|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1747
   |
Posted - 2015.10.15 18:53:07 -
[1] - Quote
For all the reasons put forward in all the threads over the few years I've played about buying ISK I say a huge no.
So now we have 'EvE has consequences...except you can buy your way out of them'? No thanks.
Of Course CCP will do this anyway no matter the opinion of the majority of existing players so at least give us some way to have some benefit from being a long term non-tampered character.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1747
|
Posted - 2015.10.15 19:07:24 -
[2] - Quote
Skinzee wrote:...
Trial accounts cant use this service... Which would mean you would have to sub the account. Which means you would have 9000x -ú10 to pay... and even then they cant sell the SP because they have to have over 5m SP... which is say... 4months...
so....
9000x4x-ú10 = -ú360,000 + The Skill Transfer fee...
Sounds like a great deal right? ^^
Or rich players can just gift game time to the characters in question. Sat in stations with +5's to farm SP. This will favour rich players far more. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1747
|
Posted - 2015.10.15 22:44:44 -
[3] - Quote
Querns wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Querns wrote:
The new system is only different in its granularity.
Wrong. I can't buy instant bulk sp for this or any arbitrary character in the old system. I can in the new system. World of difference. Cash to ccp. Bulk, instant, and arbitrarily large SP for any character of my choice. If you claim this is the same as the character bazaar, you're lying through your teeth. No, I'm just able to see things without a blood haze over my vision. It's the same thing. Characters in eve are not special. They are commodities to be bought and sold.
Mine isn't. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1748
|
Posted - 2015.10.15 23:04:32 -
[4] - Quote
Querns wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Querns wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Querns wrote:
The new system is only different in its granularity.
Wrong. I can't buy instant bulk sp for this or any arbitrary character in the old system. I can in the new system. World of difference. Cash to ccp. Bulk, instant, and arbitrarily large SP for any character of my choice. If you claim this is the same as the character bazaar, you're lying through your teeth. No, I'm just able to see things without a blood haze over my vision. It's the same thing. Characters in eve are not special. They are commodities to be bought and sold. Mine isn't. It's your choice to live in deliberate ignorance of reality. I fail to see how the reality shifting a bit affects this.
Ignorance of reality? The reality is I will never sell my character to anyone else. Therefore it is not a commodity and never will be which makes it as unique as a character can be. It is 'special' in so far as it is mine and only mine. Whatever anyone else does with their characters is entirely up to them. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1752
|
Posted - 2015.10.16 09:18:33 -
[5] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Ignorance of reality? The reality is I will never sell my character to anyone else. Therefore it is not a commodity and never will be which makes it as unique as a character can be. It is 'special' in so far as it is mine and only mine. Whatever anyone else does with their characters is entirely up to them. Then this change is of no consequence to you and harms you in no way. Those that don't use it and chose not to commodify their characters or SP can train as normal. I have no intent to use the feature, all the characters I would use it on have horrible return potential, but I see no reason to deny others.
It 'harms' me be changing the game so that a player with more RL money than me can just choose to be as competitive as me in each or all of the various areas I make ISK in simply by throwing RL money at it (or spare ISK if backed by one of the major groups with trillions to spare}. It also harms me as this will inevitably lead to an increase in PLEX way above and beyond the inflation we are currently seeing in them. It also changes one of the core tenets of the game that actions and decisions have persistent consequences.
It also offends my sensibilities in Lore terms :D I'm fine with skillbooks being some kind of nanobots injected in to make certain areas of the brain more plastic and pre-wired to assist in learning a skill. I'm not fine with the idea of simply rewriting a section of someones brain with a copy of a section of someone else's entirely different brain.
If CCP want to give players a way to speed up SP we as players can do very little about it. It would have been better in my opinion to allow new players to buy a new kind of cerebral accelerator that is produced in game and has diminishing returns up to say 50 mil SP (capped). Still not sure I'd like this but then you could always reward those characters who retain their original un-enhanced brain with a slightly better baseline learning rate than someone who uses the accelerators or something. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1753
|
Posted - 2015.10.16 09:56:13 -
[6] - Quote
Surely this idea amounts to giving older players more ways to make isk that simply aren't available to younger players. For instance I have a character trained up for POS management. He doesn't really do much else than that and PI but I still train as I still have to PLEX him. Now I would simply throw in a pair of +5's and train all skills on that branch starting with the lowest multipliers first.
I would also use a remap to max out those attributes thus giving perfect training rate to throw those skills at another player or character. It would probably become necessary for me to do this as PLEX will jump in price if this idea is implemented. New players will benefit from this only if they enjoy being rapidly milked for cash early on in the game.
Ed: Also isn't this just effectiviley allowing SP laundering from an awox character? Won't sell on the bazaar due to reputation so just slice and dice the brain and feed it to other alts instead. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1757
|
Posted - 2015.10.18 11:00:07 -
[7] - Quote
Colt Blackhawk wrote:T...hese changes WILL make it a lot easier for new players and this is the right direction.
My objections are on two levels:
1) they are changing the very core of the game and in doing so really pissing of a large chunk of the existing player base. This really doesn't seem like a very good idea to me.
2) This will not be for the benefit of new players unless you view them spending PLEX after PLEX on skill packs as a good thing for them. Older players and those that can afford to farm alts for SP will be those that benefit most from this. Also those entities who own the most lucrative space assets (such as moons...) will be able to farm alts to ensure they have perfect pilots in the most important areas making it even harder for smaller entities to encroach on their space.
This really is not a good idea in my opinion. If you want to assist new pilots give them all the cerebral accelerator to start with and allow players to build them in game too in any space. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1760
|
Posted - 2015.10.18 20:44:32 -
[8] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Luscius Uta wrote:tl;dr of this dev blog:
You'll be able to trade ISK for SP. stop making noise, you're ignoring the facts.
That is the basic fact of the thread. Players will be able to pay ISK for SP from other players. Everything else around that is simply dressing it up. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1762
|
Posted - 2015.10.18 22:28:17 -
[9] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:...
Actually I do not see how it affects me directly, if that is what you mean. But I tend to look beyond myself when considering changes to Eve. Kind of why I am on the CSM. Not just to feather my own nest.
As I said in the long quote . . . it will change the dynamic and the flavour of the game. If sold or marketed incorrectly it WILL look like a money grab where it is a subscription game that also needs microtransactions to stay current. I spoke about this on Podside, last night, about the financial divide it may create between the poor and the rich. I was told the solution was not to be 'poor'.
What about the divide between the casual and the hardcore?
Mainly I am trying to figure out WHO this is for and who it benefits.
any ideas?
m
Almost certainly not the new players unless the lay out a reasonable sum of RL cash. It makes me feel very uncomfortable about the whole thing. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1769
|
Posted - 2015.10.19 08:50:00 -
[10] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:...
It's no secret to me that you're a Dev alt Dave and you're most likely the main one who's constructed this insidiously cancerous idea and is trying your best to convert the masses in this thread to follow your plot. I'm not buying it and I seriously hope no one else will because I know what it will lead to in the future.
But this post is something that you really, REALLY need to comprehend. Please try your best to get this Dave. Try harder and harder if you have to.
I'm wondering if I'm the only person who when reading this had the voice of HAL in their head... |
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1769
|
Posted - 2015.10.19 09:26:50 -
[11] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Can someone do me a tl;dr of the negative side? There must be something I'm missing.
Pros
- Adds a flexible alternative to the existing legitimate SP purchase arrangement of the Character Bazaar.
- Provides young players (especially) another way to speed up their progression.
- More income for CCP.
- I can spend my vast fortune on SP :)
Cons
- New players might feel pressured into taking the accelerated approach. (But same argument applies to Character Bazaar).
- Plex prices will increase. (Oh well. Plex is there as an anti-RMT tool, not so people can play for free.)
- Consequences. (But you can buy/sell on the Character Bazaar.)
- I won't be able to tell how GÇÿpowerfulGÇÖ a character is by their age.
As far as I can tell only the last one is a real negative. And it certainly doesn't outweigh the numerous positives. And to be clear this obviously isn't pay to win because the SP will be freely traded on the market for isk.
An extra big con is that this essentially tells new players they need to spend extra RL cash (as they won't have ISK) to be a viable pilot. This isn't true and is pretty much milking new players for extra cash.
