These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

ORE ship reimbursement and upcoming expansion

First post
Author
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#561 - 2013-03-11 22:53:43 UTC
Wow ... all the great posts are still in the thread, so far i've checked.

Thanks, Mr. ISD ! ^_^
Dave stark
#562 - 2013-03-11 22:55:05 UTC
clearly, innuendo and 1bn isk mammoths are relevant to the OP.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#563 - 2013-03-11 23:06:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Abrazzar
This thread reminds me of the time I went from Jita to Dodixie for some item on contract and when I got back to Jita, I realized the items are on the market now and I could have bought it for half the price right there.

Edit: In the end it turned out, I didn't even need that thing for the fit.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#564 - 2013-03-11 23:28:41 UTC
Currently listening to http://newedenradio.com,
where famous DJ Taya Dentano from Minmatar Chat is talking in between all the music.

And she takes requests and shoutouts too ! CONTACT HER INGAME NOW !

A REAL girl, btw.

...

(that'll make them tune in)
Whitehound
#565 - 2013-03-11 23:57:52 UTC
Abrazzar wrote:
This thread reminds me of the time I went from Jita to Dodixie for some item on contract and when I got back to Jita, I realized the items are on the market now and I could have bought it for half the price right there.

Edit: In the end it turned out, I didn't even need that thing for the fit.

Now you need to take the next step and turn it into a scam.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

kes88
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#566 - 2013-03-12 00:04:27 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
How the **** is this thread still going?

I capitalized **** for emphasis while typing this, not that that actually matters.



I...I... *massages temples*...I just read this thread...

Soooooo. In summary:

Original Poster: Reimbursement for Orca changes?
2nd poster: Nope. Shudup.

Argument Maker Number 1: That is not fair.
Argument Maker Number 2: It is not unfair.
Argument Maker Number 1: YOU SIR, ARE A CAD!!
Argument Maker Number 2: NO SIR! YOU SIR ARE A CAD!!

*much 'you started it' ensues

Amusing Poster Number 1 : *Rude innuendo! For amusement!
Amusing Poster Number 2: *Lol! Indeed! Docking permission requested! lololol!

*much later, after many explosions and hardeners burnt out

Argument Maker Number 13423523: YOU SIR ARE A CAD!!
Argument Maker Number 18356385: NO SIR! YOU SIR ARE A CAD!!

I prefer the amusing ones, dunno bout everyone else.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#567 - 2013-03-12 00:26:10 UTC
kes88 wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
How the **** is this thread still going?

I capitalized **** for emphasis while typing this, not that that actually matters.



I...I... *massages temples*...I just read this thread...

Soooooo. In summary:

Original Poster: Reimbursement for Orca changes?
2nd poster: Nope. Shudup.

Argument Maker Number 1: That is not fair.
Argument Maker Number 2: It is not unfair.
Argument Maker Number 1: YOU SIR, ARE A CAD!!
Argument Maker Number 2: NO SIR! YOU SIR ARE A CAD!!

*much 'you started it' ensues

Amusing Poster Number 1 : *Rude innuendo! For amusement!
Amusing Poster Number 2: *Lol! Indeed! Docking permission requested! lololol!

*much later, after many explosions and hardeners burnt out

Argument Maker Number 13423523: YOU SIR ARE A CAD!!
Argument Maker Number 18356385: NO SIR! YOU SIR ARE A CAD!!

I prefer the amusing ones, dunno bout everyone else.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA nice ! ^_^
Tiber Ibis
The Paratwa Ka
#568 - 2013-03-12 02:44:44 UTC
I've been reading through the thread, skimming through a lot of it, and I can see the OP does have a point. Also I can understand CCPs stance on this as well as it would give all the other people who have had skills changed to want a reimbursement also.

Reading through I had an idea though which may be a good solution to the problem. What if Mining Barge V affected a relevant bonus on the Orca. For instance you could remove the Mining Link bonus and from the Industrial Command Ships skill, and make that attribute affected by training up the Mining Barge skill instead. Also you could make a role bonus such as tractor beam range affected by Mining Barge skill also.

Then those who have trained Mining Barge will still have some use for the skill even if they don't want to fly a Mining Barge. Also it would be simple for CCP to implement.
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#569 - 2013-03-12 06:25:54 UTC
Wacktopia wrote:
No skill point reimbursement. Ever.

You train a skill at a time for a reason and that's the end of it.


"Skills that are deleted, or removed from the game."

Case in point: Learning skills.

You're welcome.
Whitehound
#570 - 2013-03-12 07:18:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Tiber Ibis wrote:
I've been reading through the thread, skimming through a lot of it, and I can see the OP does have a point. Also I can understand CCPs stance on this as well as it would give all the other people who have had skills changed to want a reimbursement also.

Reading through I had an idea though which may be a good solution to the problem. What if Mining Barge V affected a relevant bonus on the Orca. For instance you could remove the Mining Link bonus and from the Industrial Command Ships skill, and make that attribute affected by training up the Mining Barge skill instead. Also you could make a role bonus such as tractor beam range affected by Mining Barge skill also.

Then those who have trained Mining Barge will still have some use for the skill even if they don't want to fly a Mining Barge. Also it would be simple for CCP to implement.

While this is a good compromise does it still not need one. Unallocating the skill points for Mining Barge V and returning them into the free pool of SPs, where players can reassign them, is the easiest way. It is what the players want and those who say they hate it can put their points back into Mining Barge V.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#571 - 2013-03-12 07:39:51 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
It is what the players want


No it isn't.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#572 - 2013-03-12 07:47:37 UTC
Tiber Ibis wrote:
Then those who have trained Mining Barge will still have some use for the skill even if they don't want to fly a Mining Barge. Also it would be simple for CCP to implement.
The problem is that this would go completely against what they're trying to do: remove cross-tier and cross-class skill requirements and bonus contaminations. The Mining Barge has use for everyone who has trained it. Just because some choose not to make full use of their skill set (actually, make that “everyone” not just “some” since this is always true) doesn't mean that they are suddenly owed added usefulness for their skills. In fact, on of the key design elements of the EVE skill system is that you never use all of your skills, and that most of them actually lie dormant, waiting for some particular scenario where they make a difference.

Whitehound wrote:
While this is a good compromise does it still not need one. Unallocating the skill points for Mining Barge V and returning them into the free pool of SPs, where players can reassign them, is the easiest way.
…which, as it often does, also coincides with it being the wrong way since it opens the floodgates for SP remaps for the flimsiest of reasons (and yes “I don't want this skill any more” is a flimsy reason).

Anyway, you've already agreed that there should be no reimbursement since no-one lost anything so I'm not sure why you'd suggest something as silly as that. You're quite right: there is no need for a compromise here since it's such a clear-cut case of keeping exactly what you got for exactly the price you were willing to pay.
Whitehound
#573 - 2013-03-12 08:01:07 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
It is what the players want


No it isn't.

Sure, have you not been reading the thread?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Whitehound
#574 - 2013-03-12 08:02:22 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
While this is a good compromise does it still not need one. Unallocating the skill points for Mining Barge V and returning them into the free pool of SPs, where players can reassign them, is the easiest way.
…which, as it often does, also coincides with it being the wrong way since it opens the floodgates ...

I stopped reading at floodgates. There are none in the game.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#575 - 2013-03-12 08:02:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Whitehound wrote:
Sure, have you not been reading the thread?
You are not “the players”.

Quote:
I stopped reading at floodgates.
Maybe you should get some new specs then, if you can't read for longer than that. That would certainly explain your illiteracy and your complete insensitivity to context.

Of course, we all know that the reason you stopped reading there is because you still can't present a cogent or coherent counter-argument and you're hoping that no-one will notice. Unfortunately, it'll rather have the opposite effect of making everyone notice it instead.
Whitehound
#576 - 2013-03-12 08:13:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Tippia wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Sure, have you not been reading the thread?
You are not “the players”.

Oh, I know. What I do not know is how you can talk of "floodgates" and at the same time claim that nobody wants it. My reading comprehension is fine.

Tippia wrote:
Unfortunately, it'll rather have the opposite effect of making everyone notice it instead.

You are just trolling again. Who seriously puts an emphasis on what others notice about you? What is the point of that? It is so not the topic.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#577 - 2013-03-12 08:18:19 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
What I do not know is how you can talk of "floodgates" and at the same time claim that nobody wants it.
Some might think that they want it because they have completely misunderstood how the EVE skill system works and think that it's much like the progression trees you'll find in your average derivative class/level/xp-based RPG. The problem is that the result of what they think they want is the complete removal of skills as a functional mechanic in the game and a complete [surprise-sex] of new players… and I feel spectacularly confident in saying that “the players” do not actually want that.

Quote:
My reading comprehension is fine.
Only in the sense that it's been ground into a very fine powder and spread for the wind.
Whitehound
#578 - 2013-03-12 08:22:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Tippia wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
What I do not know is how you can talk of "floodgates" and at the same time claim that nobody wants it.
Some might think that they want it because they have completely misunderstood how the EVE skill system works and think that it's much like the progression trees you'll find in your average derivative class/level/xp-based RPG. The problem is that the result of what they think they want is the complete removal of skills as a functional mechanic in the game and a complete [surprise-sex] of new players… and I feel spectacularly confident in saying that “the players” do not actually want that.

Quote:
My reading comprehension is fine.
Only in the sense that it's been ground into a very fine powder and spread for the wind.

Others do not need to be told what they want and my reading comprehension is really not the topic. Please, stop with the trolling. It leads no where.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#579 - 2013-03-12 08:27:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Whitehound wrote:
Others do not need your help to know what they want
Sure they do, especially if they don't understand what it is they're asking for…

…which is pretty much always the case in SP remap requests.

Quote:
and my reading comprehension is really not the topic.
It is when you make it one by wilfully misrepresenting people's positions, arguments, and comments — in short, when you lie.

Quote:
Please, stop with the trolling. It leads no where.
So why do you keep doing it, then?
Whitehound
#580 - 2013-03-12 08:31:43 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Others do not need your help to know what they want
Sure they do, especially ...

No. Just no. It is so not relevant for the topic.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.