These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Logic dictates EVE is a pay to win game. This makes it unappealing. Solutions.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#21 - 2013-12-12 18:41:57 UTC
I'm not looking at it backwards because I included what you just said in my post.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#22 - 2013-12-12 18:42:56 UTC
I understand the knee-jerk reaction to this. But what the status quo auto-objectors are saying is "I don't want EVE to be more appealing and require more skill to play".
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2013-12-12 18:45:05 UTC
Batelle wrote:
I'm not looking at it backwards because I included what you just said in my post.



Oh yeah, only scanned that, sorry.

Multi accounts are how you keep up with OOOOOOOOLLLLLD players.

Can you do everything that a 9 year old with 190mil SP can....nope. Can you can him out with a 2 month old account and gank his carebear boat with a 4 month old AF pilot?

Damn sure can.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#24 - 2013-12-12 18:48:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Fabulous Rod wrote:
Try not to be so clueless and understand we aren't talking about 1 ship vs 1 ship.
Then logic dictates that 2 > 1 (in most cases… again, reality actually disagrees with this generalisation), which has nothing to do with money or P2W. It also has very little to do with what makes a game appealing or not.

Quote:
I understand the knee-jerk reaction to this. But what the status quo auto-objectors are saying is "I don't want EVE to be more appealing and require more skill to play"
No, what they're saying is that you have a poor grasp on topics such as logic and pay-to-win, not to mention the appeal of games.
Karrl Tian
Doomheim
#25 - 2013-12-12 18:49:15 UTC
People stay away because of the skill system, spreadsheets, and the "Tell your ship what to do instead of flying it" interface. Most of them don't even know about the Schizophrenic model.

Also, anything an alt can do, a player can do better, it just takes social skills most "soloists" don't have and CCP is merely catering to this lucrative market (as anyone would).
Kiryen O'Bannon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#26 - 2013-12-12 18:51:07 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
I understand the knee-jerk reaction to this. But what the status quo auto-objectors are saying is "I don't want EVE to be more appealing and require more skill to play".


Unfortunately for you, "more appealing" is totally subjective and "require more skill to play" really just means "requires different skills to play." And we all know manual aiming wouldn't become a problem in TiDi or anything.

Eternal Father, King of birth, /Who didst create the heaven and earth, /And bid the planets and the sun/ Their own appointed orbits run; /O hear us when we seek thy grace /For those who soar through outer space.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2013-12-12 18:56:17 UTC
Karrl Tian wrote:
People stay away because of the skill system, spreadsheets, and the "Tell your ship what to do instead of flying it" interface. Most of them don't even know about the Schizophrenic model.

Also, anything an alt can do, a player can do better, it just takes social skills most "soloists" don't have and CCP is merely catering to this lucrative market (as anyone would).



A lot of people (WoW power gamers for example) are put off by the fact that they can't jump in a Titan within a couple months of poopsocking and be the baddest boy on the block.

Understanding that skills make it a little easier at times, but there is a counter to most things and you DON'T need 100mil SP to do it.
Caviar Liberta
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2013-12-12 18:58:01 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:

This creates an environment where multiple accounts are highly preferable to gain an edge over an opponent. The advantage of more accounts is compounded exponentially by the hard counters that are possible in pvp, such as E-war, Neut/Nos, RR etc.

In other mmorpgs, players are forced to group up and cooperate to achieve their goals because it is nearly impossible for them to play more than one or two accounts simultaneously and efficiently. In EVE, you don't need to find another buddy to fill that tackler role or neut role for you because you can just easily, or even more easily, use one of your alts to fulfill the role perfectly.


Let me see if I read this correctly.

Having friends, being in a corporation or alliance is bad.

And in the ideal situation every fight should be 1v1?
Serptimis
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#29 - 2013-12-12 19:01:44 UTC
Are you asking for the mechanics of the game to be changed so that multiboxing would no longer be possible? I can imagine that is something not really on CCP's list of things to do.
Can't imagine why.
Dont UseYourAlt OnTheForums
Doomheim
#30 - 2013-12-12 19:01:54 UTC
OFC EvE is pay to win.

Only pathetic people will disagree and bring all kinds of nonsensical excuses to justify their lack of reason.

They dont want to believe it cause if they do it breaks all their dreams and expectations about eve.

Their little world all of a sudden collapses.

Thats why its better to believe in a lie for them.
Rabid Disconnection
Prism's Keepers
#31 - 2013-12-12 19:02:18 UTC
In many cases multiboxers are actually going in at a disadvantage... Multiple times I have singly torn one guy apart as he tries to control his 4 different characters in a situation that is rapidly changing.

4 players > 1 player controlling 4 characters

OFC this is only in relation to PVP, I am sure in mining for example one person with multiple characters can be just as efficient as one person per character.
Grunanca
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2013-12-12 19:03:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Grunanca
Fabulous Rod wrote:
Fact: Unlike other pvp mmorpgs, EVE's controls are simple enough and required interactions are low enough that simultaneously controlling multiple accounts is very easy to do.

Some of us actually do PvP. Try something that requires more interaction than mission running. I would never ever have 2 active ships while pvping. A scout and pvp char maybe, but you suck bad when fighting with 2 accounts, because you wont be able to give the required attention to each ship and max the performance. Try flying a guardian while controlling a another ship in a fleet battle. Controlling the guardian alone can be hard enough.. Atleast if you fight competent people.


This creates an environment where multiple accounts are highly preferable to gain an edge over an opponent. The advantage of more accounts is compounded exponentially by the hard counters that are possible in pvp, such as E-war, Neut/Nos, RR etc.

In other mmorpgs, players are forced to group up and cooperate to achieve their goals because it is nearly impossible for them to play more than one or two accounts simultaneously and efficiently. In EVE, you don't need to find another buddy to fill that tackler role or neut role for you because you can just easily, or even more easily, use one of your alts to fulfill the role perfectly.


Conclusion: Daddy's boy rich kid with 500$ a week allowance gets to dominate you in EVE 1v1 until you get competitive with your wallet.

Considering that the average age of an EVE player is around 30 years, I would assume that mpst people have jobs and make their own money... And if you cant get money, just buy plexes with isk. Oh wait, then its not pay to win!

Many intelligent people understand this about EVE and stay away. This statement made me laugh so hard. You come with a flawed argument, which is proven wrong pretty much as soon as you have posted, and then make this statement, with the hidden suggestion that you are among the few intelligent people who have seen the light...


Solution: Require more input from the user. Requiring some degree of aiming or charge bars with timing requirements in combat would go a long way to improving the reputation and game play of EVE.

Because aiming and charge bars works soooo well in a game based on 1 second intervals. Glad a person who has seen the light could tell me how the game thousands of people like is supposed to be. Once upon a time there was a game which went from where EVE is now and changed to manual aim and charge bars... It was called Star Wars Galaxies. Search on the internet on SWG NGE and see what a succes that turned out to be! I will call you Smedley from now on. Named from the most hated person in the MMO community.
Tabra Penken
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#33 - 2013-12-12 19:04:01 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
Rhivre wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:


In other mmorpgs, players are forced to group up and cooperate to achieve their goals


Conclusion: Daddy's boy rich kid with 500$ a week allowance gets to dominate you in EVE 1v1 until you get competitive with your wallet.

Many intelligent people understand this about EVE and stay away.
.



I think I have found your problem

And, fwiw, multiboxing is very common in other games, even to the point of multiboxing raids.


Multi-boxing is nowhere near as common in other MMORPGS as it is in EVE. This is because of the extreme advantages and ease with which it is done in EVE. Anyone who plays EVE could tell you this.




Any experienced gamer will call BS on this one multiboxing is HIGHLY common in a vast majority of games I personally know of at least 2 people who have solo ran raids in WOW by multiboxing to the tune of up to 8 accounts at once.

Go get a clue you need one
Dont UseYourAlt OnTheForums
Doomheim
#34 - 2013-12-12 19:10:05 UTC
Im a new player, Im rich and I want to win.


I buy a bunch of plexes with $$$
I buy characters
I buy ships
I buy modules
I buy corps
I buy mercs
I buy friends
I buy alliances
I pretty much kill whoever I want for money
Make them suicide for me
Make them give me their stuff

END
Shaniqua McBoggis
EVE Corporation 98195887
#35 - 2013-12-12 19:15:59 UTC
Dont UseYourAlt OnTheForums wrote:
Im a new player, Im rich and I want to win.


I buy a bunch of plexes with $$$
I buy characters
I buy ships
I buy modules
I get scammed by Goons

END




Fixed that for ya
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#36 - 2013-12-12 19:16:17 UTC
Dont UseYourAlt OnTheForums wrote:
Im a new player, Im rich and I want to win.


I buy a bunch of plexes with $$$
I buy characters
I buy ships
I buy modules
I buy corps
I buy mercs
I buy friends
I buy alliances
I pretty much kill whoever I want for money
Make them suicide for me
Make them give me their stuff
…none of which requires any money to acquire, and none of which actually guarantees any kind of win whatsoever. So it's more “pay to get stuff you could conceivable (but don't have to) pay for” than “pay to win”. Blink
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#37 - 2013-12-12 19:17:33 UTC
Serptimis wrote:
Are you asking for the mechanics of the game to be changed so that multiboxing would no longer be possible? I can imagine that is something not really on CCP's list of things to do.
Can't imagine why.


Not that it wouldn't be impossible, just so that it wouldn't be so easy and effective to multibox. For instance, they could implement features where users are required to perform some degree of aiming or perhaps hit a perfect timing on a fluctuating bar in order to achieve maximum damage or hit chance, things to that effect. This would go a long way towards making the game more appealing, more skill demanding, and less pay 2 win.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#38 - 2013-12-12 19:23:59 UTC
How does one win eve?
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#39 - 2013-12-12 19:25:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulous Rod
Tippia wrote:
Dont UseYourAlt OnTheForums wrote:
Im a new player, Im rich and I want to win.


I buy a bunch of plexes with $$$
I buy characters
I buy ships
I buy modules
I buy corps
I buy mercs
I buy friends
I buy alliances
I pretty much kill whoever I want for money
Make them suicide for me
Make them give me their stuff
…none of which requires any money to acquire, and none of which actually guarantees any kind of win whatsoever. So it's more “pay to get stuff you could conceivable (but don't have to) pay for” than “pay to win”. Blink


Tippia, under your obtuse personal definition of p2w, there are no games that exist that can be called p2w.

Haven't you embarrassed yourself enough in this thread already?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#40 - 2013-12-12 19:25:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
PotatoOverdose wrote:
How does one win eve?

You press the “cancel subscription” button.

Fabulous Rod wrote:
Tippia, under your personal the normal definition of p2w, there are no games that exist that can be called p2w.
Sure there are: any game where, by paying, you get something (especially an advantage) you can't have if you're not paying. Be it gold ammo or performance enhancers or just unlocking special equipment, there are plenty of them out there. In fact, that's pretty much the standard definition of the term.

Just because you want to use it in a highly unorthodox manner to drive a point bolstered by dubious logic and weasel words doesn't mean that I'm embarrassing myself by pointing out those flaws…