I would prefer the cerebral accelerator approach along with skill queue templates that can be imported for the basic skills as a starter queue for new players. Cerebral accelerators can be built in game and only work up to a certain age of character as now or up to a hard cap of sp with diminishing returns. Cerebral accelerators could be use to replace implants in drops when (not if) CCP decide to remove them.
These would either be as BPC's or directly as accelerators for sale (I prefer BPC's to boost manufacture too). The drop cerebral accelerators would not have a hard SP cap on them since they are replacing implants but would still be time limited.
Skill queue templates would be very useful as a new player has no idea what to train up but certainly knows what ships they'd like to fly. being able to simply import the skeleton of basic pre-req skills would allow them to set this in a few clicks, and then amend the queue to suit their specific needs. Corps would be able to develop and set their own skill queues for new pilots too in support of their activities. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1769
|
Posted - 2015.10.19 09:34:04 -
[12] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Dave Stark wrote:head outside eve-o and you'll see the myriad of support for this idea - and not from no-name nobodies like me. from people who have been playing for years and have the profile to support that. Took a peek at reddit. Almost all postivies to idea. Almost all of them are like: "Finally, I pay I gain". If this in not microtransaction then what is? The baazar exist just because without it there will be black market like in others MMOs. From what I saw there (reddit) I 100% it will be implemented. It will be moutain of cash for CCP. I can compete with other players within game activities. I can't compete with other players when RL money are involved. It doesn't matter if SP are stripped from alts or just emerge from thin air. It was the same thing like my gfs mmo. They have an items to speed up leveling there. For cash. This was discouraging for her, it was a loop, if she won't pay she'll stay behind. I have the same feeling about this new feature. What is the message new players will see? "Pay" Do you, currently, feel that you can compete with other players and veterans?
I any gallente hull up to and including cruisers yes I can. I have exactly the same maxed skills as they do because I chose to train them up. I cannot compete in other hulls but that's because I chose to train manufacturing and invention too. This means I still have other choices to make , and that's the key thing here. I choose what to do and when. With this idea I would have the choice to pay more money instead which for a new player will come across as *have* to pay more to be competitive. Not a good way to encourage new players. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1769
|
Posted - 2015.10.19 09:44:39 -
[13] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
An extra big con is that this essentially tells new players they need to spend extra RL cash (as they won't have ISK) to be a viable pilot. This isn't true and is pretty much milking new players for extra cash.
I would prefer the cerebral accelerator approach along with skill queue templates that can be imported for the basic skills as a starter queue for new players. Cerebral accelerators can be built in game and only work up to a certain age of character as now or up to a hard cap of sp with diminishing returns. Cerebral accelerators could be use to replace implants in drops when (not if) CCP decide to remove them.
These would either be as BPC's or directly as accelerators for sale (I prefer BPC's to boost manufacture too). The drop cerebral accelerators would not have a hard SP cap on them since they are replacing implants but would still be time limited.
Skill queue templates would be very useful as a new player has no idea what to train up but certainly knows what ships they'd like to fly. being able to simply import the skeleton of basic pre-req skills would allow them to set this in a few clicks, and then amend the queue to suit their specific needs. Corps would be able to develop and set their own skill queues for new pilots too in support of their activities.
People can conclude exactly the same thing now because of the Character Bazaar. You could also argue that a lot of people leave because they think it will take too long to catch up. In which case this change would be a net positive. Remember that CCP has feedback from players who leave the game to ponder.
Character bazaar is different in that they train at exactly the same speed but as you say CCP have all sorts of feedback to consider. However they don't seem to be considering the feedback from the existing player base over the last few years of my time in the game where most people I've seen have been against this kind of thing.
In my view CCP will do whatever they feel is best. I'm not in support of the current idea as it stands and tried to propose a different approach that has other benefits too without changing one of the core tenets of EvE.
As ever I'll just adapt to any incoming changes (like the gimping of my beloved gila :( ) but I don't think draining more cash from new players is necessarily the best way to go. Which would feel best to a new player: Paying a PLEX for a skill pack for instant gain or finding the cerebral implant for increased skill training in a combat site/mission reward? What will help a new player more: Having to work out what skills to throw unallocated SP at and then feeling *very* annoyed when they realize they put the SP they paid for in the wrong place, or being given a skillqueue import pack that will then guide their increased SP gain into the correct locations?
I'm not one of those who just says 'Nononononononoragequitnonononono...', but rather try to propose alternatives if I disagree with a proposed approach. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1770
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 08:33:59 -
[14] - Quote
afkalt wrote:...
'Think of the newbros' is the game equivalent of 'think of the children' at this point.
It's also disingenuous I would say, new players will not benefit from being asked to pay more to play the game. Especially when they still won't have a clue where they want to put those unallocated SP. And then even more so when they realize they got it wrong and have to buy another pack to put some where they really should have. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1771
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 09:43:53 -
[15] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Dave Stark wrote:if supply and demand make SP packets cost more than production costs you can bypass the market entirely and create your own with SP farms of which the barrier to entry is pretty much just "create a new account".
Lost here, why would I create new account? I can't strip SP from alt below 5 mil. by the time you've gone through the trial, and the 30 days gametime required to create a full account that's 2 months. you're almost already at that 5m SP limit and thus you have a character you can farm for SP at lower than market price (and once market price dips below cost price you just stop subscribing it). edit: pretty sure with power of 2 you'll be at 5m SP for "free" as you're paying 3 plex for 6 months is it? personal SP farm(s) ensures that you are never in a situation where you will ever have to pay above cost price for SP. which would be a prudent thing to do if for some strange reason you're being asked to pay rent in SP packets every month.
So you are saying this idea is good and actually advocating people create alts purely for SP farming?
OK, everyone will be able to do that. Except they won't as not everyone has the ISK or RL cash to do so. Thus those who are RL or space rich will gain the advantage of practically instant perfect skills in whatever FotM ship is around after any rebalance, The rest of the players of the game just plod along at a now seemingly slower rate (which is in fact no slower than now but this change will create that perception).
Messing with the SP system is plainly not a good idea. It is one of the few things in the game that has consistently worked and worked well. It sets EvE apart from other MMO's and I for one do not want EvE to be 'like every other MMO out there'.
You can be sure that goons et al already have several plans to make this system reinforce their stranglehold over certain areas of space/the game. It's what they are good at and as long as it's within the rules they are perfectly within their rights to do so. that doesn't however make the game any better for the rest of us. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1771
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 10:14:51 -
[16] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Moac Tor wrote:Dave Stark wrote:if supply and demand make SP packets cost more than production costs you can bypass the market entirely and create your own with SP farms of which the barrier to entry is pretty much just "create a new account". And setting up a SP farm requires capital investment and time. If a big alliance buys out all the SP packets for instance then price will spike until demand can catch up. It is what happens in the eve markets all the time already. by setting up an SP farm takes, as i said, a little over two months probably three. with power of 2 getting to the point where that farm is functional is essentially "free" if i have my prices/duration on power of 2 correct (been a while since i made a new alt). buying out all the sp packets is irrelevant - you're bypassing the market by setting up your own farm anyway. you're acting like large alliances are intentionally going to try and not get paid and destroy their own rental empires - which in itself is illogical as all hell.
You somehow think that goons et al won't work out the best level at which to charge people whilst having (now instantly perfect) market alts hoover up all SP packs in the hubs with the trillions they get from moons? They would be stupid not to.
They can afford to screw over the hisec (i.e. newbs) markets whilst giving the damn things away for free to alliance members. They already reimburse expensive ships, now they will be able to simply bring all alliance members up to perfect skills for any doctrine they choose in an instant. Oh, they'll have SP SRP too for those flying T3's. The hold of the existing alliances just gets tighter with this. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1772
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 10:35:47 -
[17] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:...
they can charge any price they want - but ANYONE can undercut them if they sell above cost price. while goon's pockets are deep they are not infinite.
...
They don't have to be infinite, they simply buy up packets that undercut them and then sell them at the price they actually want to sell them at. They make more money than it costs to buy the packets. Infinite resources are not required, just basic marketing ability which I'm pretty sure they are way way above. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1772
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 10:46:36 -
[18] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Dave Stark wrote:...
they can charge any price they want - but ANYONE can undercut them if they sell above cost price. while goon's pockets are deep they are not infinite.
