| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Anika Mobius
British Legion
NE CEDE MALIS.
0
   |
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:42:00 -
[1] - Quote
This morning in the shower, I remembered that needed to cancel my EVE Online subscription before the renewal date. This must be the tenth time IGÇÖve cancelled my subscription, and even before doing so I know IGÇÖll be back as a subscriber again. I then got to thinking why do I keep alternately subscribing and cancelling my subscription to EVE Online, and what could be done to keep me, and others like me, as steady customers. During the length of said shower I came up with the contents of the following open letterGǪ
This is an open letter to the developers of EVE Online [the game]. My intent is to voice my opinion on how best to move the EVE Universe forward and make the game more appealing to a larger audience. My reasoning is twofold. The first is selfish: it is simply how IGÇÖd like to see the EVE Universe change to best suit my vision how it should be. The second is more altruistic: it is the simple truth that the more people in numbers and variety that play the game, the better the gameGÇÖs economy works and since the EVE Universe is first and foremost an economy simulation this is where efforts need to be focused.
Let us start with the solo player aspect of the game. Today, despite the gameGÇÖs developersGÇÖ best efforts, I could define solo play in the EVE Universe as boring and repetitive. Playing alone in any massively multiplayer online game [MMO] is, by definition, not intended use. However, it is the way a very large portion of the subscribing populous does in fact play these games. There are a huge number of reasons to play alone in a game populated with thousands (or millions) of other people, all playing the same game. Reasons vary from insufficient time to play with others; to not knowing other players therefore not having friends to play with; to simply being introverted and preferring onesGÇÖ own company to that of others. Whatever the reason these are paying customers and should be catered to.
There are a number of issues with EVE OnlineGÇÖs solo player experience. First thereGÇÖs limited reasons to play solo. The primary activities done solo, in my experiences playing the game, are completing missions, mining asteroids, and engaging in the harassment of other players for my own enjoyment. LetGÇÖs first focus on the experiences that do not require the involvement of other players.
The completion of missions is a moderately rewarding experience. In my experience the reward curve (measured in the enjoyment of the activity as opposed to the in game currency reward) is a third degree curve: one that starts very high on the enjoyment axis and quickly drops to below zero, only to oscillate above and below the zero axis until at comes to reset at zero. The problem with mission completion is repetition with the impetus to move forward. The only compelling reasons to complete missions that I know of are the in game currency reward [ISK], loyalty points (another form of currency), and faction standing (a third form of currency used to access more missions).
Mining in the EVE Universe is potentially the most boring activity ever presented to mankind as a form of play. Even golf is far more an exciting and rewarding way to spend your time. As best I can tell mining as an activity only exists in the game to provide a limitation to the influx of new raw materials thus stabilizing the economy. It requires hours of time spent doing mindless tasks best left to a automation and is both a waste of personal time for the EVE Online subscriber as well as server time for CCP.
In my opinion these are insufficient rewards to keep the game interesting to anyone who, for whatever reason, is playing solo and that customer will unsubscribe as their return on investment [ROI] decreases past their minimal threshold for paying the subscription fee. With mining it is even worse that with completing missions because thereGÇÖs very little personal ROI for those engaged in spending their days and nights mining for ore to sell for ISK. In fact it has become such a critical, yet painfully boring part of the game that many players have looked outside the offerings of CCP to spend additional money to purchase software which will automate mining and therefore reduce the boredom. This means that the only way to make mining enjoyable is to violate the end user license agreement [EULA]. Making a bad situation worse is that the large scale usage of bots to make mining rewarding punishes those who havenGÇÖt broken the EULA by suppressing the value of ore in the economy and consuming deposits (asteroids). This is a fundamentally broken system, and I fully believe CCP knows it to be broken because I have seen obvious usage of automated mining tools [bots] go on for months without any repercussions.
[CCP: If a player never logs off and never stops mining, that player is a bot. Clear and simple.]
- A.Mobius |
Anika Mobius
British Legion
NE CEDE MALIS.
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:42:00 -
[2] - Quote
Then what are the rewards to encourage the mass of solo players to continue playing EVE Online? First is to making completing missions interesting. This means more story arcs and some method to personalize the experience. My recommendations are to add a new mechanism to the game called GÇ£CrewGÇ¥ which cannot be bought or sold but only obtained through completing missions, faction standing, and the upcoming Incarna interaction which are to be added to the game.
I see Crew working as such: ships in the game have a number of GÇ£Crew SlotsGÇ¥ which allow the assignment of GÇ£Crew MembersGÇ¥, smaller ships having fewer lots and larger ships having more. Crew Members add specific bonuses to the various aspects of a ship when assigned. For example a Crew Member might make a ship accelerate faster and change direction quicker as well. One important difference between ship modules and Crew Members is that Crew Members increased their value over time. The longer you have a Crew Members assigned to an active ship the better and more varied their skills become. This is analogous to how player characters improve over time using the gameGÇÖs learning mechanism. However, like ship modules, if a ship is destroyed thereGÇÖs only a small chance a Crew Member will survive and the captain will need to return to rescue the lost Crew Member(s). Crew Members rescued by another captain might be persuaded to abandon their old captain and join the new captain, but this should be dependent on the Crew Members loyalty requirements (such as faction and/or Concord standing, or the captainGÇÖs race) and the captainsGÇÖ competing social skills.
Crew gives players another reason to not want to lose their active ship because Crew Members are built up over time and longer you keep your Crew Member alive the better they are. Therefore losing them can be traumatic. Losing them to a non-player faction could result in rescue missions, losing them to a player could result in hostage negotiations, police reports, or the afore mentioned rescue missions. There are dozens of ways this could be played out. Most importantly, acquiring new Crew Members should involve interactions at a station where by the Crew Member is recruited. This would ideally be done via Incarna, but not be delayed by Incarna being a requirement.
To make Crew Members balanced and prevent hording, I recommend that CCP require that Crew Members receive a periodic salary regardless of use. Any Crew Member GÇ£possessedGÇ¥ by a pilot should cost an amount of ISK relative to their skill levels each period (be it an hour, a day, or a month). This should be true of Crew Members assigned to a ship or simply waiting at the station. Unpaid Crew Members should leave the employ of their captain and become part of the pool, available to other captains. Another limitation to dissuade hording should be the limitation that Crew Members only improve their skills when assigned to an active ship, though the ship shouldnGÇÖt need to be undocked; and to be fair their skill should increase whenever their captainGÇÖs skills are increasing.
The fact that the majority of the EVE UniverseGÇÖs population lives within the Great Empires means the majority of new Crew Members can only be found within the boards of the Great Empires. This gives meaning to security status, as outlaws actually have a penalty for being barred from higher security space: they donGÇÖt have access to the large pool of available Crew Members. EVE OnlineGÇÖs security status has always been a joke because nobody really cared about it, now thereGÇÖs a mechanism by which it becomes important. Of course, Agents who are very happy with the performance of a captain, could introduce potential new Crew Members as well; and this should be true of Empire Agents as well as GÇ£PirateGÇ¥ Agents.
- A.Mobius |
Anika Mobius
British Legion
NE CEDE MALIS.
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
The experience of completing missions could also be improved by reducing the chance that my third solo activity (engaging in the harassment of other players for my enjoyment) is reduced while in the process of completing a mission. I have a simple mechanism and a solid in game logic to explain it.
Since most missions are in GÇ£dead spaceGÇ¥ where faster than light travel [FTL] isnGÇÖt possible, it shouldnGÇÖt be possible for any kind of scanners to detect activity within dead space. Somebody needs to explain to me how anything is detected inside dead space at faster than light. Even at the amazingly fast speed of light, it takes eight minutes to each the Earth from the sun and over four hours to reach Neptune. Given that, dead space should be blocking any FTL transmission. How are details such as ship placement visible from within a pocket of dead space? Simply put they shouldnGÇÖt be. The pocket of dead space itself should be easily detectable, but not the contents within. Therefore players looking to harass other players should be allowed to warp to the edge of the dead space pocket, but be forced to travel at sub-luminal speeds looking for the acceleration gate, potentially a multi-hour/day activity.
Without this limitation imposed by dead space what logical reason is there that the EVE UniverseGÇÖs massive empires still have rouge elements within them? How can a military body the size of the Gallente Federation Navy, which protects hundreds if not thousands of planets, be unable to hunt down and decimate a single corporation? Why provide the player characters with secret acceleration gate locations when anyone who warps to the edge of the dead space will magically find the necessary acceleration gate? The only logical thing to do here is to make dead space FTL signal-dead and prevent the scanning of the objects within. Only by knowing the location of an acceleration gate can one access the dead space. Finally, the discovery of these acceleration gates should be one of the key activities of the upcoming Incarna experience; players should need to research, coerce, and bribe the information to use for their selves, provide to the empires, or sell to the highest bidder.
This change doesnGÇÖt have to be limited to solo player activity. By changing the nature of dead space, player run corporations will more easily be able to hide their player own stations and other valuables, however now the valuable location will be the acceleration gate(s).
To offset the safety provided by a darkened dead space, I believe CCP should prevent warp from being initiated with dead space as well. Except in the case of pod emergency warp, ships should require the use of an acceleration gate to get out of dead space as well. This means once players have committed to a mission they must complete it or fail. With the addition of Crew the stakes have been raised and the player has only themselves to blame. These stressful situations with so much on the table are amazingly rewards when you succeed; they can be quite addicting.
The only method I have come up with to resolving the problem of the low ROI the activity of mining provided for EVE Online subscribers is the same solution that so many before me have come up with: use a bot. From my point of view CCP has a choice to make: either get serious about banning bots and punishing users of them, or create your own mining bot. I believe CCP should create a sanctioned mining bot which can keep a character online, even when the player has logged out, to continue mining as much as possible.
Admittedly this will have an impact on the economy due to the flood of raw materials. I do have this to say about it however: because asteroids are limited and are consumed by the act of mining the actual amount of minerals being dumped on the market is limited; in my experience this nearly happening today anyways; therefore by allowing all subscribers to engage in mining with a bot only EULA breakers are being punished. However, since there will likely be more minerals injected into the market we need a proper sink to keep the economy balanced.
- A.Mobius |
Anika Mobius
British Legion
NE CEDE MALIS.
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
LetGÇÖs talk T3 battleships and ship modules. It is, and has been, my opinion that there should be benefits for hard welding modules to a ship such that that ship is no longer flexible. This is what I think T3 battleships should be. IGÇÖd recommend giving them a significant boost to performance with the drawback at removing ship modules from the ship destroys the modules. The same should be true of T3 ship modules as well: once fitted to a ship they cannot be unfit without being destroyed. This would make them rare and therefore valuable; in addition it would require the use of large amount of minerals to keep the consumer population happy thus offsetting the CCP provided mining bot.
Player harassment in the game is what separated EVE Online from its MMO competitors. I would not recommend removing it. As outlined above, I do recommend attaching difficulties and penalties to it however. Today the few garner too much happiness at the expense of the many and the many have no recourse by to punish CCP by voting with their wallets and their feet. There should be a system of laws in place that have meaning and impact, and I believe requiring minimal security status to have access to new Crew Members and to Agents to for access to acceleration gates should be enough.
I would touch on one last topic before ending this letter. IGÇÖd like to touch on the topic of subscriptions and pay for services. To date, CCP has been an industry leader in innovative methods by which to profit while adding value to their customersGÇÖ experiences. The concept of PLEX is an elegant and fairly effective method by which to limit the impact of GÇ£gold farmersGÇ¥ on the game. The Character Bazaar is another elegant was to deter the existence of third party character sellers (aka XP Farmers) whoGÇÖs only value add is the ability to skip a portion of the game for a price. Both models bolster CCPGÇÖs bottom line while improving the gaming experience. With all of these novel methods of allowing subscribers to pay for what they want, I recommend that CCP consider making the subscription system for EVE Online even more flexible.
First, make EVE Online free to play. Limit free accounts to the same rules as Trial Accounts are currently limited. In addition only allow free accounts to logon for a limited amount of time each day, perhaps two hours per day is a good amount of time. During this time is the only time a character on the account can accumulate new skill points; and if the Crew idea is implemented limited Crew Member skill point accrual to limited to this time as well. This would vastly increase the number of active players in the game, benefiting the economy through diversity and volume. Benefiting the economy is benefitting everyone, and the ability to advertise EVE Online as free should a boon to CCPGÇÖs marketing department. Seems like a win-win for everyone. Of course, the first 14 or 30 days should be free, as is the model today.
Second, enable tiers of services for players capable and willing to spend more money on their past time. For example, I recommend that CPP allow players to pay an extra $10 to purchase a 30-Day Pilot Training Accelerator License [PTAL] which can be used to increase their characterGÇÖs learning speed by 50%, or be sold on the in game market for ISK. Perhaps even allow two PTALs to be applied to a single character at a time, effectively doubling the characters skill point accrual for 30 days. Sell Pilot License [PLEX] in various denominations. 15-day for US$10, 30-day for US$15, and 90-day US$40 seem the most logical denominations to me. This will allow players short on cash to continue their characterGÇÖs development on a reduced budget; and allow those players who have the capacity to spend the additional money on a CCP product. This would also make the in game economy more fluid as the diversity of PLEX products increased and players could make choices based on their bet as to which products will best maintain their in game value relative to the real world cost.
- A.Mobius |
Doc Fury
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
226
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
Features and Ideas forum is that way -->
edit: Holy walls of text Batman!
The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the ho's and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' and I'll look down, and whisper 'no.' |
Anika Mobius
British Legion
NE CEDE MALIS.
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:44:00 -
[6] - Quote
There you have roughly twenty minutes of thought. While admittedly a long shower, is a short amount of time to have spent thinking about topics as in depth as this. Therefore I present these thought as what they are, the initial seeds of ideas, not yet fully thought out or scoped. I do believe thereGÇÖs something valuable here and therefore have presented these ideas as is. Thanks for your time and I hope something has sparked your imagination.
Fly safe
- A.Mobius |
Anika Mobius
British Legion
NE CEDE MALIS.
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:46:00 -
[7] - Quote
Doc Fury wrote:Features and Ideas forum is that way -->
Which way? I don't post much on these forums. I looked about but didn't see any good place to park my thread. My apologies if this is the wrong place. Could a Mod relocate this post to where it should, if I have posted in the incorrect location? Thanks!
- A.Mobius |
Doc Fury
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
226
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:48:00 -
[8] - Quote
Anika Mobius wrote:Doc Fury wrote:Features and Ideas forum is that way --> Which way? I don't post much on these forums. I looked about but didn't see any good place to park my thread.
EVE Features and Ideas Discussion
The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the ho's and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' and I'll look down, and whisper 'no.' |
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
40
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
..the kind of people flying solo and doing 'their stuff' mostly have a limited time window only for the game and would like to enjoy this time to the fullest - within a ruthless sci-fi-environment.
Your proposal to field crews on ships does not make sense in that regard, as this would need coordination and more importantly - trust.
Take another shower... |
Dbars Grinding
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
334
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:56:00 -
[10] - Quote
Now, this is the story all about how
My life got flipped-turned upside down
And I'd like to take a minute
Just sit right there
I'll tell you how I became the prince of a town called Bel Air
In west Philadelphia born and raised
On the playground was where I spent most of my days
Chillin' out maxin' relaxin' all cool
And all shootin some b-ball outside of school
When a couple of guys
Who were up to no good
Startin making trouble in my neighborhood
I got in one little fight and my mom got scared
She said 'You're movin' with your auntie and uncle in Bel Air'
I begged and pleaded with her day after day
But she packed my suite case and sent me on my way
She gave me a kiss and then she gave me my ticket.
I put my walkman on and said, 'I might as well kick it'.
First class, yo this is bad
Drinking orange juice out of a champagne glass.
Is this what the people of Bel-Air living like?
Hmmmmm this might be alright.
But wait, I hear the prissy, booze, whine, all that
Is this the type of place that they should send this cool cat?
I don't think so
I'll see when I get there
I hope they're prepared for the prince of Bel-Air
Well uh, the plane landed and when I came out
There was a dude who looked like a cop standing there with my name out
I ain't trying to get arrested yet.
I just got here!
I sprang with the quickness, like lightening disappeared
I whistled for a cab and when it came near
The license plate said fresh and it had dice in the mirror
If anything I can say is that this cab was rare
But I thought 'Man forget it' - 'Yo home to Bel Air'
I pulled up to the house about seven or eight
And I yelled to the cabbie 'Yo homes smell ya later'
I looked to my kingdom
I was finally there
To sit on my throne as the Prince of Bel Air |
Anika Mobius
British Legion
NE CEDE MALIS.
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:58:00 -
[11] - Quote
Tres Farmer wrote:..the kind of people flying solo and doing 'their stuff' mostly have a limited time window only for the game and would like to enjoy this time to the fullest - within a ruthless sci-fi-environment.
Your proposal to field crews on ships does not make sense in that regard, as this would need coordination and more importantly - trust.
Take another shower...
I think you misunderstand. Crews would be NPCs not human controlled. Therefore would not require anymore coordination. At least that's my vision for it.
- A.Mobius |
Tiberius Sunstealer
Phantom Soulreavers
53
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 02:58:00 -
[12] - Quote
Anika Mobius wrote:it is simply how IGÇÖd like to see the EVE Universe change to best suit my vision how it should be.
Stopped reading there. It's a good thing I did seeing how you just built a massive wall of text. |
Anika Mobius
British Legion
NE CEDE MALIS.
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 03:01:00 -
[13] - Quote
Tiberius Sunstealer wrote:Anika Mobius wrote:it is simply how IGÇÖd like to see the EVE Universe change to best suit my vision how it should be. Stopped reading there. It's a good thing I did seeing how you just built a massive wall of text.
Luckily this is a letter to the developers of EVE Online and not you. 
- A.Mobius |
Tiberius Sunstealer
Phantom Soulreavers
53
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 03:05:00 -
[14] - Quote
Anika Mobius wrote:Luckily this is a letter to the developers of EVE Online and not you.
Do you really think they're going to read it? You admitted yourself that your idea is selfish. It is your vision. Not CCP's vision. Not the vision of the community. Your vision.
By the way, you do know you can call the developers of EVE Online by name, right? Repeat after me: CCP. |
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
40
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 03:05:00 -
[15] - Quote
Anika Mobius wrote:Tres Farmer wrote:..the kind of people flying solo and doing 'their stuff' mostly have a limited time window only for the game and would like to enjoy this time to the fullest - within a ruthless sci-fi-environment.
Your proposal to field crews on ships does not make sense in that regard, as this would need coordination and more importantly - trust.
Take another shower... I think you misunderstand. Crews would be NPCs not human controlled. Therefore would not require anymore coordination. At least that's my vision for it.
Uh, right.. aehm.. so, you want to introduce 'power ups' for ships that are harder to trade (which is against the core of eve btw) to 'vitalize' mission running?
Also, rigs already work that way somewhat.. you run missions, get stuff, convert it into power up parts to hardwire them to your ship and if it gets blown up, they're gone. |
Meryl SinGarda
Belligerent Underpayed Tactical Team
313
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 03:12:00 -
[16] - Quote
Are you trying to get this published?
Fly Safe, Die Hard
As stated by a fellow player, Mara Rinn, "EVE is not an internet spaceships game. It's a game of politics, subterfuge, capitalism, empire building and trust."-á
|
Rory Orlenard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 03:17:00 -
[17] - Quote
I read 90% of that ...whew. Some good ideas but leave the probing alone, it works well and as intended. Eve doesn't have to conform to real world physics any more then the Universe has to take on the properties of the mathmatics we humans use to describe it with.
I have previously put forth the idea of CCP supplied bots, ones where you earned the LP to spend on a bot that could only be operated for a limited number of hours and harvested less then a real player - it didn't go over well.
But I would like to encourage you to run for CSM this year - you obviously care about the game and think of it. |
Sverige Pahis
Thunderwaffe
Goonswarm Federation
597
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 03:18:00 -
[18] - Quote
tl;dr |
Tiberius Sunstealer
Phantom Soulreavers
53
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 03:26:00 -
[19] - Quote
Sverige Pahis wrote:tl;dr
tl;dr Version:
Crew Members: Rigs 0.5 where you level them up by having your ship docked.
Deadspace: I really had no idea what Anika was rambling on about. There were words put together but they had no meaning. I think Anika is trying to allow people to gank in deadspace and not allow you to warp out of deadspace.
T3: Make all T3 ships use their modules like rigs ie. they cannot be removed.
F2P: Make EVE F2P with all F2P having limitations.
PTAL: Have boosters that increase SP/H by 50% and allow two to be applied at a time.
PLEX: Reduce PLEX prices.
[*] Bots: CCP makes mining bots. |
Jack Tronic
borkedLabs
30
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 03:51:00 -
[20] - Quote
Quote:LetGÇÖs talk T3 battleships and ship modules. It is, and has been, my opinion that there should be benefits for hard welding modules to a ship such that that ship is no longer flexible. This is what I think T3 battleships should be. IGÇÖd recommend giving them a significant boost to performance with the drawback at removing ship modules from the ship destroys the modules. The same should be true of T3 ship modules as well: once fitted to a ship they cannot be unfit without being destroyed. This would make them rare and therefore valuable; in addition it would require the use of large amount of minerals to keep the consumer population happy thus offsetting the CCP provided mining bot.
T3s are and will always be produced from WSPACE, minerals are barely required. |
ACE McFACE
Acetech Systems
538
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 03:59:00 -
[21] - Quote
Quote:This is an open letter to the developers of EVE Online [the game]
Quote:The only compelling reasons to complete missions that I know of are the in game currency reward [ISK]
Quote:Open Letter to the Developers of EVE Online [CCP]
Quote:This means that the only way to make mining enjoyable is to violate the end user license agreement [EULA]
Quote:I have seen obvious usage of automated mining tools [bots]
Why do you feel the need to tell us that one of the rewards for doing missions is ISK, or that the developers of EVE are CCP? Its assumed you know this, after all this is the EVE forums, you're not explaining the game to someone who has never played before.
Also Features and Ideas [F&I] not General Discussion [GD]
See what I did there??
Real men wear goggles and a Navy shirt! |
Anika Mobius
British Legion
NE CEDE MALIS.
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 04:05:00 -
[22] - Quote
Tiberius Sunstealer wrote:Sverige Pahis wrote:tl;dr tl;dr Version: Crew Members: Rigs 0.5 where you level them up by having your ship docked.
Deadspace: I really had no idea what Anika was rambling on about. There were words put together but they had no meaning. I think Anika is trying to allow people to gank in deadspace and not allow you to warp out of deadspace.
T3: Make all T3 ships use their modules like rigs ie. they cannot be removed.
F2P: Make EVE F2P with all F2P having limitations.
PTAL: Have boosters that increase SP/H by 50% and allow two to be applied at a time.
PLEX: Reduce PLEX prices.
Bots: CCP makes mining bots.
Might be the most misleading summary I've seen in years. Thanks for trying, but I suppose I should summarize this myself for the "too long; didn't read" crowd.
- Crew: New type of "module" that cannot be purchased or traded and can only be aquired by convincing them to join you. Crew would cost ISK monthly (as salary) regardless of account state. Crew would add bonsues similar to how rigs work today and could improve over time so long as they're assigned to an active ship on an active account.
- Change deadspace so that mission ganking is more difficult. Make fleeing from mission more difficult to compensate.
- T3 Ships and Modules recommendation: make them powerful, but fit once like Rigs.
- Make EVE's pricing tiered. Allow players to pay more money to train faster. Enable a F2P mode which only allows a couple of hours a day of game/training time.
- CCP Mining Bots: Time for CCP to **** or get off the pot on the bot situation. Either make thier own bot that only paying accounts can use or start getting serious about stopping EULA breaking bot usage.
I think that's generally it. It's getting late on my end, so I might have missed something.
- A.Mobius |
ACE McFACE
Acetech Systems
538
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 04:26:00 -
[23] - Quote
Anika Mobius wrote: Make EVE's pricing tiered. Allow players to pay more money to train faster. Enable a F2P mode which only allows a couple of hours a day of game/training time.
Definatly not this
Real men wear goggles and a Navy shirt! |
Morganta
Peripheral Madness
The Midget Mafia
875
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 04:27:00 -
[24] - Quote
Doc Fury wrote:Features and Ideas forum is that way -->
edit: Holy walls of text Batman!
eek!
all that text in a GD post...
this will not do at all
The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
seany1212
eXceed Inc.
No Holes Barred
68
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 04:29:00 -
[25] - Quote
Don't let the door hit you and your terrible ideas in the butt on your way out. Also, never resub... 
Crews are a dumb idea, next you'll want to be able to fly fleets of ships instead of just one because you have crews, get more alts = crews.
If you want mission ganking to be more difficult, take a logi in with you, you chose to tank your ship with ridiculously expensive mods for a mission that choses to pay out what? 10 million a turn in? Now if you were taking that ship fitting into a 6/10 guristas plex that dropped a pithum A-type 1.5billion isk shield booster i'd understand it .
Tech 3 cruisers are meant to be modular, period and they are powerful, are you flying them with your eyes closed?
You deserve a slap for suggesting F2P considering all the protesting for NO F2P, your either trolling with this entire, long written post or just oblivious to how eve work and has done.
ONE thing i'll agree on, but i still consider your idea for CCP to make there own bots to be ridiculous, why would they make something that can be potentially game breaking.
Get back in the shower and think of more ideas, you haven't started to prune yet 
|
Jason McCoy
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 04:36:00 -
[26] - Quote
you fellas actually read that? what is this thread about?
moving along . . . |
Xercodo
Train Brigade
789
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 06:04:00 -
[27] - Quote
Anika Mobius wrote:This morning in the shower,
Admit it, some of you stopped reading right there and started fapping....
The Drake is a Lie |
Jita Alt666
864
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 06:13:00 -
[28] - Quote
I commend you on your efforts in writing a comprehensive assessment on your feelings toward Eve Online. However I think you may find that many here disagree strongly with F2P (pay to win) and artificial botting. |
Valei Khurelem
172
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 06:30:00 -
[29] - Quote
Oh look, someone spent lots of effort writing down their idea to the fullest and immediately the troll brigade comes along to bash it without even reading it all the way through.
Well done EVE playerbase, you've actually made me feel sorry for you because of how pathetic you've become, now I hope this game really does die a slow and painful death because it deserves it. |
KrakizBad
Eve Defence Force
Fatal Ascension
211
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 06:48:00 -
[30] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:Oh look, someone spent lots of effort writing down their idea to the fullest and immediately the troll brigade comes along to bash it without even reading it all the way through.
Well done EVE playerbase, you've actually made me feel sorry for you because of how pathetic you've become, now I hope this game really does die a slow and painful death because it deserves it.
Contract your stuff and unsub with OP.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/39006524/DumbHiseccers.jpg |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |