These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Rebalance Clone Prices

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Callic Veratar
#161 - 2013-01-17 20:55:02 UTC
In my mind, the goal of reducing clone costs is to encourage people to PVP more. So, dropping the clone costs significantly would theoretically increase PVP. Yes, that drops an ISK sink, but there's an easy way to increase another sink directly tied to PVP, increase the high sec manufacturing job costs (by a factor of 10 or more).
Burseg Sardaukar
Free State Project
#162 - 2013-01-17 21:37:17 UTC
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:
The choice to continue skill training comes with a cost. I don't think most 120m SP players are going to argue that this is a bad thing.


As I'm a week or so away from this threshold I'd have to disagree. I think the cost is years of subscriptions, and while that is different than in-game ISK, I'm really cheap in both worlds and don't like spending more $ or ISK, especially into a sink... like a ****** car or a black hole.

Some sinks make sense (LP store, taxes), I don't think this one does. It penalizes you for sticking with the game. LP stores and taxes take away from the players that have the money in the first place and want to trade it for other things for physical gain. The clone cost is a penalty you pay for being a subscriber.

I like that you can lose skill points in the game in certain ways, but I think it should be moved towards frequency of pod loss, or supercapital losses more than forgetting to pay a bill. Updating clones shouldn't exist.

Can't wait to dual box my Dust toon and EVE toon on the same machine!
Demolishar
United Aggression
#163 - 2013-01-17 21:38:08 UTC
Sorry, why do we want more people PvPing? We already have inflation of minerals which suggest people are actually PvPing TOO MUCH rather than too little and the economy can't cope with the sheer volume of losses!
Grauth Thorner
Vicious Trading Company
#164 - 2013-01-17 22:58:43 UTC
Some things are not entirely true, even though you state them as facts...

Jurias wrote:
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.
    • Arrow As you're stating yourself, it has -far more- to do with situation/location. However your SP can improve this. For instance a miner with Mining V has 25% more yield. A combat pilot with more gunnery skills has more chance to win a fight, and makes his fights last shorter (time is money). Winning more fights equals earning more ISK due to loot plus losing less ISK...

  • 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'.
    • Arrow Playing longer and having more SP doesn't make you 'better'? Well it should make you more experienced doing your job. Unless you've been sitting in your station until you've gotten the amount of SP you got.. But then it's more or less your own fault that you aren't as experienced as players who did not. Also having more SP does make it easier to do the same job you would be doing without these SP otherwise, as long as these SP are in cope with the career you're following. For instance would it be easier to kill an enemy with or without having gunnery V trained?

  • 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.
    • Arrow In terms of ship/module cost... Yes they can... In terms of clone-cost... No they can't.

  • 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.
    • Arrow I agree with this, even though it's not about losing the exact same hull... It's about losing a different body holding these SP and possible implants. But yeah the exponential growth is too much. But my question is, is lowering these value's the only solution to this problem?


Fights should indeed be about risk vs reward, but let people choose the level of risk!
Arrow I think this is the most interesting part of your whole post tbh... And this shouldn't only count for fights but rather for more or less everything, however that is a whole different topic. Next to that imo the reward should be bigger... One of the things I was thinking about is this:
- What about being able to loot the body of a podded pilot into your cargo, and "salvaging" them (if you have the appropriate skill) which makes it possible to loot implants. This would mean a (slight) increase of income for PvP'ers, a (slight) decrease of expenses (because implants shall become cheaper) and instead of removing an ISK-sink, it removes an ISK-generator since pre-looted implants will be recycled this way.


My point of view is answered after the Arrow-signs

Regards,
Grauth Thorner

View real-time damage statistics in-game

>EVE Live DPS Graph application forum thread

>iciclesoft.com
Vagilicious
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#165 - 2013-01-17 23:13:04 UTC
Trolls aside, this is an interesting thread.

My main has 140mill+ SP, and after selling an alt I don't flinch too much at forking out for a new clone. That being said, I agree with the OP completely.

