EVE Search - Disabling ghost training

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Disabling ghost training - the blog edition

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.13 23:23:00 - [1] Sudden surge of this? Seriously, CCP. Show us numbers. I'd like to see your proof: Hell, how can you prove it has been happening?
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.13 23:25:00 - [2] Not to mention... What about the "unfair" advantage we older players got? How are you going to balance that out for new players?
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.13 23:39:00 - [3] Originally by: Avon Hey, your bug... Skills continue training even if you are logged off or if your account is inactive I found it in the player guide. You guys better get in there and ninja-edit it. You, sir, are a hero.
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.13 23:50:00 - [4] I do have to say I'm glad they at least admitted it was all about money...
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 02:01:00 - [5] Edited by: Seth Ruin on 14/10/2008 02:00:47 Originally by: Sanadis Screw ghost training I say, but don't freaking lie about why it was removed. This is the reason for such a violent backlash, CCP. You still have much to learn as a corporation. (Post #541 at time of posting) -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 03:45:00 - [6] Originally by: Stretchmeat Crotchquake So how long until they fix that bug that lets you train skills even when you're logged off? No other MMO lets me do this! Next week, my friend.
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 05:05:00 - [7] I can't wait to log in tomorrow morning and read their official retraction of this decision -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 05:34:00 - [8] Originally by: algorythm well, in my case, I'm BoB, you have my msn I LOLed But I agree wholeheartedly... CCP seems to be pulling this "fix" out of their asses. It is very obviously a hasty decision that has not been thought through at all. I would not be surprised if yesterday was the first time the majority of CCP staff heard of this change too. Some higher-up decided to get greedy, and now damage control is once again at critical, where it was some two years ago (almost same time of year, no less). So tell us CCP: Your smoke and mirror tricks are getting old, and your member base is getting smart. Hell, most of us are completely unimpressed by your CSM bullcrap seeing as their opinions and your meetings with them hold no more weight than a random forum thread held before the CSM's inception. *Do you listen at all anymore?*
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 05:47:00 - [9] Originally by: Alexander Ronay Originally by: Carsidava 31 pages and no replies. 49 pages in the other thread, and only a devblog filled with lies. I post again: Nope, sorry. This doesn't wash. If you disable skill training for inactive accounts, why aren't you also disabling market orders from inactive accounts? Why aren't you also disabling RP accumulation from inactive accounts? Why aren't you disabling dividend payouts to inactive accounts? Why are only skill points being hit? Sorry CCP, this is an entirely unsatisfactory answer. Heh, well maybe they figured out they ****** their PR when they posted the dev blog like they did. Maybe they're giving their response a little more thought this time? Or... It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact it's 5:45AM in Rekjavik, would it? >.> I'd be very surprised if CCP posted any official response before the next downtime. As much as we're all "emoraging" against this decision, the devs still have to sleep some time -- (CCP Inconsistency)
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 06:44:00 - [10] Originally by: freddy madball no whining no complaining, deeds are louder then words -1 alt account, maybe if they actually fixed problems and bugs and chose to be honest to its playerbase there would be alot more - accounts, and alot more sympathy. ccp you have credibility issues and you havent even improved those. shame the old guard moved on. Good point. To that I add my own alt: Subscription Status: Cancelled Will be suspended4/7/2009 Total Number Of Payments: 1 Cancel Subscription Cancellation Expires: 4/7/2009 9:24:50 PM Remaining Playtime: 175d:14h:42m ^ Yeah, I got suckered in by the Power of Two... This alt account will most likely never be paid for again. -- (CCP Inconsistency)

Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 06:59:00 - [11] Edited by: Seth Ruin on 14/10/2008 07:00:11 Originally by: Terail Zoqial It's about freaking time, hell, it's bad enough without the macro's that we have a bunch of free loaders using bandwidth we pay for. Hope the whining carebears leave tbh. As has been stated before: An inactive account uses zero bandwidth (no information is sent to/from CCP servers to/from an outside source), and due to the way skill training works, checking for inactive accounts will actually add workload to the servers. Edit: And I was beaten like a redheaded stepchild to the punch. -- (CCP Inconsistency)
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 07:05:00 - [12] Originally by: Catherine Frasier Yes. The guide describes the way things are. It does not say anything about whether or not that was an accident. I defy you to find another "accident" listed in the player guide. With your logic, this surely can't be the one and only? What about... User interface? Maybe they should put something in the guide about how the user interface will jump around? Of course it's not intended for the UI to act as such, but it is an accurate representation of what is happening. Or maybe... Missile kiting? I think the guide should describe that ships going fast enough will never be hit by missiles. Not that CCP intended it to work this way, but it's how the game works now, right? Or am I missing the point? Are you simply saying "they can claim it's a bug now without any warning simply because they're CCP?" I like what another poster said before: "How long until training skills while offline is considered a 'bug?" -- (CCP Inconsistency)
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 12:20:00 - [13] Originally by: Last Flower Edited by: Last Flower on 14/10/2008 12:14:45 . Of course it would be more fair and appreciated by CCP's customers if CCP would just say "cause we need money". That will never happen, however, and let me explain you why are we being fed lies, it's for a reason. Due to "credit crush" and actual economical hole all countries of the world feel to one extent or another, any "virtual" money (credit, loans etc.) or would-be-money deteriorate in value, cause it(money) exist not NOW, that is, in the present. Every company that is at stake now tries to accumulate as much REAL money at this given moment as possible. Yes, this "ghost training" nerf will cause CCP to loose players in long run, loose revenue in long run, but hey, they can deal with that later, by firing-off a new marketing campaign to bring folks back. Thus they employ "oh snap, we'll figure out something!(later)" tactics at the moment, and do this premeditated and smart move to get as much REAL money as they can as fast as possible. How this is achieved? First of, you analyze the situation, the data you have, and you see that there is a large number of "would-be-money-in-a-near-future" but it ain't "real money now", so how do you make the aforementioned into the other and fast? You cut-off "ghost training" and what you get is a vast number of people resubscribing into their accounts for whatever reasons they got (prolly main accounts on "vacation") in 2 days time! <-- HENCE THE SHORT TIME NOTICE. So, the immediate effect is the immediate real money flow and hey, the right immediate upt to date and fresh numbers to show to your business partners ("hey, it's all ok on our end! it's safe to invest"). Now why the "bug" scam? What a self respecting company with common business sense would admit to it's customers that it's finances are bit on the edge? Admitting to your customers, you would also admit to your investors, to your business partners and anyone related to your business. Now we wouldn't want to let that happen, do we? It's way more easier to lie to your customers by saying it's a bug, than to try to negotiate a future business deal with your investor by saying "you know, we're a bit low..." It's simple as that logic not everyone manages to perceive. SO here are your reasons for "why do they tell lies" drama. So they'd rather tell investors they've ****ed off their player base (y'know, loyal customers) with a blatant lie than tell them they're hard up on cash? -- (CCP Inconsistency)
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 13:56:00 - [14] Originally by: Adam Slysphere lol, I'm canceling the accounts that I . . . paid for!! The key right there. Getting paid sometimes is more profit than getting paid never. -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 14:12:00 - [15] Well it's 14:12 in Iceland... Where's our responses, devs? You can't tell me nobody is watching this topic. -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 14:19:00 - [16] Originally by: cuculet Originally by: Seth Ruin Well it's 14:12 in Iceland... Where's our responses, devs? You can't tell me nobody is watching this topic. well they will just serve us this: "The EVE-online website is undergoing maintenance. We are sorry for any inconvenience caused." officially they don't have time for this^^ So even the community managers are somehow helping out with that process? Doubt it. -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 14:21:00 - [17] Originally by: Remlidan Originally by: NupetietVer $15 a month? Show me the link for that GTC. It's $35 now, more than doubled the price of an old 30-day GTC, which was $15. It's $35 for 60 days. Think the subscription cost is $15 in the States (at least according to http://www.eve-online.com/faq/faq_08.asp)? $35 for 60 days is $17.50/mo, not $15. -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 14:53:00 - [18] Originally by: chotaire Originally by: IR Scoutar Originally by: Koyama Ise CCP before you go bankrupt and lose your servers... release the source code... why the hell would you want the source code what you want is the IP or a free license to the eve universe Most useless and nonsense post of this thread, congratulations ;) Far from it. IP in this context refers to "Intellectual Property," and "license" in this context refers to the legal right to use said intellectual property... Source code will only tell you how the servers work. Without a license, you're not legally allowed to do anything with the source. Hell, even open-source software has a license (GPL and such). Or, y'know, you can just sit there and look at hundreds of thousands (if not over a million) lines of code... -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 15:03:00 - [19] Originally by: Annaphera 1) I have played my character from day one, and received benefit in-game for it. If you honestly couldn't manage level one missions without 45 days of training, you've got a serious problem! I managed them my first day; by the end of the trial period, I was in a cruiser edging in to level 2's. Irrelevant when you're talking to a 2003 or 2004 player... You folk start with far more skill points than we did back in the day. Not complaining; I think that's a good thing that they periodically boost the amount of SP new players get. But just because you can do level 1s no problem now doesn't mean we didn't have to skill up (a lot) to be competent enough to complete a level 1 back in the day. -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 15:25:00 - [20] Arg, the number of "If you didn't pay for xxx service in real life you wouldn't get anything from it either" posts... Listen, this ghost skill training issue is something akin to this: You sign up for a cell phone contract. You get one of their "free" cell phones for a sign-up bonus. When the contract's up, you don't renew because you can't afford it. Ghost training can be thought of as still being able to keep your handset. You can still change your wallpapers, listen to MP3s on it, use it as a phone... you just can't make calls or do anything that depends on having a network. I don't know of any cell phone company that repossesses the cell phone after a contract is expired. However, this isn't the main issue here The majority of us are complaining about being lied to, like children, idiots, sheep, or what-have-you. Had CCP announced, say a month before they planned to implement it, that they were disabling this feature because it was being abused, fine. But instead they claim it's a balance issue and then a bug. I am frustrated. Over the past few years, CCP's PR has not improved. Their communication still sucks, and they still have this habit of lying to their customers. We just want to be treated with respect -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money

Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 15:30:00 - [21] Originally by: Catherine Frasier Originally by: Marius Duvall The issue isn't that the players guide isn't a promotion (which is arguable, really) but that a supposed "bug" was listed as an intended effect therein. No, it never was listed as an intended effect, ever, anywhere. The guide merely described the way things were. All the emorage in the world can't change documentation into proof of intent. Of course, since this has been pointed out about seven thousand times and ignored about seven thousand times, I don't expect pointing it out again will have any effect on you "But it was in the guide!!!!11one!!" folks. And you still failed to show anything in response to my challenge many pages back, so I'll post it again: Find me one other "bug" or "unintended feature" in the player's manual. Or, better yet, so we're on the same level: What would you consider a list of "intended effects?" The features page? -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 16:00:00 - [22] Edited by: Seth Ruin on 14/10/2008 16:00:19 Originally by: BIind Originally by: Emerald Cortess So for example u gain SP in gunnery when activating a gun to a ship. Or u get better in the EM-Compensation-Skill when u have fitted a EM-Hardener and someone is shooting u with EM-Missiles. As far as i know, this would be the first mmorpg using such system and it would make EVE very very special. UO was like this. Yeah... And UO is doing so well now compared to back then! http://mmogdata.voig.com/voig/ContentList/MMOGDATA/Charts/7.ViewChart?aLanguage=en-us&a5Years=Y Edit: clicky -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 16:03:00 - [23] Originally by: Catherine Frasier Originally by: Seth Ruin And you still failed to show anything in response to my challenge many pages back, so I'll post it again: Find me one other "bug" or "unintended feature" in the player's manual. I don't know of any off-hand (and have no intention of paging through the guide looking). But since the guide doesn't say anything about intent one way or the other on 99% of the game's mechanics, and since I can't read minds, how can we know what was intended and what was emergent? What I do know is that it makes no damn difference either way. Even if this was the only unintended feature documented in the guide then that just means that this was the only unintended feature documented in the guide, and so what? Now, if you could show that CCP was explicitly using this "feature" in advertising, while it would still not show intent, it would justify some of the annoyance at this decision. Originally by: Seth Ruin Or, better yet, so we're on the same level: What would you consider a list of "intended effects?" The features page? I wouldn't expect such a list, period, why would you? Why would CCP (or anyone) run through each and every aspect of the game and specify; "Meant to do that", "Just got lucky", and "Ooops"? The guide describes how things are regardless of how they ended up that way. Reading more into it is unwarranted. Quite simply: They say it was unintended and there is nothing which indicates that's untrue. Certainly there's nothing remotely resembling proof that it's untrue. Without proof, without evidence, all you have is your tinfoil hat/black helicopter nonsense being used to justify your annoyance at this decision by painting them as "liars". So here you're going to tell me neither you nor your main will ever complain about any game change ever, correct? Because after all, nothing is really an "intended feature." I hope you're not one of the people complaining about the nano-nerf, either, because none of that was "intended" either. -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 16:07:00 - [24] Originally by: Callib Gor'Karrithe But... oh, look at that. Ghost training is gone. Gee, would this not be a bit of foreshadowing to queued training? No. It wouldn't. CCP has continuously stated that they will not be adding queued training. And CCP never goes back on their wor-- oh nevermind >.> On a more serious note, they have yet to announce the "eventuality" of such queued training to satiate the masses. I would assume if there were an appropriate time to mention they're working on it, it would be in conjunction with this change. They, however, have not. -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 16:09:00 - [25] Originally by: James Marshalll Originally by: Catherine Frasier Originally by: Marius Duvall The issue isn't that the players guide isn't a promotion (which is arguable, really) but that a supposed "bug" was listed as an intended effect therein. No, it never was listed as an intended effect, ever, anywhere. The guide merely described the way things were. All the emorage in the world can't change documentation into proof of intent. Of course, since this has been pointed out about seven thousand times and ignored about seven thousand times, I don't expect pointing it out again will have any effect on you "But it was in the guide!!!!11one!!" folks. just as seven thousand times you have been told, COMPANIES DO NOT DOCUMENT BUGS IN PLAYER GUIDES SO THEY WILL USE IT UNLESS IT WAS AN INTENDED FEATURE THAT THEY WANTED YOU TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. Give me a break. Think about it, I mean I know your a GM Alt, but really think about it.... If I am trying to market an MMO the LAST frigging thing I want to do is tell my customers in the new user guide "HEY! Btw here is a bug and how you can take advantage of it!" But of course you choose to ignore that. Hmm... We should tell CCP to add information about how to successfully perform a logoffski to the player guide, too It is certainly not an "intended feature," but it is how the system works right now. -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 16:38:00 - [26] Originally by: Catherine Frasier Originally by: Seth Ruin So here you're going to tell me neither you nor your main will ever complain about any game change ever, correct? Because after all, nothing is really an "intended feature." Completely incorrect. First: Some things are clearly intended, some are not, for many there's just no way to know. Second: That doesn't matter to me at all. I complain about (or applaud) the way things are. I don't give a rat's posterior whether they meant to do it or whether it just happened. The only people I see claiming intent are the ones who want to take their selfish whinge about this decision and try to pretend it's some great moral crusade for honesty instead of just whining about their metagaming free lunch being closed down. For the record, the honesty refers mostly to CCP's inability to choose a "reason" for doing this, but I like arguing the minutia anyway... And as I said on one of the first dozen pages, this doesn't really affect me personally: I pay, I play. I pay for a year's subscription in advance because of the massive discount. I can afford my account and my alt. There are many who can't, however. So me complaining about CCP's actions here have nothing to do with "metagaming free lunch being closed down." I understand your viewpoint. I honestly do. However, it is simply not standard practice for a company to openly document something that is an unintended affect. Documentation takes extra time, which is why you'll see many things in game that are not documented. The things that do make it to documentation have either had such a tenure in the process that they're essentially grandfathered in or they are such big features it is worth documenting. Arguing that the documentation is not a description of intended features is simply not accurate with industry standards. Changes can be made to these features, of course, but to call what was once documented in the Player's Guide as "a bug" is dishonest at least, and shows CCP is still trying to cover up what was an entirely financial decision. How can you define such an arbitrary line between "intended features" and "unintended features" without some kind of metric? How is it so "clear" that some features are intended? What makes them "clearly intended?" Mind you, this is not a rhetorical question. As far as you "complain[ing] about (or applaud[ing]) the way things are," isn't that what we are doing here? We are applauding the way things currently are and complaining about the way things will be shortly. How are you any better than the other posters in this thread? You say yourself, "I don't give a rat's posterior whether they meant to do it or whether it just happened," to which I reply: neither do the posters who oppose this change. They do not care if CCP "meant to" implement this "ghost training" or if it "just happened." The fact remains, however, that this has been in game for the past half decade, and as such has become a part of the game. There are very few features for which you can say they have also been part of the game for that long. -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 17:13:00 - [27] Originally by: AntonioBanderas any answers from ccp? Nope! CCP has gone the entire day ignoring the player base! -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 17:54:00 - [28] Originally by: Son Korhal Edited by: Son Korhal on 14/10/2008 17:52:30 Originally by: CCP Wrangler Test2 Lost for words on another epic ccp fail idea? Edit: Ok wrangler likes to delete his own posts. Makes me think the "test" posts are possibly Wrangler trying to fix this thread? Could be that it disappeared entirely by accident, and they're actually trying to fix it -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 17:58:00 - [29] Originally by: CCP Wrangler Yes, we're trying to fix it but we'll need to have web take a look at it. It's still accessible through the other sticky though. --ConspiracyTheories; Well that's one down. -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.14 18:17:00 - [30] Originally by: Amarr Hyena hmm, the thread is gone when I wake up. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Yes, we're trying to fix it but we'll need to have web take a look at it. It's still accessible through the other sticky though. Stop with the conspiracy theories already >.< -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money

Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.15 00:08:00 - [31] Originally by: CCP t0rfifrans The bug that became a feature On Monday, we released news that we are disabling äGhost Trainingô, the ability to train characters on inactive accounts. This resulted in strong reactions from the community as many people were routinely making use of it. We explained the matter in more detail and pointed out that this had been a bug in the original game code. Those of us who were involved in the process of making the decision and communicating it to the community did not realize this bug had been so accepted as a feature that it was listed as such in our own documentation on our own website. How can we not know whatæs in our own documentation? Well, to be frank, it was a case of insufficient communication on our part between various teams û a regrettable mistake and hard lesson to learn at the expense of the trust youæve placed in us. Thereæs no way to spin it and we wonæt add insult to injury by trying to do so. It was a mistake on our part and for that we sincerely and humbly apologize. Many would hope that in light of this we will decide not to cancel ghost training and keep it active as an option but weære cannot to do that. EVE is already one-of-a-kind in allowing players to progress their characters through offline skill training. We stand by our policy that if you want your character to progress in EVE, you should pay the subscription fee. The fact that so many people have been able to do so for several years was our own oversight. We know this change, and our misstep in telling you about it, has created some discontent and we hope that over time we can prove our committment to make EVE better than ever for you will be evident as you enjoy the fruits of our labor. Torfi t0rfifrans, Are you telling us there is no comprimise? That this entire thread is wasted bandwidth and space? Has CCP turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to the player base? After thousands of posts of players who are unsatisfied with this entire ordeal: announcement, response, and eventual patch, you have decided to go ahead with your 48-hour timebomb? I have never before seen a feature that players have felt so strongly about be changed so suddenly. Your response has told us nothing more. You admit you went about this whole mess like a pack of bumbling morons. We know this. We called you out on it. But you still haven't told us why it has suddenly become an issue. What happened? Did somebody bring it up in a financial meeting? Were you wondering how to milk the players for even more money? I want to know the exact circumstances that lead you to change this "bug" that, face it, you knew about. (Yes, this is a tricky situation: Admit you knew about it for five years and are changing it suddenly for a mysterious reason or claim you never knew about it, which would admit you have never actually played the game for any length of time... Go on, your choice) -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.15 01:35:00 - [32] Originally by: Jayce Shale I look forward to the Vampire thing which this is paying for. :P I don't. Not looking forward to it one bit. The walking-around-killing-stuff angle has been done too many times in MMOG. Flying around in space is something different, and I like it. However, the devs are trying my patience -- (CCP Inconsistency) Why cover it up? We KNOW it's all just about money
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.15 10:30:00 - [33] Originally by: Lerand Gaunt Originally by: Xhanti Originally by: Aodha Khan Unlike some, I actually pay to play. I support no Ghost training! Those that are whining. Ask yourself this, does any other MMORPG train your char while the account is disabled? Then ask yourself does any other MMORPG have skills that take 30 or more days to get ONE lvl in? One level of Carriers takes less than a day. If you meant the last level, then you should've asked "Does any other MMORPG have skills that take 30 or more days to get FULLY TRAINED in 1 area?" How long does it take to gather full set of T8 (or what ever is the highes level if itemization they have) in WOW? 6 months? 1 year? More? Sure "Carriers I" itself takes all of nothing to train, but what about the pre-requisites? The thing is, getting skills to 5 isn't just a luxury. It's a requirement to get to certain ships or items
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.15 11:00:00 - [34] Well, it's DT... Here's to hoping CCP got some sense and at least postponed this thing. Hell, they didn't even explain if it's going to cancel all currently training inactive accounts or just disable it for future skills.
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.15 11:32:00 - [35] Originally by: Mr Manjuice I wonder if in a few months time that CCP's gamble of doing this, is not the $$$ maker they hope for, will the feature that is now a bug become a feature again. And then tout it and advertise it...
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.15 17:24:00 - [36] Originally by: Random5154 Originally by: Erimisha THAT is the topic at hand. Not so much 'Ghost training' itself, but the ineptitude of how CCP managed to break the news and the constant changing subterfuge and subsequent coverup. THAT is the reason I have cancelled my accounts. ... I have the $'s to pay for the accounts, not the time. You have the time, not the $'s. Which do you think CCP prefers? Congratulations for completely failing at reading comprehension. He mentioned nothing about not having the income for EVE. He mentioned the lie after lie that CCP has fed us since they first announced this.
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.15 17:42:00 - [37] Originally by: Random5154 because this really does make business sense from CCP. I don't understand why people keep assuming the outrage has anything to do with business or money. THE OUTRAGE IS HOW IT WAS HANDLED Had they out and out said "We need to do this because it makes business sense" from the start, it wouldn't have escalated.
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.15 18:02:00 - [38] Originally by: Venezia Dawn My point is that I reactivated b/c CCP told us our skills were no longer going to be training after this morning, and my skill was still training before I started a skill myself. Obviously, CCP had not cut off the training on my inactive account yet. Bug report it? Or CCP's pulling the biggest "lol you all are so gullible" in history.
Seth Ruin Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.10.16 04:06:00 - [39] Originally by: StealthGerbils ....it makes training extremely long skills less tedious. I honestly wouldn't mind a boost to skill training... Might help new players catch up to older ones even, as they seem so keen to want to do.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.