These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

You know what I would definitely pay Aurum for?

Author
Daneirkus Auralex
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#81 - 2011-12-08 01:10:23 UTC
also, anchorable propaganda billboards
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#82 - 2011-12-08 01:12:38 UTC
Daneirkus Auralex wrote:
also, anchorable propaganda billboards


heh can you imagine the havoc..

Jita 4-4 ... milions of billboards at undock area Big smile with spam spam and spam ..
L'ouris
Have Naught Subsidiaries
#83 - 2011-12-08 01:16:04 UTC
Daneirkus Auralex wrote:
also, anchorable propaganda billboards


Neat idea, but Id rather see BP's for that ingame :)
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#84 - 2011-12-08 01:17:50 UTC
L'ouris wrote:
Daneirkus Auralex wrote:
also, anchorable propaganda billboards


Neat idea, but Id rather see BP's for that ingame :)


Then NEX can be selling BP for anchorable propaganda billobards Big smile
However to anchor it plenty of restriction would have to be implemented..
Sri Nova
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2011-12-08 01:28:20 UTC
i would love to know the reason why C.C.P. did not implement this when introducing the nex .

this has been requested so much . makes so much sense. and would be the sure fire way to ensure a successful launch of a secondary market. i cannot see how the investment of cash into designing high quality models vs letting the players create their own for free was more attractive.

even with t.t.p. (time to penis) issues the amount of work put into the items for the nex could have been redirected to tools to aid and eliminate offending content.

hopefully C.C.P. has realized this mistake and it will be within the next 6 months or so we will start to see this becoming a reality.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#86 - 2011-12-08 01:30:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Tippia wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Except that AURUM is the cross over currency to be used for certain products in DUST and must be integrated into the EVE economy to serve that purpose.
Yes, and until they do, they have no purpose and could at that time be introduced in some way that's worth-while. The NeX is not needed. And seeing as how Dust is going to use ISK as well, and there is pretty much nothing that points to AUR having any additional purpose in EVE aside from maybe bribing bunnies so they don't have to buy it themselves (because in that game, AUR has a purpose as an MT currency but that only raises the question of why we should pay them real money for stuff that only exists in their game), it is not needed in EVE for the two to be integrated.

Even if AUR is the way to bribe some cheap-ass bunny, there is still no need to have AUR as a functional item in EVE. Sure, split those PLEXes up in more useful tradeable units to be doled out to the dust bunnies, but it can still be left completely outside of the EVE economy and simply serve that one purpose.
Quote:
And, I'm sorry to say this Tippia, but you selectively quoted him yourself (and by doing so changed the meaning of that part of his post to suit your purposes).
How did it change the meaning? He is saying that AUR is not something people aim to buy — it's a pointless intermediary stage with the sole purpose of immediately being flushed from the system — and as a result, you could remove that and its only use (the NeX) from the game without any ill effects. Anything and everything it does could (and should) be done with ISK instead.


Oh come on Tippia, you know they have to run this thing for a while on the EVE side of things to work all of the kinks out of it (and likely get people used to the idea). I'm sure they would also like to stimulate the PLEX market even more and make a bit of additional coin.

I'm not entirely at odds with you on the use of the AURUM currency instead of ISK in these transactions, and would likely be right there with you if we only had to take EVE's economy into consideration. But that is not the case, and we are not working with very complete information as to how AURUM will be used in the DUST/EVE shared economy.

The sketchy information we have thus far seems to indicate that AURUM in DUST will be purchased with cash and be the only way the INITIAL purchase of certain items can be done. It is hinted that these items can later be resold for ISK, but I don't think that has been confirmed. AURUM is there to provide a very clear division between items that can be purchased initially for ISK and items that required a cash outlay to initially obtain (thus providing the necessary revenue stream from DUST).

I point this out to try and be as completely forthright on the issue as possible, as this actually lends more weight to your argument.

Perhaps CCP can eliminate the use of AURUM in EVE, or perhaps this is complicated by Sony's involvement in the purchase of in game currency. We really don't know enough details about the two economies and how they intersect (or CCP's agreements with Sony) to make any well informed judgements either way at this point.

For my part, I'm fine with it either way. As long as:

The economy works for both games.
Player based industries are included as much as possible.
It is financially viable and profitable for CCP.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

NickyYo
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#87 - 2011-12-08 01:36:38 UTC  |  Edited by: NickyYo
Oh god don't give CCP more stupid ideas for MT.
MT as a whole is a no!!

You pay to play a game, not pay to play within a paid computer game!!

..

NickyYo
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#88 - 2011-12-08 01:39:45 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Except that AURUM is the cross over currency to be used for certain products in DUST and must be integrated into the EVE economy to serve that purpose.
Yes, and until they do, they have no purpose and could at that time be introduced in some way that's worth-while. The NeX is not needed. And seeing as how Dust is going to use ISK as well, and there is pretty much nothing that points to AUR having any additional purpose in EVE aside from maybe bribing bunnies so they don't have to buy it themselves (because in that game, AUR has a purpose as an MT currency but that only raises the question of why we should pay them real money for stuff that only exists in their game), it is not needed in EVE for the two to be integrated.

Even if AUR is the way to bribe some cheap-ass bunny, there is still no need to have AUR as a functional item in EVE. Sure, split those PLEXes up in more useful tradeable units to be doled out to the dust bunnies, but it can still be left completely outside of the EVE economy and simply serve that one purpose.
Quote:
And, I'm sorry to say this Tippia, but you selectively quoted him yourself (and by doing so changed the meaning of that part of his post to suit your purposes).
How did it change the meaning? He is saying that AUR is not something people aim to buy — it's a pointless intermediary stage with the sole purpose of immediately being flushed from the system — and as a result, you could remove that and its only use (the NeX) from the game without any ill effects. Anything and everything it does could (and should) be done with ISK instead.


Oh come on Tippia, you know they have to run this thing for a while on the EVE side of things to work all of the kinks out of it (and likely get people used to the idea). I'm sure they would also like to stimulate the PLEX market even more and make a bit of additional coin.

I'm not entirely at odds with you on the use of the AURUM currency instead of ISK in these transactions, and would likely be right there with you if we only had to take EVE's economy into consideration. But that is not the case, and we are not working with very complete information as to how AURUM will be used in the DUST/EVE shared economy.

The sketchy information we have thus far seems to indicate that AURUM in DUST will be purchased with cash and be the only way the INITIAL purchase of certain items can be done. It is hinted that these items can later be resold for ISK, but I don't think that has been confirmed. AURUM is there to provide a very clear division between items that can be purchased initially for ISK and items that required a cash outlay to initially obtain (thus providing the necessary revenue stream from DUST).

I point this out by to try and be as completely forthright on the issue as possible, as this actually lends more weight to your argument.

Perhaps CCP can eliminate the use of AURUM in EVE, or perhaps this is complicated by Sony's involvement in the purchase of in game currency. We really don't know enough details about the two economies and how they intersect (or CCP's agreements with Sony) to make any well informed judgements either way at this point.

For my part, I'm fine with it either way. As long as:

The economy works for both games.
Player based industries are included as much as possible.
It is financially viable and profitable for CCP.


Tippia never agrees with anything, everything he says has to be an opposite to what you say, he never agrees even though he is wrong. I guess its one of those cases where he can only fit in if he complains about something.

..

Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#89 - 2011-12-08 01:42:21 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:

The plan was laid out pretty clearly in the interview done during the last alliance tournament. This discussion centered around the plan to bring in ship logo's and skins, which as we know is still going full steam ahead.


No, I'm not expecting that "full steam ahead" really. Last Alliance tournent was pre NeX Carna unsub protest and I think CCP have realized the player base does not accept their plans for microtransactions (or at least realizes that there will be a heavy price to be paid in subscriptions for this line of thinking.

Quote:
Now I will grant you this, it is possible that they will choose to go a completely different path with these items. There has been no recent announcement either way (although it stands to reason that they would let public opinion soften on the issue a bit before opening this can of worms again).


Well this CSM meeting in Iceland this weekend should let us have an idea where things are going.

Quote:
However, that would likely have to include some restructuring as to how the DUST and EVE economies were going to align, and I'm really not sure if they have the flexibility to make that major a change this late in DUST's development cycle.


Dust is another can of worms really. I think its a mistake to see it as intrinsically linked to Eve's future. Eve will need to survive if Dust crashes and burns. I believe CCP know this as well.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#90 - 2011-12-08 02:28:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Quote:
No, I'm not expecting that "full steam ahead" really. Last Alliance tournent was pre NeX Carna unsub protest and I think CCP have realized the player base does not accept their plans for microtransactions (or at least realizes that there will be a heavy price to be paid in subscriptions for this line of thinking.


I'm not as convinced as you are that the main disconnect was over MT. It was for some, no doubt, but I think that a lot of people were upset for entirely different reasons. It's open for debate I think.

Quote:
Dust is another can of worms really. I think its a mistake to see it as intrinsically linked to Eve's future. Eve will need to survive if Dust crashes and burns. I believe CCP know this as well.


While I do agree that CCP understands the need to keep the two games viable separately (if one or the other were to die), they also need to make sure that there is a high degree of synergy between the two. It is the cornerstone of the concept.

Attaining those two goals is going to be a tricky path.

Quote:
Well this CSM meeting in Iceland this weekend should let us have an idea where things are going.


Indeed. Hopefully it won't be completely buried under the NDA for months.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#91 - 2011-12-08 02:38:43 UTC
Quote:
Tippia never agrees with anything, everything he says has to be an opposite to what you say, he never agrees even though he is wrong. I guess its one of those cases where he can only fit in if he complains about something.


Smile As tempting as it may be in this case, I can't agree with you on that one.

Tippia's arguments are usually very well thought out (if sharply put at times). We just happen to be on opposite sides (for the most part) this time around.

I believe that the AURUM currency can be integrated smoothly into EVE, and is likely a large part of the EVE/DUST integration.

Tippia feels it is redundant, and at least EVE would be better off without it.

I can't fault Tippia for feeling that way, at least not until we know more, but at this point I simply don't agree.

We'll both survive. Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Doctor Ungabungas
Doomheim
#92 - 2011-12-08 03:36:43 UTC
I'd pay aurum for a forum ban for Jade Constantine
Flamespar
WarRavens
Imperium Eden
#93 - 2011-12-08 05:29:58 UTC
I think it's funny that some people still don't realise that you can pay to win.

Buy plex -> sell plex -> buy bigger ship than the other guy.

The only difference that EVE has from other Pay to win games, is that players can still use ingame currency to buy the same advantage, it just takes them longer.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#94 - 2011-12-08 05:39:00 UTC
Flamespar wrote:
I think it's funny that some people still don't realise that you can pay to win.

Buy plex -> sell plex -> buy bigger ship than the other guy.

The only difference that EVE has from other Pay to win games, is that players can still use ingame currency to buy the same advantage, it just takes them longer.



I know what you are trying to say, but your last sentence invalidates the first one.

Pay to win is simply buying in game advantages that cannot be obtained through normal game play. Think Gold Ammo in WOT. You simply cannot obtain it except by paying real cash for it... and it gives a player a significant advantage.

A very good case CAN be made that the PLEX system is essentially a modified micro transaction system, but MT and pay-to-win are two related but different beasts. You can have micro transactions without it being pay-to-win if those items are also available through regular game play.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Trainwreck McGee
Doomheim
#95 - 2011-12-08 05:44:38 UTC
i agree with the people that think AURUM is poo poo

CCP Trainwreck - Weekend Custodial Engineer / CCP Necrogoats foot stool

Flamespar
WarRavens
Imperium Eden
#96 - 2011-12-08 05:45:14 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Flamespar wrote:
I think it's funny that some people still don't realise that you can pay to win.

Buy plex -> sell plex -> buy bigger ship than the other guy.

The only difference that EVE has from other Pay to win games, is that players can still use ingame currency to buy the same advantage, it just takes them longer.



I know what you are trying to say, but your last sentence invalidates the first one.


No it doesn't. The advantage is that a player can access the advantage quicker than a normal player by paying for it.

Want a new battleship? Grind for a month or get it today - through Plex!
Igualmentedos
Perkone
Caldari State
#97 - 2011-12-08 06:04:08 UTC
Katja Norolyev wrote:
There should be a lengthy addition to the manufacturing skill tree that allows trained players to pick a skin (L1 and 2. Perhaps 1 is hull color and 2 is glass/lights) and a logo (L3) to be applied to an entire job's worth of ships during the build.

Players should have to take their ship to one of these manufacturers to modify the logo (L4) and skin (L5). Also, make it so that only these players can submit logo designs to CCP (Also L5). Then they'll be able to 'stamp' all their product with their personalized makers' seal of quality.

I already want a Chribba(TM) brand Hulk.


OMG that would rock. If CCP let alliances make personalized ships I would, hug the crap(pg rating) out of the person responsible.
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#98 - 2011-12-08 10:05:23 UTC
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:
I'd pay aurum for a forum ban for Jade Constantine


Only way you'll ever come away from a verbal clash with ego intact then buttercup? Cool

I wouldn't even pay Aurum to have goons forced to defend their own sovereignty.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom

Ciar Meara
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#99 - 2011-12-08 12:04:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Ciar Meara
Rodj Blake wrote:
I'm pretty sure that CCP originally announced that they would be introducing logos on ships long before there was any talk of this AURUM nonsense.

So we should be able to get them for free.


You where able to put logo's on ships during the EVE-Online BETA, 10 years ago.

Daneirkus Auralex wrote:
While I agree the NEX sometimes seems like an unnecessary middle step, it currently is what it is.


Thank you, our point exactly. unnecessary steps are something...unnecessary.

And congrats that you like doing what you do and you love your body/avatar. I sure do enjoy my life also. Calling people neckbeards though doesn't exactly smell mature so you should and did get slapped for that.

- [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow]

Toros Revoke
#100 - 2011-12-08 13:50:37 UTC
I would like a black paint job for my Archon, and everything else I might want to paint black, or red.