I'm shaking my head at this elitist 'If you have that many SP and don't have the isk for the clone, you're playing the game wrong' mentality. Not all of us are basement dwelling neckbeards that can stay logged in 23/7 camping gates. Some of us have familes, commitments, whatever, and are lucky if we're able to play for a couple of hours a week.

Not all of us are concerned with attaining the maximum isk/hour ratio. Some of us log in to play for fun, you know? That thing a game is supposed to provide? To say that I'm not playing the game properly, who are you to dictate how I play the game that I pay my subscription for?

Sure, I could sell a Plex, but not everyone can afford the RL cash to do that either.

My point is, everybodies situation is different. In most cases you have no idea what's going on in the life of another player, and making sweeping assumptions that 'You have that much SP, therefore you are rich and can afford it' just doesn't hold true in every case.

The beauty of Eve is that, no matter how much or how little time you can spend playing, your skills train at the same rate. It's one of the reasons that attracted me to the game in the first place. This is where the imbalance comes in to play. Somebody that can only fit an hour of gametime in here or there is not necessarily going to have billions of Isk at their disposal. Does that mean they should give up? Sell their character? Be forced to create a new one just to enjoy PVP combat without worrying about funding the next clone? No it doesn't.
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#166 - 2013-01-18 06:51:11 UTC
Jurias wrote:
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.


  • 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'.


  • 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.


  • 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.


  • 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.


  • 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.


  • 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.



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.



clone prices aren't a deterrent for highly skill-pointed players. If they are to you, then you're doing it wrong.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#167 - 2013-01-18 08:06:16 UTC
I think high clone costs are meant to encourage specialization and differentiation. If you want to be GREAT AT EVERYTHING then you pay extra. That seems reasonable to me. I like the idea that someone who planned out the perfect 92.5M (or 71M or 54.6M) SP build (and stopped training that char when the milestone was reached) is rewarded with affordable clones. It's not like this was suddenly sprung on us by CCP, either.

If CCP chooses to lower clone costs I hope they nerf insurance payouts enough to offset so that the amount of ISK sunk overall isn't reduced.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#168 - 2013-01-18 08:35:26 UTC
AkJon Ferguson wrote:
If CCP chooses to lower clone costs I hope they nerf insurance payouts enough to offset so that the amount of ISK sunk overall isn't reduced.

I'm for the complete removal of clone upgrade costs and complete removal of ship insurance in one swoop.
Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts
#169 - 2013-01-18 08:43:54 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
AkJon Ferguson wrote:
If CCP chooses to lower clone costs I hope they nerf insurance payouts enough to offset so that the amount of ISK sunk overall isn't reduced.

I'm for the complete removal of clone upgrade costs and complete removal of ship insurance in one swoop.


I'm also for both of those things. I believe CCP are in discussion about the former since they are starting to believe that while it is an isk sink it has become a bit outdated. And the latter has been rolled out in a small way, such as if CONCORD is what was ganking you then you don't get insurance back which is fair enough.
Dave Dood
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#170 - 2013-01-18 10:49:10 UTC
Make pod costs a function of the ship class you were in prior to being podded.

EG Titan, Super Carrier pay 100%, BS Command HIC 90%, ....., Interceptor DIC 30%, T1 Cruiser 20%, T1 frig 10%

That way the high sp toon who chooses not to earn lots of isk due to time constraints / finding it boring etc also gets an additional choice as to how expensive his pvp is.

Choice is a good thing.
Jess Maine
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#171 - 2013-01-18 10:52:10 UTC
Clones shouldn't be an ISK sink. Not really anyway. A high SP clone losing ships (whatever said price of ships) should be the actual ISK sink. With DUST coming around it looks like CCP has their own select plans on new ISK sinks anyway so without tipping the scales lets borrow from one platter and put it on the other..
Prince Kobol
#172 - 2013-01-18 11:22:44 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
AkJon Ferguson wrote:
If CCP chooses to lower clone costs I hope they nerf insurance payouts enough to offset so that the amount of ISK sunk overall isn't reduced.

I'm for the complete removal of clone upgrade costs and complete removal of ship insurance in one swoop.


I actually love this idea
Ayeshah Volfield
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#173 - 2013-01-18 11:29:00 UTC
Removing learning implants, clone costs and insurance while applying a tax based on total SP every time you use a jump clone as an ISK sink wouldn't be a reasonable solution ?

EVE is what happens when the rule of law does not apply and Darwinism is allowed to run freely.
Etherealclams
#174 - 2013-01-18 12:35:54 UTC
Why? EvE needs MORE Isk sinks, not less. Quit being a baddie and maybe you won't have to pay for clones!

http://aclamthatrants.blogspot.com/ Read up on my adventures.
Rual Storge
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#175 - 2013-01-18 12:56:16 UTC
confirming that i dont pvp in small ships anymore due my 60m sp clone,

my clones are x3 as expensive as the ships i fly

i would pvp more with lower clone cost
Doc Severiide
Doomheim
#176 - 2013-01-18 13:25:07 UTC
Just get rid of clones all together. Stop taking away SP if you die. It's stupid, why should I lose skills simply for getting killed? You already lose your ship, cargo, implants, etc...
Ra Jackson
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#177 - 2013-01-18 13:32:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Ra Jackson
AkJon Ferguson wrote:
I think high clone costs are meant to encourage specialization and differentiation. If you want to be GREAT AT EVERYTHING then you pay extra. That seems reasonable to me. I like the idea that someone who planned out the perfect 92.5M (or 71M or 54.6M) SP build (and stopped training that char when the milestone was reached) is rewarded with affordable clones. It's not like this was suddenly sprung on us by CCP, either.


This is not how Eve works. You cannot plan a 5-year-skillplan for a sandbox game where corporations usually come up with new doctrines every second week. And then refuse to skill a new doctrine you are just a 30 day level 5 skill away from.
At least it shouldn't.

I agree with the notion that people should not be punished for going into risky pvp while having a lot of skillpoints. Removing clone costs and insurance would be an excellent solution.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#178 - 2013-01-18 15:11:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Nova Fox
Clone costs is my largest bill year to year ingame, and as a 'casual' by force I can't earn enough isk to keep going on much longer.

Im a 7 year old player just about now. I am a maxed out miner, PI, Tech 1 ship subcap max, Tech 2 lvl 4 -BO and -JF, Tech 3 lvl 3, Subs max, T2 Weapon Systems lvl 4, and and industry and trade are tolerant enough to make it rich it just that the limit time contraint of play has severly reduced any oppertunity to make isk.

A character with more time with this same skill set would be raking in wheel burrows of money.

There is litterally only 14 ships I cant fly in skill points.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
Dezreth
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#179 - 2013-01-18 17:21:05 UTC
Ris Dnalor wrote:


clone prices aren't a deterrent for highly skill-pointed players. If they are to you, then you're doing it wrong.



So by this logic, PvP should only be reasonably available to low-SP or highly skilled, high-SP players.

Players who have high-SP but not the time, skill or interest in generating large amounts of ISK should not PvP?

It sounds like that's what you're suggesting.

BTW, I'm a low-SP player (<3MM SP) so this doesn't directly affect me. I just see that the current system either discourages players from taking risks in PvP, or from wanting to develop their characters beyond a certain point (or both) and that doesn't seem like an ideal system to me.
Toku Jiang
Jiang Laboratories and Discovery
#180 - 2013-01-18 17:56:39 UTC
Galaxy Pig wrote:


^^^ Yup. This reminds me of this phenomenon we have in the states where rich people complain about their taxes and expect me to give a damn. ...



Its not about paying taxes, it's about not wanting to give my hard earned money to bunch of free loaders with their hands out crying " I can't do for myself". As far as I'm concerned people in the US should either learn to work hard or work smart, and the people that don't can starve to death for being lazy, stupid, and worthless.