| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rudolf Miller
   |
Posted - 2006.11.27 03:42:00 -
[31]
Throwing players out of or limiting them in NPC is a poor idea.
It would think it would case issues with the following proposed change:
 Quote:
Factional Warfare
We want the major factions to go to war and enable the players to pledge allegiance to any of these factions and fight for them, allow them to rise through the faction ranks and be awarded for their accomplishments.
|
Levin Milcaro
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 03:45:00 -
[32]
"The low sp players can remain where they are. True carebears can remain where they are. But a HULK pilot should be guarded at all times. If in player corp, that means sharing some of the profit with a corpmate. If in npc corp, that means sharing some of the profit with concord."
that I can agree with. well with alittle modification... since a covetor is a 20 mill ship...cost much less than a BS lol
(oh and we already pay taxes for refining....POS.. no tax unless set by corp..)
but yeah, it still opens a huge can of worms as mentioned by my last post....
but yeah... NPC corps doesnt have the benefits of the player corp..(help from each other for one.... POS... JC....and afew other things.... dont think nerfing them into oblivion is that great... since well, not everybody can dedicated 8 hours a day to an alliance... those ppl end up in npc corps...)
anywho, I am out...
|
Sessho Seki
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 04:21:00 -
[33]
Originally by: LUGAL MOP'N'GLO
Originally by: Bawls Deep
Originally by: Sessho Seki
Quote:
It is no longer possible to log into a trial account if there is already an active client running on the same computer (subscription or other trial).
While currently, this only applies to trial accounts, it could possibly be extended to all accounts (as in no more multi-accounts operation on one PC), which of course would put legitimate players in an uproar, but it would also put a considerable damper on macroers as well. (Foreign isk farmers however would be all but unaffected)
I wouldn’t be for such a thing, as it would also hurt more legitimate players than crooks, but it’s possible.
Not much of a business man are you? CCP would never limit us to one account per computer unless they started making CCP computers. My guess is that doing that would cut down their subscriptions by more than half. 
Sorry, alt post. <--- Main
Yeesh... Reading FTW!
Since you didn't read it the first time through, here's another pass...
Quote:
[...]it could possibly be extended to all accounts[...]
Quote:
[...]I wouldn’t be for such a thing[...]
I never suggested it WOULD happen, or that CCP would WANT to do that, I very literally only suggested that it is POSSIBLE, but possible is a very long was from an actuality. Before suggesting things about my business sense, please actually read what I said and don't interpret my words for me, that's why I wrote it rather than having you write it for me.
|
Kuriatai
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 04:31:00 -
[34]
I have seen this idea before. It's just the same old tired nonsense of forcing others to play the game your way. No thanks.
Commander USS Turtle U-1
Unknown, unauthorized, and first of that class |
Draqun
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 04:33:00 -
[35]
the only problem with "stoping" macro miners is that doing so will put one hell of a strain on the system, lets face it part of the reason why I and others can turn out as mutch product as we do is because we buy a chunk of our raw materials on the market, a lot of that comes from the macro miners.
Theirs also the sad reality that a lot of the Gankers, Pirates, PvPers and even some of the care bears run mining ops of some kind on an alt just to keep themselves in Ammo/ships(which is going to get interesting when you realise that your going to be chewing through 25% more ammo next week due to the "health boost" that all ships are getting!)
and since theirs nothing better than
|
Vrizuh
Eve Defence Force
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 05:10:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Levin Milcaro
"The low sp players can remain where they are. True carebears can remain where they are. But a HULK pilot should be guarded at all times. If in player corp, that means sharing some of the profit with a corpmate. If in npc corp, that means sharing some of the profit with concord."
that I can agree with. well with alittle modification... since a covetor is a 20 mill ship...cost much less than a BS lol
(oh and we already pay taxes for refining....POS.. no tax unless set by corp..)
but yeah, it still opens a huge can of worms as mentioned by my last post....
but yeah... NPC corps doesnt have the benefits of the player corp..(help from each other for one.... POS... JC....and afew other things.... dont think nerfing them into oblivion is that great... since well, not everybody can dedicated 8 hours a day to an alliance... those ppl end up in npc corps...)
anywho, I am out...
Well, Im not so worried about the hulks in high sec cos they'd take forever to pay off. I just use them as an example of a ship almost (cost/benefit) unkillable if in high sec & npc corp.
Please keep in mind that I have focused my last 2 posts on how npc corps can affect player corp operations and the market. That is, the financial empire players bring a lot of isk in but lose none themselves. Player corps & pirates can have alts openly supplying them without any (cost/benefit) method of interruption to that.
Players with poor networking skills etc, yes, I fully believe npc corps serve a function. The problem begins when players perfectly capable of leaving the nest continue to hide behind the NPC corp umbrella because it gives them PVP & Market advantages.
-------------------------------------
Since entering 0.0 I've noticed my wallet slowly crawl towards 0.00. Coincidence? I think not
|
Levin Milcaro
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 05:25:00 -
[37]
hmmm, so...all in all, the problems come down to people with alts..=P
but yeah, that doesnt stop people from buying secound acounts..(than again, CCP wouldnt complain...)
hmm thinking of the OLD PRE NGE SWG.. only 1 char per acount....
the interdependancy worked.... but yeah, too late to take alts away from people now...
|
Ekscalybur
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 05:38:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Sonos SAGD
Edited by: Sonos SAGD on 25/11/2006 12:15:37
Edited by: Sonos SAGD on 25/11/2006 12:14:54
so what happens if you are in a .01 system out in the boonies and you get kicked from your corp cause the hate you. all you have there is a battle ship no ships are on the market in station since low sec markets are dead. you cant undock since you are in a npc corp. you cant buy anything that isn't there. since its low sec there are no other corps in that office since its a pirate system/sucks/out of the way
how do you get home? you you just start from scratch?
Give everyone corporation management lvl 1 for free. Then they can make a corp of their own.
Oh, and making the corp shouldn't cost anything, it should simply cost 1.5m per month to keep it alive instead. If not paid, you all default back to the declarable npc corp.
I have an even easier solution. A 1 man corp needs zero skills, a fresh off the soylent green conveyor newbie can make a corp for himself. In fact, the game should default to that. After character creation, the character is in the tutorial mode, and in an NPC corp. After a month, the NPC corp says "congrats, you are no longer nubkakes, you may wish to join a player run corp at this moment, or allow us to incorporate you." They can either accept a corp invite, or go along with being made a 1 man corp. When inbetween corps, you default back to your 1 man corp, or that screen pops back up again. When that screen is up, nothing else is clickable except joining another corp.
|
Vrizuh
Eve Defence Force
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 06:07:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Levin Milcaro
hmmm, so...all in all, the problems come down to people with alts..=P
but yeah, that doesnt stop people from buying secound acounts..(than again, CCP wouldnt complain...)
hmm thinking of the OLD PRE NGE SWG.. only 1 char per acount....
the interdependancy worked.... but yeah, too late to take alts away from people now...
Ekscalybur: Why do you have to be so extreme? The key is finding the middle ground. Not shove every player out into the cold. The middle ground here is finding a diminishing return for being in an npc corp. Something which doesnt harm anyone who needs an npc corp, but does trouble those who dont.
Levin: The issue isnt with alts. As you've pointed out, secondary accounts. Or here's another one: Empire corps. Say Corp "Omega Tech Pty Ltd" is fighting another corp in low sec. They hire a player corp called "Joes Supplies Inc" to get them trit. Except "Joes Supplies Inc" is just a 1 man corp for contact reasons. All the REAL corp is within a single npc corp. These players use their own channel to avoid talking in npc corp channel. They fly supplies out to the war front under the guise of being neutrals. As long as they stay in 0.1 or better, anyone trying to stop them will get sec hit. Meanwhile 'Omega Tech' can escort them past pirates.
The issue here isnt alts. Its using concord as a free escort service, with no penalties. Ok, no corp wallet and no corp shares. Other than that, what are the downsides? Especially if you only operate in empire? Im just saying that after a certain point of profit, or skill, or networking, an npc corp should be a ball and chain.
-------------------------------------
I came. I mined. I fled. I mined. I fled. I mined some ore. I fled once more. War is hell! |
Dao 2
Generals Of Destruction Syndicate
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 06:51:00 -
[40]
just petition them and steal all their ore mwahahah ;p 
though yah the petition wont work without some serious changes i dont think getting rid of macro miners is really an option at all
TITAN DOOMSDAY DEVICE THEM! ;p
xl smartbombs? ;p
------------------------------------------------
NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p)
the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that
Also the gal |
Zar Dim
Minmatar
Anus Horriblis
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 06:59:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Zar Dim on 27/11/2006 06:59:45
Extremly stupid idea, there are plenty of non macro miners that stay in NPC corp and are flying around in miners.
Just petition MM.
