EVE General Discussion

Well clearly the isk sinks aren't working if even you aren't willing to pew pew with your more expensive clones.

The problem isn't that ISK is hard to make - it's not - it is that it takes a lot of time. For people who work, have a family, etc. this equals to maybe an hour or two of gametime, three-to-four at best. I don't know about you, but even with the absolute best skills and best ship for blowing through lvl4's and assuming mission gods are merciful with good missions - I can make about 20 million ISK an hour.
With my current skillpoints this means I have to pve 2 hours just to cover my clone cost, and additional 2-10 depending on how good implants and modules I want to use. Obviously I want maximum life expectancy so best the money can buy, ship, module and implant wise, maybe even some combat boosters. So suddenly, for an hour or two of PVP I would have had to PvE for 12-20 hours.

Now of course, I don't have an alt that could double my isk/hr through salvage, so my money making is obviously gimped. However, this is supposed to be a sandbox and therefore I should be allowed to play this game without using a "mandatory" alt.

TL;DR if we want people to PVP more we have to make money a non-issue in regards to PVP.

edit: on the flipside of isk sinks, as a higher SP player I'm almost always flying something T2/T3 which is a decent enough isk sink. Oh, not to mention the T3 SP loss.

Problem:

The cost of clones exponentially increases as you acquire more SP. This causes an imbalance in the game due to the following facts.

Facts

• More SP does not allow you to make ISK exponentially faster. This has far more to do with your situation/location in EVE. A lower SP player can be just as effective at making ISK in terms of skill points as a 9 year old bittervet. There is only so much specialisation available in whatever ISK making career you choose, whether it be combat or industry based. This threshold can be met very early on and does not scale with the SP to clone cost ratio at all - even though lower SP players with argue otherwise, they are just plain wrong.
[BR]


• More time subscribed to EVE does not automatically mean you are rich with a huge stash of ISK to spare. Some comparatively new players are far more wealthy than some bittervets - playing the game for longer and having more SP doesn't make you 'better'.
[BR]


• A higher SP player cannot go and have fun in a cheap ship with way lower SP players can for the same cost. I'm sure you'd have more higher SP players bringing about more PVP in nullsec in the way of affordable PVP with more Tech 1 and smaller hulls if they weren't having to worry about the 65mil clone cost on top when they inevitably get bubbled.
[BR]


• The higher clone cost represents the additional SP cover provided by the clone. The cost should indeed be higher, but not exponentially so. I agree with the extra risk for having more SP available, but there's no justification why one pilot's grind to replace their clone should be 10 times the length of time compare to another pilot for losing the exact same hull.
[BR]


• It makes no sense that lots of vets would prefer to use lower SP alts to do things such as frigate or T1 gangs in null simply because it isn't worth their clone expense otherwise.
[BR]


• Clone costs are a necessary ISK sink. I agree, but don't assume that bittervets hold all the ISK. It's not logical to penalise them based on this false assumption.
[BR]


• In time nobody will be able to afford clones as the exponential model means it will scale to a point where people need 500mil to replace their clone. The time will come, the change has to happen sooner or later. CCP have already eased this issue in the past, it's just time for another review is all.
[BR]

Now - I've seen previous posts on this issue go down in a ball of flames. Mainly from people who are rich enough not to care, or newer players who firmly believe that older players should face the penalty imposed by the current system for reasons above. I've seen all the arguments against this notion several times before. Fights should indeed be about risk vs reward, but let people choose the level of risk!

A nerf to the cost of clones has happened before. It is about time the situation was reviewed.

Now please, no flames, and read the points above before posting something stupid. Everyone wants more fights, so why not fix this issue and free people up to have a little more fun.

why not make clone grades manufacturable?

since when can an isk sink for one person not be an isk faucet for another...

not everyone makes ships and for those who loose them its an isk sink... and for those who make them its an isk faucet...

you still get the isk sink... but now it would allow for thoughs who want to do clone production the ability to do it...

Here's an additional reason for a linear progression, rather than exponential progression, in sp cost:

Skillpoints already suffer from diminishing returns in an exponential function:
It takes exponentially more SP to gain that next level, which only provides a linear benefit (i.e. 5% more damage or what-not). As such, there is no reason to add another exponential cost to having those skill points.

Oh dear here we go. Please READ the post. The forums are not here for spam and abuse, they are here for constructive discussion. Very helpful start, bravo.

ISK sink = ISK leaves the economy (is given to NPC)

ISK faucet = ISK enters the economy (is given to players from NPCs)

The only ISK sink in manufacturable clone grades is the market tax (and broker fees in NPC stations).