... They don't have to be infinite, they simply buy up packets that undercut them and then sell them at the price they actually want to sell them at. They make more money than it costs to buy the packets. Infinite resources are not required, just basic marketing ability which I'm pretty sure they are way way above. to be honest, without knowing actual numbers there's no way to know if this is valid or not. however they'd have to purchase every single packet. every single one, as every single packet will undercut them if they try and sell above cost price.
Not necessarily, just enough to control the market. Besides you just described how groups perform market warfare right now so why would something as valuable as SP be any different? In fact they may well drop other areas of interest if they had to just to make sure they control something so fundamental to peoples abilities as a pilot. Again it would be stupid not to. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1772
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 11:18:40 -
[19] - Quote
darkchild's corpse wrote:Moac Tor wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Any decision CCP? It's nice talking to Dave but I think it's time to show us what's your opinion about it. Another 200 pages won't make any difference here. Well I am guessing this discussion didn't go as they had expected, so they are probably trying to work out how they can dig themselves out of this hole now. Also I wouldn't expect any confirmation until after vegas. i guess CCP knew how this discussion would go and just want to know what changes they have to make that a little more ppl are ok with it. i mean, CCP are not a bunch of idiots... they had to know what kind of feature they were talking about.
They probably had two ideas for how to jigger with SP accrual and put the worst one up so that people are happy when they 'revisit' the idea and put forward the less bad one :D |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1772
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 11:20:54 -
[20] - Quote
Syn'Drakkahr wrote:...
I have an interest in a client that has made a significant amount of ISK in EVE, he buys 5x 48MSP= 240M SP, he then effectively MAXES out his account of SP. You still have 25x 48M SP remaining, all covering another 5 MAXED accounts.
...
I think you forgot to account for the diminishing returns? |
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1772
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 11:23:27 -
[21] - Quote
Kaivar Lancer wrote:People have been buying "SP" off the Character Bazaar for years.
The only people crying are bitter elitists who HATE the idea of newbies buying SP and catching up.
Actually I hate the idea of new players being expected (since that's what it'll become) to pay lots more RL money to just start playing the game. New players will not benefit from this change unless they invest a big chunk of cash. I really do hate that idea. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1775
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 11:36:15 -
[22] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Dave Stark wrote:...
you claimed my interest in this was because i can start an "sp farm" - the new system allows me to convert SP in to isk, as does the current one. SP farms are not new and i can still start an SP farm now if i want to. But you can't use the current system to steal the skill souls of your alts over time to increase your mains training rate by one char's worth of SP per alt per month.Unless CCP give some very good reason not to do this on your main then every character with PI alts and the ISK available will do this and as far as new player perceptions go leave them behind even further unless they throw yet more RL cash at the game. no, instead i can just sell my alts, and my main, then use the cash to buy what i wanted my alt to be in the first place.
Actually you can't unless you a very lucky. You can buy something that's a close approximation but not with a name you chose. This new 'feature' will allow people to boost there main learning rate by whatever amount of characters worth of SP they can afford to PLEX. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1775
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 11:48:06 -
[23] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:... however we both love sci-fi, that's why we're here. no?
Actually I'm here because I like character based RPG games...so you can see why I'd be against the idea (ignoring the various game altering aspects of it)
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1787
|
Posted - 2015.10.21 10:04:46 -
[24] - Quote
[quote=Dave Stark]...stuff...
The problem I see with TSP being used in rental (and there's no way to stop that if it's a tradeable commodity) is the newer less capable and/or space rich players will be tempted to just harvest their own SP meaning they then get 'left behind' as they see it.
I notice from skipreading the thread now and then that no goons have denied they will attempt to control the market on SP ;) As I have said before they would be stupid not to. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1787
|
Posted - 2015.10.21 11:26:13 -
[25] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Dave Stark wrote:...stuff... The problem I see with TSP being used in rental (and there's no way to stop that if it's a tradeable commodity) is the newer less capable and/or space rich players will be tempted to just harvest their own SP meaning they then get 'left behind' as they see it. I notice from skipreading the thread now and then that no goons have denied they will attempt to control the market on SP ;) As I have said before they would be stupid not to. and that's different to them just selling the SP to pay the rental bill if the landlords say "carry on paying your rent in isk"?
You can earn ISK in many ways, you can only gain SP personally with time. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1789
|
Posted - 2015.10.21 13:11:20 -
[26] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
so you're saying CCP should disregard one of the best sources of feedback because it's not run by them?
And in a similar vein why should they disregard this forum where only paying players can post (and I would say the response has been largely negative). |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1790
|
Posted - 2015.10.21 13:22:29 -
[27] - Quote
afkalt wrote:General Lootit wrote:afkalt wrote:Go watch fanfest videos and check out what happens to newbros who chase PvE. Actully I already posted that link. You are not so thoughtful, are you? So you've watched it all and understood it. Understood that people levelling their ravens/chasing PvE have horrible retention. Understood that you yourself are feeling pressured to buy these packs to "compete" (hello there Moby D) Understood that you can buy these with isk Yet somehow not understood that the blindingly obvious extension of that is people ratting to skill up with the end game of them quitting even faster because ratting is now tied to "progression".
Not to worry they can just buy PLEX to buy the SP instead, now they can just spend RL money instead to 'compete' into a ship that will then be nerfed. Because people will use this to instantly access the current FotM. If this had been available a short while back it truly would have been Ishtars online since everyone would have just bought the skills. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1790
|
Posted - 2015.10.21 13:25:55 -
[28] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:...
"Leveling your raven" is an achievement (even if a poor one) that at least keeps people around for a bit. "working 2 extra hours at McBurger joint to afford to buy the SP to level the raven to the point where it can do boring lvl 4 missions" is not an achievement lol, it's a recipe for quitting EVE.
Oh hell...think of the kids we'll be harming by having new players sell more burgers to them. ... |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1796
|
Posted - 2015.10.21 14:32:48 -
[29] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:What kind of ice cream, not the wimpy type, one hopes.
I prefer Mr Whippy, but only with restraint. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1798
|
Posted - 2015.10.21 15:17:49 -
[30] - Quote
I feel very sorry for whichever ISD has to clean this thread up!
Back to the point:
CCP have released a proposal (or 'What they are going to do' depending on your belief). That proposal has been reviewed here and many players who actually access and play the game have pointed out that it is open to heavy abuse. They have also largely sad don't mess with a system that works, enhance other areas that don't.
I would suggest that CCP should address these concerns first before pressing ahead with any change because although it won't matter if those of us against it are wrong, it will matter hugely if we are correct. |
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1807
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 11:11:04 -
[31] - Quote
afkalt wrote:So why can you do nothing whilst it cooks?
...
Just think how frustrated new players will be when they buy shiny manufacture/invention/research skills and find out they have to wait for things to cook/succeed....oh wait...then they'll demand all products are simply delivered instantly if they pay more... |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1807
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 11:27:00 -
[32] - Quote
Dror wrote:afkalt wrote:General Lootit wrote:afkalt wrote:
No-one said it was hard to grind for plex, what people are saying is that doing it as a newbro - for the most part - is utterly soul crushing and has a tendency to burn people out. Probably because the time it takes precludes everything else.
And here we are about to pull the trigger on putting even more pressure on newbros to chase the isk; instead of chasing the fun. Fun is what keeps people playing, not a second space job.
I didn't said either that griding is hard to do. It's also time consuming but less than waiting the quee and I want to trade my griding time to SP. "Fun" in yours meaning isn't pays for itself but I had some fun while griding by chating people who also doing this. It's not a pressure - it's an option. You say on one hand that it is an option, yet earlier you say you feel pressued to catch vets. You have to pick one and only one, really. See thing is, whilst you're waiting on teh training queue, you can be playing the game. How fast to fly a gankalyst again? 20 minutes now? Fly with Code, explode stuff, have fun whilst the queue is ticking. The only thing locking you into a gameplay style until XXXX trains is you. Unless you're a focused super sitter, but if that were the case we would not be having this conversation. You're pretending like you know what's motivating and, in the same sentence, implying that some 1-10M SP should retain subs. Except, those subs have come for the gameplay of 400M SP, because that's of what the stories and advertisements are.
If by that you mean B-R then that isn't gameplay and never can be. It was a one off unique event. It is impossible that it could occur very often (if at all again) due to the nature of that event. Gameplay is focused around small group interaction mainly with some large groups involved in Sov/Wardecs etc. To advocate changing something as fundamental as the skill system based on one off events is misleading. It has been pointed out before that if players are coming in thinking that B-R happens all the time it is the fault of the advertising, not the game mechanics. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1810
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 12:44:45 -
[33] - Quote
Dror wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:...
If by that you mean B-R then that isn't gameplay and never can be. It was a one off unique event. It is impossible that it could occur very often (if at all again) due to the nature of that event. Gameplay is focused around small group interaction mainly with some large groups involved in Sov/Wardecs etc. To advocate changing something as fundamental as the skill system based on one off events is misleading. It has been pointed out before that if players are coming in thinking that B-R happens all the time it is the fault of the advertising, not the game mechanics. No. There is no implication for that. SP effects everything in the game -- pick a topic? Motivation, competitiveness, mastery, depth, socialization, referrals, diversity.. ...
Pick a topic and show me which one requires 400 mil SP to take part in? I have around 40 mil and do everything other than moon mining(and that's because i'm not interested in nullsec). That's a 10th of the SP you claim is required. I don't remember adverts saying anywhere that you need vast amounts of SP to play. The 'I was there' ad? Centres around someone flying a frig through a battle. The ghost site ad? That uses SoE ships which are entirely viable for exploration with meta fits.
Your claims that a player needs max skills to be competitive are utter fallacy as proved by all the players in game who have not got maximum SP yet somehow remain competitive in the areas they have chosen to train into. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1811
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 13:11:12 -
[34] - Quote
Dror wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Pick a topic and show me which one requires 400 mil SP to take part in? I have around 40 mil and do everything other than moon mining(and that's because i'm not interested in nullsec). That's a 10th of the SP you claim is required. I don't remember adverts saying anywhere that you need vast amounts of SP to play. The 'I was there' ad? Centres around someone flying a frig through a battle. The ghost site ad? That uses SoE ships which are entirely viable for exploration with meta fits.
Your claims that a player needs max skills to be competitive are utter fallacy as proved by all the players in game who have not got maximum SP yet somehow remain competitive in the areas they have chosen to train into.
You're reducing to absurdity. 40M SP is much less than a newbie gets. Again, there's a deep game beyond SP. That's where the sustain and referral potential is. The design has more for an experience (and on the line) than every possible sub grinding out 13-30B for their relevant interests. Quote:"Research on loyalty has found that increasing customer retention by as little as 5 percent can increase profits by 25 to 95 percent." Subs can come and go, but if they have a great reason to stay and refer others, that's well above a 5 percent increase. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121116160946.htm
"To build a player's feeling of ownership towards its character, game makers should provide equal opportunities for any character to win a battle." Wow, it's like science.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1811
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 14:16:35 -
[35] - Quote
Dror wrote:...
Rise + Pirate Unicorns are welcome in this discussion.
Are you really appealing to absurdity again? How is capital vs cruiser SP equal opportunity?
I didn't appeal to anything, I pointed out that with significantly less SP than you quote I have done most things in the game at some level.
As for capital vs cruiser SP How many cruisers (or sub-caps in general) are in space at any given time on average? And how many capitals? And which set of SP have the most use in game by that measure?
Capitals are not used in the same numbers as sub-caps nor would they be. Capital combat is not that much fun by all accounts, waiting for an FC to tell you when to hit F1 and on who in 10% TiDi really doesn't appeal to me. You think there will be a spate of capital 1 v 1's if new players can instantly fly them? There would be a spate of hilarious km's as small gangs catch such ships and eat them up. That would really be fun for the new players who laid out RL cash for a ship that dies in a ball of pretty flames unless it's used in the right context (which a new player will have no idea about).
Also if the capital pilot is in a cruiser too because that is the appropriate ship for a given task then the cruiser pilot is on an exactly equal footing independent of the total SP of the capital pilot. The cruiser pilot may well prefer smaller faster ships to a whale of a floating coffin. Fun is not defined by what you can do in game but rather by what you actually do in game. Some of the most fun I've had was in dodging gatecamps in losec in a nereus whist fetching PI. I was almost certainly at around 5-10 mil SP at that time. No capital ship required. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1812
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 15:09:36 -
[36] - Quote
Dror wrote:...
Yes, there are plenty.
Some games disperse their premium currency (PLEX, basically) through allowing consumers to complete whatever the advertisement companies are interested in. That includes providing information and interests, filling out surveys, trying products like Netflix, and even referring for products or such.
So you are saying we should be happy for players to be bribed into sharing their details with 3rd parties? Brilliant idea...
Dror wrote:..
There's also just more subs. As stated on these forums, there are some 18M+ fresh internet users every month, and the PC gaming demographic includes some 900M on a report. Even Raptr (a very niche program) lists about 1.5M fresh users per month, which apparently can include 0% from China (seems relevant for our shard).
Those numbers mean nothing as EvE is a niche game in it's appeal (i.e. how many players will accept other players actively setting out to kill them and steal all their stuff?) and setting (spaceship combat and manufacturing). Raptr probably gets those subs from people upgrading Catalyst drivers for the video drivers to a large degree. It came with the last upgrade I tried to apply (which I imediately rolled back :D ) |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1812
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 15:43:31 -
[37] - Quote
Dror wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:So you are saying we should be happy for players to be bribed into sharing their details with 3rd parties? Brilliant idea... Not sure if being intentionally aloof, or just dull, but it's simple stuff like emails or zip codes.. That's obviously less beneficial to a company than most data, so it ordinarily rewards less.
If such information is of little value thenwhy would they ask for it? Your email is an extremely easy way to bombard you with junk mail. It has great value to marketing companies. You postcode in combination with other details is equally valuable information. Your email is also often your login on many sites so suggesting pepole should get used to giving it out in retunr for some little in game benefit is very poor.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Dror wrote:..
There's also just more subs. As stated on these forums, there are some 18M+ fresh internet users every month, and the PC gaming demographic includes some 900M on a report. Even Raptr (a very niche program) lists about 1.5M fresh users per month, which apparently can include 0% from China (seems relevant for our shard). Those numbers mean nothing as EvE is a niche game in it's appeal (i.e. how many players will accept other players actively setting out to kill them and steal all their stuff?) and setting (spaceship combat and manufacturing). Raptr probably gets those subs from people upgrading Catalyst drivers for the video drivers to a large degree. It came with the last upgrade I tried to apply (which I imediately rolled back :D )
If you'd recall, the game gets a lot of leeway for being an interesting experience, and if it actively devalues its own feature list, how is that helpful? You're reductions are poor and unbased.
...[/quote]
The game is an interesting experience but only to those willing to participate. By dumbing down/removing areas of the game the interest level diminishes. If you change too much too quickly you alienate those who re active current customers, if they get too annoyed you have to back down embarrassingly or lose a lot of business.
The point I make is that SP is in no way a barrier to any area of EvE *if* you just get out and play the game. Stop worrying about isk, sp accrual, what you own etc etc and just play. Key to that is not the amount of SP but rather the NPE. This absolutely needs to introduce new players to the player corps around that will take new players and help them find their way. All the SP in the game will not help the NPE if the new players are not guided.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1812
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 15:47:57 -
[38] - Quote
N00B-SAIB0T wrote:Maybe what's needed is some sort of compromise:
Be able to extract Skill Points but only allocate them back to the original character from which they were extracted. Additionally, have a steep penalty with SP loss in this process that makes this feature make you think twice.
I have a feeling that CCP is pushing ahead with its original plan but some kind of middle ground should be reached due to the overwhelming negative response to the original idea.
Additionally, CCP mentions something about not being able to change the name of a new character that you've acquired. Is a name change feature also a part of their plans with this?
Not sure how much the name would matter now as any character on the bazaar simply becomes and SP pool to carve up and sell. Rich players can just carve them up into a group of perfect focused 50 mil alts for every occasion too.
Nothing I have seen so far in all of this discussion changes my view that this will only benefit older players/large groups. New players will simply not have the isk/cash/knowledge to make use of this. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1815
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 16:18:50 -
[39] - Quote
Dror wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:The game is an interesting experience but only to those willing to participate. By dumbing down/removing areas of the game the interest level diminishes. If you change too much too quickly you alienate those who re active current customers, if they get too annoyed you have to back down embarrassingly or lose a lot of business.
The point I make is that SP is in no way a barrier to any area of EvE *if* you just get out and play the game. Stop worrying about isk, sp accrual, what you own etc etc and just play. Key to that is not the amount of SP but rather the NPE. This absolutely needs to introduce new players to the player corps around that will take new players and help them find their way. All the SP in the game will not help the NPE if the new players are not guided. How odd it is supposing that SP supplies depth and "areas of the game" while also removing those. Again, you're assuming that limiting progression and depth and variety and competitiveness allows sub interest and their referrals. If it really only takes 5% increased retention to increase profits by 25-95%, some unsubbing (after it's announced for feedback that this seems like the best option) over something that absolutely makes the game shallow is fine, replaced with those interested in playing the game. You obviously can't refute the relevance of motivation science, and it's less than obvious why you try with more anecdotal arguments? It's just bias.
Game experience is not bias, it is opinion formed from actual play of the game we are discussing, not some findings from a study which I have no doubt will be contradicted by another study somewhere else and is also very generalized (one size absolutely does not fit all in psychology/motivation etc).
Again I'm not assuming anything, I'm relating my experience in various games where progression is a key component of the experience. Many other people here have agreed with this. You on the other hand are assuming that the removal of a core component of a game will instantly make it more fun, increase subs, improve retention, improve NPE, have people forking out tons of cash to fly ship x, y, or z etc etc etc.
If it takes a 5% increase in retention to increase profits by 25-95% (again I bet there's studies that refute this) then what would happen to profits if 25% of the long term players unsub due to their game being gutted? How long do you think CCP could sustain the loss in profits whilst waiting for new player retention to ramp up (assuming it did)?
The SP mechanism works well, it has players thinking about what they want to do in game, guides them in a direction to follow, rewards subs without grinding. It does not stop players from doing what they want, they just have to work towards it through other areas of the game. Would HALO be as much fun if you could just start at the end level with the biggest guns on your back? Would super mario have been fun if you could just drop in the boss level at the end with whatever power ups you could have?
This is simplifying things down but the point is the same. How much fun is there in being handed everything on a plate? Much of the attraction of Eve comes from having to earn things if you want them. That comes from planning, good choices, gameplay and luck. You are proposing the removal of the first two to a large degree. You are also overestimating how much extra fun people will have by being able to simply do anything in game (along with the impact that will have on others who *have* invested a lot of time and effort in getting to that point).
You are also still seemingly ignoring the fact that CCP have outright stated the importance of SP as a core part of the game. This in itself ends any discussion of SP removal which isn't what this thread was t discuss in the first place. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1817
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 08:44:18 -
[40] - Quote
Dror wrote:...
Ah, there it is. This underlined claim has no precedent, especially in this conversation. The whole point of established motivation theories is commonality.
...
And I disgree with that view as we are all motivated by different things. You cannot whitewash over the arguments of everyone here who is aganist this proposal by telling us that we all think the same and have the same motivations. That is clearly untrue.
Dror wrote:...
25% unsubs of some hundreds of thousands? In all respect, that's a tiny amount. WoW lost 50%, but the trend is a "lack of content". Oh, sweet -- a sandbox game can have unlimited content without restrictions undermining fresh subs and interest.
So a 5% increase in subs gives huge profits but a 25% loss would be a tiny drop in profits? Maybe someone with better maths skills than I can point out who silly that is...
Dror wrote:...The implication is still, apparently, that SP doesn't come upon the same reward problems as other extrinsic motivations, which are actually reported as reduced direction and creativity. As with the NPE videos, it's following that Achievements line and having no clue how you got there or no clue what to do next. Maslow's hierarchy would state that the most motivating thing is self-actualization. Yet, how can interested subs show how to be great if both of their skills disallow that?
Halo is the example? Its multiplayer experience sets the experience on a tuned playing field -- same stats, etc. Mario? False equivalence. These aren't sandbox games, nor are they multiplayer. Earning and progression? How is it progression being limited to a tiny window of diversity and unsubbing?
The implication is that training and creating your character is an intrinsic part of the experience in EvE. The statement that this is so from CCP Rise flat out shoots down your agenda of removing skill points entirely. You have also never addressed in either thread you have pushed this in how the impact of tearing the heart out of the existing code and game mechanism would be accomplished. How the frankly obvious impact on the market of every player being able to do everything perfectly would affect the game. You also ignore how alienating a good portion of the existing customers of CCP would be bad business practice.
I already pointed out that Halo etc are simplified versions of the gating system we have in EvE so. Of course the skill ssytem is progression, you guide your character by making choices and open up other options in game available to you. Of course you may think this is only important to those of us who are more RP minded but many disagree and also to discount that area of the player base is stupid.
Dror wrote:...
The fun comes from being competitive at everything.. (of interest). If a sub gets a character with 35M SP, what if he'd like to recruit his crew? This very idea should explain exactly how essential freedom is.
Fun comes from the individual, it comes from what they enjoy in game and neither you or any other person can define what any individual will find fun. There are many players in the game who will look at you idea that everyone should have acees to capitals and fly in PvP and hate the idea because they don't like capital ships, TiDi, PvP combat or all three together. You are trying to define what fun is for everyone which you simply cannot do. You are trying to use studies to back up your idea of fun for everyone which has been questioned and shot down by many, and is based on your false premise that you know what is fun for everyone.
You are also ignoring the fact that there are many characters who will 'recruit his(her) crew' because that is what they enjoy, helping people, guiding people in there choices, assisting with skill growth etc etc. How does that fit with your model of 'give everyone everything'.
If you got your no skills utopia what would you do then? Not everyone has access to every ship because of cost. Isn't that then another artificial barrier to your idea of 'fun for all'? So what then, free ships of any kind for all? Where do you stop? |
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1817
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 08:54:21 -
[41] - Quote
Dror wrote:...
Did you miss the listed problems with the progression system? Alternative suggestions are welcome; but implying that the crux of all of these problems is above "console games" and "quick fixes" seems pretty ironic. Those with the most money, for example, can "quick fix" through all of it.
....
Did you miss the fact that most people against this idea do not want a 'quick fix' game where everythging is available immediately? Let me guess, we are all wrong and don't even know what we like and enjoy because 'science' tells us so.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1819
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 09:08:09 -
[42] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:...
most people on reddit are active players. granted, not all are. however, pretending r/eve is full of unsubbed players is even more absurd than pretending this thread is the sum of all feedback for this idea.
Surely it is equally absurd to suggest that the largely negative feedback from a forum where only subbed players can post should be ignored. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1819
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 09:20:19 -
[43] - Quote
General Lootit wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Surely it is equally absurd to suggest that the largely negative feedback from a forum where only subbed players can post should be ignored.
afkalt wrote:
I think they need to be reaaaaaaally careful they don't just follow the popular voice.
Billions of people use McDonalds - doesn't make it smart.
There is often decent chat there, but putting too much emphasis on it is dangerous. The popular decision is not always the right one.
He is on your side BTW.
Yes he is, we both think that all opinions need to be considered. Both for and against. There's also an implication in previous posts that reddit is the true popular voice which does not invalidate my point that you cannot simply ignore the views of the majority here because they are negative towards the change. The majority view towards citadels originally was largely negative. CCP listened and changed them for the better. I really hope they listen here too. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1823
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 09:49:47 -
[44] - Quote
gascanu wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Dror wrote:...
Did you miss the listed problems with the progression system? Alternative suggestions are welcome; but implying that the crux of all of these problems is above "console games" and "quick fixes" seems pretty ironic. Those with the most money, for example, can "quick fix" through all of it.
.... Did you miss the fact that most people against this idea do not want a 'quick fix' game where everythging is available immediately? Let me guess, we are all wrong and don't even know what we like and enjoy because 'science' tells us so. yes, you are wrong! did it cross your mind even for a second that what is was "hard" for you then, it's 2x3x harder for a new player today? ofc not, but let's talk about good old times... when a new player could join a main alliance op in what, a month? how many corps had recruiting req like hac/recon/t3 lvl5? the main fleets where t1 bs, and no one was bitching at you for bringing a t1 fitted bs, and you knew ballance passes where like years between... and, about all that "hard" training, do you also forget to add how t3 ships for ex, where not even in game then, and we trained for them one at a time as they where released... now? a new player need to train hac/recon/logi/t3 like yesterday; and most of the time when they finish trainig for whatever flavor of the month ship alliances are using, boom! CCP drop the nerfhammer, and huh, you need to start training towards another ship, all over again... it's easy for someone like you to say "heh they don't need a quick fix" when you can switch from one doctrine to another in the same day, isn't it? is it that hard for you guys to comprehend that 10-12 years of training skill it's a major advantage for "vets" and at the same time a huge handicap for a new player? you already have huge advantages in sp/exp/isk/ stuff over a new player, is it that hard for you to accept that they need a bit of "support" till they reach a comfort zone of about 10/15/20 mil sps? and not free support, they will have to buy it from olders players with isk ! how risk adverse can you bee?
Firstly you miss the point that you cannot tell another person what kind of game they like. The players here against the idea play Eve because it *isn't* a quick fix game. That is what they signed up to and why they stayed.
Secondly it was never hard for me, I planned, I researched, I learnt by trial and error and all the while I was undocking and having fun in the game by actually playing it instead of worrying about this, that or the other. You talk about doctrines, fleets etc and seem to be only considering PvP content. I've been playing for around 3 years (so by no means a vet) and yet I've never been in a PvP fleet, never joined a big alliance and never ever missed either because I do everything else the game has to offer. You do not need 20 mil to fly frigs, destroyers or cruisers effectively. You will need significantly less to fly the pirate ships of any flavour effectively if you don't want to wait until tech II ships (or in many cases simply because they are better)
I am not and have never been risk averse. I'm currently moving down to a WH for more fun and guess what? I am going to be flying either pirate ships (all tech I and easily trained into) or a Dominix (yes you guessed it, a tech I BS). Players do not need huge amounts of SP to go and have fun, they just need to play the game.
P.S. those players wanting to go fly in whatever they can should try spectre fleets or whatever they are called. As I understand it they have no requirements on what you can fly. Same for Brave etc. But hey, what do I know? I'm to busy doing everything else that isn't PvP combat... |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1823
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 09:52:08 -
[45] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Dave Stark wrote:...
most people on reddit are active players. granted, not all are. however, pretending r/eve is full of unsubbed players is even more absurd than pretending this thread is the sum of all feedback for this idea. Surely it is equally absurd to suggest that the largely negative feedback from a forum where only subbed players can post should be ignored. i've never suggested they should be ignored. merely pointed out that this place isn't the only place with feedback
It seems we're agreeing in a roundabout way. We should stop that, we have reputations to consider (you developers can't be agreeing with us players now can you  ) |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1830
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 13:48:51 -
[46] - Quote
gascanu wrote:...
so you played a solo game in A MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER game, for about 3 years, and give your example as a successful one? i'm really sry for you...
first you say "you cannot tell another person what kind of game they like" and then you go and tell how others should play; if, by now, you cannot understand how a faster training until you reach a certain point it's beneficial for the game, there is no point in explaining it to you again
Where did I say I've played the game solo? I feel sorry for your assumption gland being so overworked.
I did not tell anyone how to play the game, I stated how I have played the game and never once been hindered by SP. I also pointed out that there is much more to the game than just PvP combat, many areas of which will be heavily affected by people being able to just buy there way in.
Faster training is not beneficial to the game, it is beneficial to those who will be able to afford to use the proposed mechanism which will not be new players. It is to the detriment of everything else in game in my opinion. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1830
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 13:50:23 -
[47] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Just out of curiosity, how many skill points are considered 'enough' to be able to play the game properly?
for those supporting this proposal the answer would be 'more than I currently have'... |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1836
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 14:30:31 -
[48] - Quote
Dror wrote:
That's you making a claim, which should be supported with more than anecdote. CCP says that they'd like to [objectively] switch over to an intrinsic reward system, which is [objectively] more motivating, creativity-inducing, etc. That's all included in the NPE videos.
CCP states unequiviocally that SP are an intrinsic and important part of the game. No amount of arguing from you changes that simple fact.
Dror wrote:
Limiting progression unfairly (nothing to do with gameplay and actual skillfulness, for example) is helpful? Please, then, show us a study that says having an unequal opportunity to do well increases, say, sub loyalty?
Please list games where there is not some kind of gating and/or progression mechanism involved in the design. Then list those that do.
Quote:One strategy found that giving players more control and ownership of their character increased loyalty [to the game]. The second strategy showed that gamers who played cooperatively and worked with other gamers in "guilds" built loyalty and social identity.
To build a player's feeling of ownership towards its character, game makers should provide equal opportunities for any character to win a battle.
Lets examine this in the case of SP. Players in EvE have complete control over the direction their chracter trains in and this continues whther you are logged in or not. You can change that direction at any time. During this time an Eve player tends to become invested in that character due to the effort required to create the specific skillset chosen. It is unique to that character and formed purely buy the player choices made.
Within Eve every player can and eventually will train up exactly the same level of skills in any given hull or task as any other player. This means that two players following a training plan that has them both flying assault frigates with tech II mods/guns will be on an exactly even playing field even if onw player has 20 mil total SP and the other player has 200 mil total SP. This of course ignores the fact that PvP combat in EvE is entirely based around creating unequal opportunities to win a battle via ship selection, mod selection and friend selection.
All of that would fit very very well with the quote you provided.
You also keep mentioning fun, please do give us a definitive description of fun. One that covers everyones activities in game. Something we can really agree on so that we have a true measure of fun.
Do you make sure the drive to work is unnecessarily ludicrous so that work seems more fulfilling?[/quote]
No, I plan ahead and also have alternative routes to make sure I achieve my goal
Dror wrote:... The information is everywhere, and (as stated) even CCP discusses it.
Interesting how you quote CCP discussion here yet completely ignore the statement made by CCP Rise about the importance of SP and skills in the game. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1836
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 14:31:43 -
[49] - Quote
General Lootit wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Faster training is not beneficial to the game, it is beneficial to those who will be able to afford to use the proposed mechanism which will not be new players.
I have no words for you.
Handy, means I don't have to listen to them then... |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1837
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 14:42:49 -
[50] - Quote
General Lootit wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:General Lootit wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Faster training is not beneficial to the game, it is beneficial to those who will be able to afford to use the proposed mechanism which will not be new players.
I have no words for you. Handy, means I don't have to listen to them then... I'm apologize for my reply but I'm quite tired from repeating myselfe.
No apology required, I'm not so insensitive that I can't take banter :D
I think that is part of the problem in the thread though. We are all now arguing around the same points with the same rebuttals. It now needs some feedback from CCP as to their view and what they plan to do. This was supposed to be about exploring the idea and I think most points have probably been covered by now. |
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1837
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 14:44:53 -
[51] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Just out of curiosity, how many skill points are considered 'enough' to be able to play the game properly? for those supporting this proposal the answer would be 'more than I currently have'... or 'less than I currently have, as I am looking forward to cashing in on unnecessary SP'
That's a point, those PvP combat only pilots who can fly all the ships they already want to can with this idea just keep selling the additional SP from their subscription time to fund their very narrow area of gameplay. Wouldn't be such a bad thing if it didn't come from seriously messing with one of the core areas of the game. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1842
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 14:56:13 -
[52] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:...Consider it's by no means and 'all or nothing' not a 'now or never' choice. The proposed system will be very flexible.
For example, I have 3 accounts:
. A main, PVP focused, which probably I'd keep skilling up normally
. A first alt account focused on industry and trading. On this account, I have no major use for additional SP, the 3 chars work perfectly for what I want to do with them. I could easily choose to sell all of this account's monthly SP to make it pay for itself
. A second alt account with a cap pilot, that I'll certainly skill up. I could also choose to use the first alt account's SP to train faster (main char of this account is around 30Mil SP)
I see this proposal simply as a way to allow SP-rich players trade with SP-poor players, for everyone's benefit (the former make some ISK, the latter get some SP).
I can see how that works when you are using your SP among your own existing accounts but as soon as something becomes a commodity it will be gamed by those in the market with the power to do so. This will not benefit new players unless having them pay lots of extra cash to play (as they will feel they have to if they can afford it) or having them grind for isk instead is beneficial to them. I don't believe it is. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1847
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 15:19:49 -
[53] - Quote
Dror wrote:...
The study is actually about a single MMORPG, so would you like to restate this?
So you are using a study based on one game to argue that all games should work in a certain way?
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1847
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 15:23:43 -
[54] - Quote
TomParad0x wrote:...
How much do you think these packets would actually go for, for a 500k packet?
They'll go for whatever people can sell them for, and that means someone will find a way to control and use this for their own gain.
The argument that everyone can create an SP farming alt doesn't work for me. Firstly it advocates even more alts, and worse still alts that will never even undock, just sit there in +5's training the same set of low multiplier skills over and over with a perfect remap to be milked of SP. Horrible idea.
Secondly any new player won't know about this or how to do this in the first place, and then when they find out wil think 'I have to have a second character to feed SP to my first???'
That surely makes for an even worse NPE. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1850
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 15:39:29 -
[55] - Quote
General Lootit wrote:... Main issue of bazaar (by CCPs version) is EULA violation. Also it's misleading new players.
It does make me cringe a bit when people say 'you can buy SP now' and use a necessary evil intended purely to stop RMT to back up why we should be allowed to buy unallocated SP in game. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1852
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 15:58:31 -
[56] - Quote
Levi Belvar wrote:....
All that analysis you've been preaching on about is WoW.
You most definatly went down the wrong route Dror, Even the world its self is instanced. Its not a global ecomony and as i already stated everything in game is Based on a level design, Dungeons / raids / PvP.
Its a terrible comparison, Blizzard has even taken the token idea from CCP / plex
Oh and the loving your characters comes from the fact you cant sell them.
Oh dear... |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1854
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 18:39:48 -
[57] - Quote
Jill Xelitras wrote:
All sides have been heard I think.
What we need now is a poll.
Only if it comes with an exotic dancer... |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1864
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:00:30 -
[58] - Quote
OK, I decided to take the time to read this study. Bearing in mind this is one study that is being QFT'd to support an argument. ! study does not make truth.
First point of concern at page 8: Therefore, the goal of this study is to identify effective strate
-
gies for promoting game player loyalty to MMORPGs by testing a proposed
model using data from a survey of 173 players who were members of a large
MMORPG community.
173 players? That few? From just one game? How is this supposed to representative of the whole MMO market? How is this supposed to representative of anything other than a very small group from a specific game model?
I'll continue reading but that doesn't fill me with confidence for s start |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1865
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:16:49 -
[59] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:OK, I decided to take the time to read this study. Bearing in mind this is one study that is being QFT'd to support an argument. ! study does not make truth.
First point of concern at page 8: Therefore, the goal of this study is to identify effective strate
-
gies for promoting game player loyalty to MMORPGs by testing a proposed
model using data from a survey of 173 players who were members of a large
MMORPG community.
173 players? That few? From just one game? How is this supposed to representative of the whole MMO market? How is this supposed to representative of anything other than a very small group from a specific game model?
I'll continue reading but that doesn't fill me with confidence for s start
Page 9: The research literature suggests that the players view
the avatar as an idealized version of their own personality and that users are
less satisfied with their avatar when there are major discrepancies between
online and real personalities
Oh god I hope this isn't true of players in EvE given the cut-throat nature here. I find it more likely that players perform actions in EvE they would never even possibly consider in RL simply because they can and that makesit fun. This in itself would put the kind of player attracted to EvE outside of the realms of this study. if that point on page 9 were remotely true then i guess now we know why there are 70 trades a day. the bazaar is like some kind of weird online dating forum where people are trying to get matched with themselves.
People with the money to do so and no attachment to their character. That does not cover all players - 70 characters a day is a very small portion of those who log ing and there is a high likelihood that the same group of players are trading these character to suit their needs at any given time. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1866
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:31:09 -
[60] - Quote
Dror wrote:Emboldened replies:
...
It's actually "a large MMORPG community", and although that makes it seem like "an MMO", it seems (per page 20) that it includes multiple games, some sandboxes."
I really can't accept 173 players as a representative group of even a small game group. The study relies on the answers from this group and is very heavily limited by the points that the study itself accepts just before the conclusion. There is no indication that the study group even fall into the same demographic of players who are attracted to EvE, let alone those that stay and play the game for an extended time.
Dror wrote:
It's often supported that games fulfill a fantasy that can only be supported in a game, yet the bahavior is still defined by play ("play phenomena" for a research keyphrase). What's more relevant is that arbitrary limitations seem unrealistic, cheapening, "gaming" (monetizing), etc. For example, it makes no sense that filling market orders is limited until they start a training queue, yeah? That can apply to a huge subset of the game, if for no other reason than the primary objective of the game being to play.. not necessarily to pay money or be artificially restricted in a sandbox.
The games studied all have character progression mechanism that allow the players to create their character as they wish over time. That in no way invalidates SP and for me does not back up your view at all. In fact in my view the study implies the exact opposite, that a mechanism to give players control over their character is intrinsically necessary for the creation of investment in that character and therefore the game.
Dror wrote:
..Requires re-evaluation after realizing what all games it encompasses? Beyond that, if there's no reason to actually refute a study that's based in deep definitions of psychology (identity and ownership theories), motivation, and the researcher's experience as a game designer, then it's still an empty challenge.
Same as above, 173 players (implied from the same game but no way to be sure) is absolutely not enough to be a representative group. The limitation of this is explicitly acknowledged at the end of the study.
Dror wrote:
It's arguably a criticism on EVE's less-interactive control method. There are playstyles that benefit from manual piloting, but many don't. It also seems unclear how you're correlating "player control" with passive skill points. "Control is .. a driving force in behavior, and individuals strive to produce behavior-event contingencies to exert primary control over the environment. Conversely, individuals are averse to loss of control and experience negative emotions when confronted with possible or actual loss of control." That would include effectiveness, e.g., ship performance, market profitability, etc.
This is on page 12 for context, and goes on to say, "Greater feelings of psychological ownership should increase positive feelings of experienced responsibility, caring, and stewardship.. Yee argued that MMORPG players usually play characters that are able to alter the game environment and control the flow of a fight so that their character becomes the winner." Notably, these are all directly correlative with gameplay, which SP is both isn't and also reduces (including effectiveness -- "control").
You read this very differently to me then, your proposal would remove any control a player has over their character growth (as there simply wouldn't be any). You are also treating EvE like most other MMORPG's and we all know it isn't. It is absolutely clear to me that the control comes from driving your character in whatever direction you choose and gaining the skills to access other areas of the game as you do so. EvE actually requires more planning and forethought than any other game I've played and this is part of what draws those players to EvE that actually stay. This is backed up by CCP's own studies that show that those players who interact with many career styles over time stay in the game longer.
I'll also re-iterate that the studies own acknowledgement of it's severe limitations completely invalidates any use of it as proof of any argument.
Ed:  the [/dror] was entirely a mistype... |
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1867
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 17:34:30 -
[61] - Quote
Dror wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:I really can't accept 173 players as a representative group of even a small game group. Then find an alternative study? Out of all of that, how is it not obvious that SP limits effectiveness, which is the very definition of control in the study? What counter do you have that an inherent drive is to win, which relies on fair opportunity?
I don't have to find an alternative study, the one you have chosen refutes itself for theuse you are putting it to. The number of case studies in itself is way too small to produce anything more than interesting avenues for research and that would need consideration to to the self reported nature of the feedback. That and the fact that EvE is a very different beats to other MMO's makes this study next to useless as a reason to remove SP.
The control you refer to is also the control a player has over their character progression, not the control a game places over a character. The control of a player over their character is highlighted as an intrinsic part of player investment in their character and therefore the game. EvE gives you this control on an even basis no matter how much time you can invest into the game. A player who plays 40 hours a week will have exactly the same investment in the progression of their character as one who only has 4 hours spare. This is one of the absolute best things about the game.
This is another reason why I'm against the SP buying idea that will be implemented as well, it's messing with this at a level where a player with low game time will be made to feel disenfranchised as they can't afford to pay for the increased SP in TL cash or in game ISK. New players will also feel pressured to pay extra cash just to speed up training. I'm extremely uncomfortable with that whole idea. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1867
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 17:41:16 -
[62] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:Skill Remapping
I have always been against this, but if this will help newer players by making the skill system less unforgiving, then upon reflection if it is implemented in a moderate way then it shouldn't be too bad. So here is my suggestion.
You buy a Neural Modifier from the market (or Aurum store) which comes in the types below;
Basic Neural Modifier - allows character to reallocate up to 3m SP - cost 1 PLEX.
Enhanced Neural Modifier - allows character to reallocate up to 5m SP - costs 2 PLEX.
To stop the kind of exploitation you get with skill trading the reallocation process would have a cool-down period of one year. You could reallocate during the cool-down period although you will get diminishing returns. So in practice the reallocation would only confers the full benefit if you wait for one year after the previous reallocation. If you reallocate for instance 6 months after the last reallocation (50% of the cool-down period) then you would get 50% of the benefit (1.5m or 2.5m SP).
And to make the skill system even less unforgiving for newer players (and due to the malleability of a new player's brain) they would have the opportunity to reallocate their SP more freely during their initial stages. As a result all new characters would come with 2 free Neural Modifications which would allow them to reallocate 2m SP each time for no cost and with no cool-down (this would be fixed to the character and could not be traded).
I believe this would make the skill system less unforgiving which would achieve some of CCPs goals without introducing the grind and possibility of exploitation that would come with skill trading.
Cerebral Enhancers
Another of the issues that CCP mentioned was that newer players were quitting because they didn't feel as though they could speed up their progress. I think this is also a fair point and newer players should be able to speed things up to some degree, although very importantly they should not be able to just completely skip straight to 50m SP if they have the cash.
The exception to this is obviously the character bazaar. With another method in place to speed up skill training though I believe newer players would not feel so inclined to take the jump and buy a character from the bazaar, this is good as I don't believe that using the CB is a good gameplay experience for a new player (and usually doesn't end well). I see the CB as more of a tool for advanced players and a lot of new players will be catered for by the proposal below.
Cerebral enhancers would come in the 2 variations below:
Standard Enhancer
increases SP gain by 100% for 7 days.
Estimated market price - 1/8 Plex (150m)
Advanced Enhancer
increases SP gain by 150% for 7 days.
Estimated market price - 1/4 Plex (300m)
The effect of the enhancer is modified based upon the SP total of the character it is used upon.
0 GÇô 10 million skillpoints = 100% effect (150% increased training speed - 6750 SP hour max)
10 - 25 million skillpoints = 75% effect (112.5% increased training speed - 5737.5 SP hour max)
25 - 50 million skillpoints = 50% effect (75% increased training speed - 4725 SP hour max)
50 GÇô 80 million skillpoints = 25% effect (37.5% increased training speed - 3712.5 SP hour max)
80 + million skillpoints = 20% effect (30% increased training speed - 3510 SP hour max)
Using cerebral enhancers which heavily benefit newer players over older players would mean that if newer players choose to do so then they could speed up their skill training for a reasonable cost (both in game and through plex). As this is not as exploitable as instant unallocated SP, I don't see this being quite as desirable to veteren players (particularly considering they benefit they would get is only 1/5 of that which a new player would get), and as a result the market would reflect a price that is attainable to a new character.
Not a fan of the remaps but I could live with the second idea in some form. I'd want a hard cap on enhancers use though and make them player created in game in some form that it is more useful for new players to produce them rather than vets farming them. This would give new players more investment in the game, would allow them to produce them by themselves as an introduction to manufacture and exploration. New players could then sell them for isk if they are patient to wait on the skill queue or just eat them like smarties if not.
ED: I also firmly believe that new players would find importable skill queues invaluable. CCP could create basic combat, explo, indy ones and corps could produce more tailored ones to entice new folks. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1868
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 17:52:37 -
[63] - Quote
Dror wrote:
Posts refuted. Enjoy.
You are refusing to accept that the study itself acknowledges that it has sever limitations and is based upon a very small set of case studies that may or may not have doubtful relevance.
You cannot use this study to argue a case for removing SP and you are blatantly ignoring the fact that CCP have stated that SP are a central core of the game. They may want to change the rate at which you gain them but they do not want to remove them. Oh and that's not an appeal to authority as you like to put it, simply a statement of the CCP position. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1868
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 18:22:35 -
[64] - Quote
Dror wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Dror wrote:
Posts refuted. Enjoy.
You are refusing to accept that the study itself acknowledges that it has sever limitations and is based upon a very small set of case studies that may or may not have doubtful relevance. You cannot use this study to argue a case for removing SP and you are blatantly ignoring the fact that CCP have stated that SP are a central core of the game. They may want to change the rate at which you gain them but they do not want to remove them. Oh and that's not an appeal to authority as you like to put it, simply a statement of the CCP position. I wasn't. The study's very questions are based on psychological ownership theory and social identity theory. There's very little variation with the idea "I feel valuable in my guild". Like, you're not actually challenging the study's contents, just the idea that a small-scale study can be comprehensive. Again, if you can't provide an alternative to the inherence of winning and experiencing (to enjoyment, loyalty, etc.), then you're posting nothing.
I read the study completely, gave my view on various sections and challenged those I did not agree with. I do not have to point out the limitations of the study as they are explicitly acknowledged by the study itself. You actually pull out one of the points I agreed with to use against me! I specifically stated I agree wholeheartedly that being part of a corp is highly valuable to player retention.
A small scale study that uses a very limited case study group cannot be comprehensive by definition. The data set provided is acknowledged as potentially flawed and simply isn't big enough to extrapolate any results from in any reliable form.
Again I do not have to find a study to prov that the study you hold up as a paragon of truth actually states it has flaws. You've been banging on that people should read the study end to end. When I do and give a considered response to many points within it you seem to resort to 'lalalalala I'm not listening...'
Loyalty is implicitly tied to social interaction within EvE (whether that be as a part of a corp or alliance or simply a social chat channel). Enjoyment comes from a player participating in those areas of the game (not just capital PvP combat as you seem to think)
A player cannot control the environment in which they play, especially so in EvE where you have other unpredictable players to contend with. You can only control the direction in which your character develops. If you remove the character growth delivered by SP and skills you remove the only thing other than the avatar itself that creates player investment in their character. Hence the control the study talks about is the players control over the character growth. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1868
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 18:46:45 -
[65] - Quote
Dror wrote:
Social interaction is limited by SP, through effectiveness (status) and productivity (entertainment). That all is the same for gameplay as well, from limitations on exploration (diversity and depth) ..and mastery (fleet comps, being competitive, and practicing ships and fittings and other niches).
You're not defining ideas accurately within the scope of the discussion. A character very well can control the environment, because the definition of that is effectiveness and strategy. Nowhere does the study (nor another, deeper explanation of) control define that as "placing opponents in space". It's about making the most of the character and the full amount of options in the game. It's maximizing opportunity to avoid loss.
You're trying to define a character as this fake identity through trickle-allocated stats, and there's no reason for that. It's basically just an appeal to board-game tradition -- but even those start the character out with full stats (and abilities) from the start. If the gamer is trying to find rapport with the fantasy of playing an MMO character, he can find much less enjoyment with being gated.
Social interaction is only limited by a players ability or desire to interact socially. No in game mechanic has anything to do with that in any way shape or form.
Players do not control an environment but rather how they interact with it. They take into account their skills, the characters capabilities, the capability of the ship they are in etc etc etc. It is about maximizing opportunity based upon that which you currently have. Remove something that affects those opportunities and you remove a major part of the decision making process. Thus you diminish the value of the decisions made to a great degree. A large amount of the risk in game comes from pushing yourself into activities that are borderline based upon your character and player skills. The adrenaline rush that comes from that is so much a part of EvE.
I define a character as an avatar that embodies the choices a player has made in game, it is unique to a player and that is what makes a player invested in the character and therefore the game. I don't know what RPG's you are basing your comment on but none of the games I ever tried (and it was many) started characters with full stats and abilities. Literally none of them. Otherwise what would be the point of XP? There would be nothing for them to increase.
If a player i trying to to find rapport with the fantasy of playing an MMO character then that character has to have a 'life' of it's own, it has to grow and change. Removing skill progression basically destroys this rapport as your character is absolutely no different to every other character in game. Bye bye immersion. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1873
|
Posted - 2015.10.27 17:27:56 -
[66] - Quote
Can I patent the phrase' Can I haz your stuff? And your brain?' I think it could be a good earner... |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
2070
|
Posted - 2016.02.16 21:33:45 -
[67] - Quote
This did make me laugh :D |
|
|
| |
|