In any case given current situation macro miners does not affect Eve that much, so there is no reason to do someting as serious in order to shoot down few 'suspects'.
|
Dao 2
Generals Of Destruction Syndicate
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 07:03:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Dao 2 on 27/11/2006 07:03:27
Originally by: Zar Dim
Edited by: Zar Dim on 27/11/2006 06:59:45
Extremly stupid idea, there are plenty of non macro miners that stay in NPC corp and are flying around in miners.
Just petition MM.
In any case given current situation macro miners does not affect Eve that much, so there is no reason to do someting as serious in order to shoot down few 'suspects'.
petition rarely works :| u see ppl that have been petitioned still there even weeks later :(\
edit: i blame gms ;p
------------------------------------------------
NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p)
the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that
Also the gal |
Locarna Lustram
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 08:42:00 -
[43]
What about a steadily increasing tax-rate for staying in an NPC corp? 0% for the first month, add x% for *every* transaction per unit time thereafter.
|
Sir Bart
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 09:12:00 -
[44]
How about if just remove all the asteroid belts from high sec?
-Bart
|
Sonos SAGD
Minmatar
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 11:26:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Sonos SAGD on 27/11/2006 11:27:23
reminder there is a differnce between macro and farmers, macros are easy to detect where as a farmer is a real person and they need to follow and isk trail and prove it was sold for real cash before they can take a ban stick to them
Most ideas here have one flaw. another force people to play the way that you want them to play
in rl people are freelance where they go from place to place doing odd jobs and never have offical employment. so going by that they could make agents say stuff like, sorry i only have work for other clients and if some freelance stuff comes up they will mail you
-25% corp tax( i like this one since it has realism to it. it takes a lot of isk to run a empire. and since every corp i have been it has had tax it just makes since that they should too)
i wonder how factional warefare is gonna work out when it comes out. if they make it high reward but make it like an optional war where instead of rats you fight players it might confince more people that you dont need to be uber to pvp
as far as the using npc as a war dec shield. i was in a npc forp for a while shopping for corps. i tried making a solo corp but i didnt like it that the chat get more limited.
also some people are in npc since they just dont play enough. would you like someone in your corp who might play for an hour or two a month since they have a new work/school schedule that will get better in time, they just are changing skills and plan to come back. and they dont want to deal with a war when they have 1 hour to play.
|
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 11:35:00 -
[46]
Most of your percieved macro miners ain't driven by macros.
--*=*=*--
The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing.
by Sharkbait | 2006.09.20 |
Phyrr
Minmatar
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 12:05:00 -
[47]
Lets say you cant train these skills in an NPC corp.
Macro joins eve forms corp trains barge skills etc.. leaves corp back in NPC corp with barge skills etc... explain that?
|
Eewec Ourbyni
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 12:18:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Eewec Ourbyni on 27/11/2006 12:19:12
Originally by: Vrizuh
if there is a guy out there with millions and millions of SP put into Freighters & trade, I should not have to suicide attack him just to put his gameplay at risk.
And what, exactly gives you the right to do so?
Originally by: Vrizuh
I should be able to war dec him.
Why?
Originally by: Vrizuh
If I am in a war deccable corp, and the industrialists are in npc corps, they can call mercs in on me, but what can I call in on them?
Envy is one of the 7 sins you know.
Originally by: Vrizuh
My answer to providing a balance between profit and security:
Cannot use Mining barge above Procurer whilst in NPC corp.
Cannot use Battleship whilst in NPC corp.
Cannot use Freighter whilst in NPC corp.
NPC corp tax set to 25% (new players wont notice 25%. Their margins are good but profits small.)
Maximum refine value -10% of same char/standings in player corp
Connections skills etc less effective whilst in NPC corp. Applies to level 3 agents and above only.
Increased sec hit when destroying ships/podding.
The problem here is you are interfering with the game play of those who have absolutley no interest in PVP. They are perfectly happy playing eve with their friends doing missions/mining/trading etc. Your assuming that simply because YOU play EVE to PVP, so everyone should be forced to play the game the same way you do.
Originally by: Vrizuh
This is a very raw suggestion, the fine folks at CCP would have a far more clever method. The results:
1. If a powerful corp or alliance wishes to channel huge amount of isk through un-deccable characters, an isk sink effect will be in place due to 25% hit.
2. Wealthy isk barons will potentially be deccable, as there's no way they'd deal with high tax and minimised skill results. It wouldnt hurt the ones sitting in station buying/reselling. However the freighters who afk transport npc goods to and fro would definately need to think twice.
3. General isk sink
4. ISK sellers would develop newer methods of farming. Such as increasing their presence in complexes. Hmmm, remote shield boost.
5. Increase social interaction. Reduce anonymous suicide gank squads.
6. Get pirates moving into new locations instead of just the gates. Now they could war dec all kinds of individuals and do some hi sec pirating.
Here's an idea... one account/one char per person. Simplifies all these things instantly and only affects those who isk filter from one char to another. Somehow I doubt your all that keen on that idea as it affects how you play rather than how we play.
EDITED: as I need to learn how to spell.
This is a sig...
-- You think this guys post is nuts.... you should see his bio --
... good, ain't it! |
Craminu
Gallente
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 16:05:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Sessho Seki
the
Quote:
It is no longer possible to log into a trial account if there is already an active client running on the same computer (subscription or other trial).
While currently, this only applies to trial accounts, it could possibly be extended to all accounts (as in no more multi-accounts operation on one PC), which of course would put legitimate players in an uproar, but it would also put a considerable damper on macroers as well. (Foreign isk farmers however would be all but unaffected)
I wouldnĘt be for such a thing, as it would also hurt more legitimate players than crooks, but itĘs possible.
i hope it wont extend to all accounts. i use 2 pc with 5 clients running(3screens). and i dont use macro. i actually sit at pc and move the ore manually ove to can. pick up, and protect my mining ships. 3miners 1hauler 1fighter. i cant always mine 100% on all laser though. but it helps me get the ore i need fast to build stuff.
so if they were to cut this down, i would just cancel all except proberly 1 account and go do other things that i dont like todo much, and would get bored.
i know alot of other players who do the same as me. if they use macro or not i dont know.
the feature of not having trial account logged on while another account, will help problem some on macro and on pvp scouts.
i think its nice, i just dont hope they dont go over to make it that only 1 client per pc can be used. it will definitly kill soem of my style of play that i enjoy. and atm i dont play to much due to rl issues, and i dont mine in noob system either(in empire yes).
|
Agent Li
Galactic Defence Consortium
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 16:11:00 -
[50]
Maybe we're thinking about the wrong end of the pyramid.
You know, there would not be macromining isk sellers if there were no isk buyers.
There must be a LOT of isk buyers.
So far, I haven't heard anyone confess to being one...
|
Hellspawn01
Amarr
The Phantom Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 16:15:00 -
[51]
Well, if their would be a 1 month right for npc members in the first month only to use barges, might work. Then have them join a corp that can give you the right to mine with barges making barges kinda corp property to ensure that only real pilots use them. Incase they return to a npc corp, they dont have the right again to use them unless the free month isnt up yet.
Ship lovers click here |
Zantazar
Caldari
The Syndicate Inc
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 16:47:00 -
[52]
So Sessho ...
No more than one account on one PC yes ?
So, I will need 4 computers, and a chair with well oiled wheels to zoom up and down the computer desks to run my 4 accounts. If that was implemented, I forecast at least a thousand players leaving. Even if you stayed, imagine deciding which character to delete after building up multi accounts that you can only play one at a time.
Signature removed due to incorrect size (400X120px and 24000 bytes). Please review the forum rules or e-mail us with any questions. You can view you signature here - Petwraith
I would sell my soul, my body, and my entire family for a Navy Raven. (Just kidding .... my soul is not for sale)
|
Phyrr
Minmatar
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 17:39:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Zantazar
So Sessho ...
No more than one account on one PC yes ?
So, I will need 4 computers, and a chair with well oiled wheels to zoom up and down the computer desks to run my 4 accounts. If that was implemented, I forecast at least a thousand players leaving. Even if you stayed, imagine deciding which character to delete after building up multi accounts that you can only play one at a time.
boo hoo. poor them. This is a bad thing why exactley? OMG people will be on equal standing and not have an advantage based on RL money.
|
Roshan longshot
Gallente
Ordos Humanitas
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 17:46:00 -
[54]
Here is one...simply remove all active players from NPC corps. Instead of a corp name, they can have freelancer or independent. There people hideing in NPC corps have been delt with.
Wait this idea will last as long as a hungry man takes to eat a meal. Sombody will be *****ing about all the freelancer and independent pilots soon...
Free-form Professions, ensure no limetations on professions. Be a trader, fighter, industialist, researcher, hunter pirate or mixture of them all.
[i]As read from the original box.
|
Zantazar
Caldari
The Syndicate Inc
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 18:01:00 -
[55]
Ah Phyrr ... nice to see that you follow the general trend of "boo hoo kiddie-speak" in the forums.
The consequence of implementing a one account to one computer rule to CCP would be catastrophic. The vast majority of players that have more than one account would close these surplus accounts, and a significant number of those players would close all of their accounts and simply leave. I estimate (based on the number of players that I know), that this would result in the closure of at least 50% of the active accounts.
The only way that this would be moderately successful is if you were able to train alts on the account at the same time. But even then, the loss of the ability to play more than one character at the same time, would be incredilby detrimental to a massive amount of players.
Where would the funding for future development come from ? And remember, the player that has 4 accounts is funding CCP progress fourfold in comparison with the player with 1 account.
I look forward to your mature and well thought out reply.
Signature removed due to incorrect size (400X120px and 24000 bytes). Please review the forum rules or e-mail us with any questions. You can view you signature here - Petwraith
I would sell my soul, my body, and my entire family for a Navy Raven. (Just kidding .... my soul is not for sale)
|
Agent Li
Galactic Defence Consortium
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 18:08:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Zantazar
Ah Phyrr ... nice to see that you follow the general trend of "boo hoo kiddie-speak" in the forums.
The consequence of implementing a one account to one computer rule to CCP would be catastrophic. The vast majority of players that have more than one account would close these surplus accounts, and a significant number of those players would close all of their accounts and simply leave. I estimate (based on the number of players that I know), that this would result in the closure of at least 50% of the active accounts.
The only way that this would be moderately successful is if you were able to train alts on the account at the same time. But even then, the loss of the ability to play more than one character at the same time, would be incredilby detrimental to a massive amount of players.
Where would the funding for future development come from ? And remember, the player that has 4 accounts is funding CCP progress fourfold in comparison with the player with 1 account.
I look forward to your mature and well thought out reply.
By that argument, macro miners are funding CCP progress.
I think that game mechanics such as untransferable skills and skill points (and unpurchasable at that) are much better at limiting the effect of real life companies that mine in-game money and resell it in the real world.
Still, no one has commented on my assertion that these sellers would not exist without a healthy market. I am implying that there are many here who have bought and continue to buy isk.
As far as that goes, when CCP finds out who really is a macro miner, and shuts them down, they should go through the database and find out who received isk from them - in those 100 million isk blocks, for instance.
Then permanently vaporize those accounts. Once customers realize (and you only have to do it to a very public few) that buying isk will put you out of the game for good, the market will shrink.
|
Zantazar
Caldari
The Syndicate Inc
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 18:13:00 -
[57]
I agree with your view to macro miners Agent Li, and yes in an sense they are also funding CCP.
I have never understood why CCP cannot implement a system that if ISK just "arrives" in someone's account that they can spot it, as it has not got there from an in game method. Could it be that they do not want to spot it, in relation to revenue from the macrominers accounts. I do not know, I can only cynically speculate.
But, I stand by my opinion in what would happen if a 1 account 1 pc rule was implemented.
Signature removed due to incorrect size (400X120px and 24000 bytes). Please review the forum rules or e-mail us with any questions. You can view you signature here - Petwraith
I would sell my soul, my body, and my entire family for a Navy Raven. (Just kidding .... my soul is not for sale)
|
xahldera
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 18:14:00 -
[58]
I've got an idea that was a suggestion on a poll on Coldfront.
Put in an anti-cheat program as part of the game. Something like Punkbuster to check for macros. Would deal with a lot of them.
Xahldera
I once saw a Megathron on escrow that was actually a piece of megacyte.
-User on Corp Chatroom |
insanebe
Caldari
carebear Corp
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 18:15:00 -
[59]
Theres another problem with the npc corps, they are used by major alliances as an alt hauling corp,
example is that alot of the major alliances have freighter alts in the npc corps that they use to avoid wardecs from their enemies which i think is unfair.
i think the idea about not being able to use capital or tech 2 ships is the best idea
knowledge is power.... guard it well |
Agent Li
Galactic Defence Consortium
|
Posted - 2006.11.27 18:17:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Zantazar
I agree with your view to macro miners Agent Li, and yes in an sense they are also funding CCP.
I have never understood why CCP cannot implement a system that if ISK just "arrives" in someone's account that they can spot it, as it has not got there from an in game method. Could it be that they do not want to spot it, in relation to revenue from the macrominers accounts. I do not know, I can only cynically speculate.
But, I stand by my opinion in what would happen if a 1 account 1 pc rule was implemented.
I have no problem with multiple paying accounts logged on at the same time. I do have a problem with players making isk in game, and then selling it for real money (which is already a violation of the EULA).
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |