|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
22
   |
Posted - 2017.02.25 14:31:48 -
[1] - Quote
Given that Burn Jita has been happening annually for a long time, I don't really see how anything is different now with Alpha clones. They used to use newly minted trial accounts to suicide gank. In fact, I'd argue that alpha clones make it harder than it was under trial accounts because you're limited in what skills you can train. With 2+ weeks of unlimited training on a trial account you could get a much stronger gank alt than you can with an alpha clone.
If CCP was okay with it before, I don't see any reason why they'd suddenly stop allowing it. Nothing has changed. Besides, I kind of get a kick out of it. I think most people do. |
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
28
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 04:29:41 -
[2] - Quote
Jagd Wilde wrote:Yea I agree, every highsec activity should be off limits for Alpha clones. If you can't be bothered to help support EVE then you don't deserve the benefits of high sec. If you want to try EVE for free, go to low or null and have at it. This includes mining, exploration, hauling, anything and everything. What rights should anyone have if they refuse to pay like the rest of us? Get subbed or get rekt. 
The people who are least capable of surviving in lowsec or nullsec are new players. Highsec is for those who still need training wheels - and there's nothing wrong with that.
Given the limits on alpha clones, I find it hard to see how they're somehow taking benefits that they don't deserve. The point is to give them enough time playing the game to decide to become a paying customer.
|
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
29
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 03:08:17 -
[3] - Quote
Jagd Wilde wrote:Zarek Kree wrote:
The point is to give them enough time playing the game to decide to become a paying customer.
Highsec is not safer for new players than living in null with a good group of players, EVE is an MMO after all. If you think otherwise then you have never left highsec, and you are part of the problem.
I think you're getting a little too emotional. Good people can simply disagree. At the point when you start declaring those who disagree with you to be "part of the problem", the intellectual credibility of your argument becomes suspect.
Null is only safer than highsec if you have a strong corp and social support structure. But, most new players don't even have a clue what a corp is or how they work. Most people hear about EVE, go to the website, download the client and start playing. Unless you join at the behest of an experienced player who then mentors you, new players lack the social contacts to immediately join a nullsec corp. The BNs and PHs of the game can't take every new alpha that signs up. That would leave most alphas alone in null trying to figure out the game. You CAN learn to swim in the middle of the ocean while sharks circle you if people are there to teach you and beat the sharks away. But who's going to do that for every rando who wanders in to try the game?
Even if I agreed with your philosophy of dumping alphas into nullsec (which I don't), it's simply not workable in any realistic way. Not to mention it does nothing to entice new players to continue playing the game.
Nobody knows what the sub numbers are other than CCP. Your anecdotal experience talking to random people may or may not be reflective of reality. If CCP isn't getting the subs they're hoping for, then I'm sure they'll tweak the system. But doing SOMETHING is better than watching the sub numbers continue to trickle away year after year. But they correctly recognize that attracting new players to the game isn't the problem - keeping them is. Alpha alts are as good a solution to the problem as any I've heard - and much better than just dumping them all into nullsec. |
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
29
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 05:05:28 -
[4] - Quote
Jagd Wilde wrote:So you seem triggered , and I believe that's an emotional reaction, so pot meet kettle and all.
I did say "part of the problem", you're the one who took it personal.
The effort shows in your post.
Get subbed or get rekt.
LOL...Okay dude. Just trying to have a civil discussion. Have a good night. |
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
29
|
Posted - 2017.03.02 18:45:55 -
[5] - Quote
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:Using multiple accounts to circumvent the game designed punishments for unlawful behavior is a violation of the EULA.
Everyone knew it would be exploited, but CCP is too desperate for new players to care about the integrity of the game.
Pirates should be proud, and fly eternal shiny and chrome blinky and -10.
Nothing wrong with highsec ganking, but the alpha clone abuse is blatant EULA violation.
And NO you probably won't get anything but CCP Rise looking the other way and pretending it isn't a problem.
Fact is even though some are cheating by recycling alts, CCP cares far more about them signing up an account so they can go show their investors the new numbers than about impropriety and difficult game management decisions.
Once again, this has nothing to do with CCP's decision to allow alpha accounts. The exact same thing happened under the trial account system. Nothing is being "exploited" that wasn't being done before. If anything, alphas have greater limitations than trial account alts did. |
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
29
|
Posted - 2017.03.02 19:10:34 -
[6] - Quote
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:Zarek Kree wrote:
Once again, this has nothing to do with CCP's decision to allow alpha accounts. The exact same thing happened under the trial account system. Nothing is being "exploited" that wasn't being done before. If anything, alphas have greater limitations than trial account alts did.
Who cares what was happening before, what are you even talking about? -Ganking is good for eve, piracy is good for eve. But those functions are intended to exist inside of a framework of consequences for "unlawful" actions. -the specific matter of people recycling accounts to avoid those consequences is a direct violation of the eula It doesn't matter what limitations existed in the past or do today. What is clear is that said limitations are not sufficient in avoid systematic exploitation of those mechanics. Safeties green for alphas in highsec is the only way to prevent this behavior.
So then your issue isn't with alphas, but with CCP's policy toward unpaid accounts. A policy that has been consistent for many, many years. You're free to argue that unpaid accounts shouldn't be able to gank in highsec (although I don't agree), but this isn't a new argument. The forums are full of it going back at least a decade (maybe all the way back to 2003, but I don't know what the mechanics were back then).
So the question is, what do you think has changed that should compel CCP to change their interpretation of the EULA? |
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
30
|
Posted - 2017.03.05 15:06:45 -
[7] - Quote
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:But, like any activity in eve, it's only harmless when it exists as intended within the rules of the game. When an activity exists within the mechanics of the game, but is done in a way that circumvents intended consequences or outcomes for that activity, that is what is called exploiting a game mechanic.
I'll ask again: How is what's going on now with alpha clones any different than what was happening for the previous 10+ years with trial accounts? There are far more limitations now on ganking alts than there used to be under the trial account system. |
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
31
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 02:41:57 -
[8] - Quote
I don't recall hearing anyone previously demanding that trial accounts be locked to green in highsec. This notion that people are supposedly abusing non-paying accounts seems to be a new "problem" that just happened to coincide with the introduction of alpha clones. The fact that people (like yourself) are suddenly perceiving an abuse issue suggests that it's simply a reaction to something new and and different. Demonstrate that people widely regarded this as a problem before alpha clones and I might be willing to support the idea of preventative measures. Otherwise, it simply smacks of hysteria over something new. I'm willing to bet that CCP views it the same way.
The question isn't why SHOULD alpha clones be allowed to suicide gank, but rather why SHOULDN'T they? If you read that Crossing Zebras article I linked earlier, he brings up the fact that one of the things that makes EVE unique is the ability to do everything on a new player account that you can on a paying account. There are no basic gameplay styles that you're prohibited from pursuing. You can rat, PvP, build, invent, mission, explore, scam and also gank. They simply limit your ability to pursue a gameplay style as efficiently as you can on an Omega clone. To that end, you can't gank as effectively as an alpha.
The default should always be to allow a gameplay style. That has always been CCP's policy and I suspect it will continue to be their policy. Abuses that violate the EULA have always been handled on an individual basis. Feel free to call for greater enforcement, but you don't deal with enforcement problems by calling for more regulations. |
|
|
| |
|