These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Telemortation removed: can we address medical clone costs now?

First post First post First post
Author
Portmanteau
Iron Krosz
#101 - 2014-11-03 14:38:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Portmanteau
Nysandra Khashour wrote:
Nope, clone cost should stay, death is supposed to be painful enough for players to be motivated to avoid it.
The whole point of clone cost is for it to be a progressive tax on player age precisely so they don't d*ck aroud in frigates with no consequences forever. At least this way if you win against the odds you may get the satisfaction of podding the bastard.

The last thing CCP should be doing is making the game even easier and consequence free for older players who are drowning in isk as it is.


Eh... you have it on authority from CCP that my playstyle is not allowed/frowned upon for players over a certain age ? How's that for sandbox :/

EDIT : also an utterly fallacious assumption that all olders characters are drowning in isk as you put it... I know I'm not
Portmanteau
Iron Krosz
#102 - 2014-11-03 14:49:20 UTC
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
Portmanteau wrote:
I'm just not sure why CCP would want to steer me towards paying less subs and stopping training my character *shrug*
Unfortunately CCP can't take into account every exception (such as yours) when they design features such as med clone costs that affect 100% of EVE's population.

Generally speaking, higher SP means better combat stats and I think it only makes sense that that should come with a non-zero price (or risk).

You're basically saying that you plan on rarely using any skill that doesn't affect frig/dessy combat, yet for some reason you would be willing to pay a sub for several months just to train skills you probably won't use. What?


It's all good but why should med clones be free just to cater to your 'unconventional' skill training habits? People usually train skills to use them...


I was planning on training things that I would use on occasion, like many other pilots do, logistics, maybe strategic cruiser, but yeah the majority of my time would still be small ship solo pvp. IDK, it just seems a bit odd that it would actually benefit me to cease training any further and sell SPs in the form of characters for isk. I'm not that averse to the idea TBH, it just never occurred to me before reading this thread and it seems a bit odd CCP would want anyone to reach this point with their character.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#103 - 2014-11-03 14:50:09 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Nysandra Khashour wrote:
Nope, clone cost should stay, death is supposed to be painful enough for players to be motivated to avoid it.
The whole point of clone cost is for it to be a progressive tax on player age precisely so they don't d*ck aroud in frigates with no consequences forever. At least this way if you win against the odds you may get the satisfaction of podding the bastard.

The last thing CCP should be doing is making the game even easier and consequence free for older players who are drowning in isk as it is.



So tell me how I'm meant to avoid a regular podding as a hero dictor pilot?

Furthermore, what are my tens of millions of skillpoints in missiles and battleships doing for me in my sabre? That's right, sweet **** all.

Where podding is a likelihood, pilots ALREADY pay a premium in implants or lack thereof meaning either expensive pod loss in implants, or a tax paid in the form of slower SP accumulation. Why should they be hit again, all for living in big boy space?


I think you'll find the last thing CCP should be doing is encouraging arbitrary heavy penalties on fighting to the point it discourages content generation.



Edit: Frankly if people are hell bent on keeping the cost for the higher grade clones, then immunity to non-targeted interdiction should come as part of the package for the cost. P
Cristl
#104 - 2014-11-03 15:46:50 UTC
I have no objection to the general idea that being podded should have consequences, including maybe ISK consequences, but clone costs are currently tied very illogically to character SP. At 30M SP you pay 2.1M ISK per clone and have a decent skill-set and earning ability. But after 120M SP you're forking out *fifteen times that amount*. That isn't sensible scaling: you don't have anywhere near fifteen times as much power or income.

And the possibility of repeatedly losing 30M ISK when podded in a frigate (or dictor etc.) definitely does piss people off and discourage fun – which is terrible game design. It may not be the largest sum of money you'll lose in the game, but it's so disproportionate and arbitrary. It's like finding yourself in a shithole of a country and being charged $10 for a can of beer. Yeah, you pay, but you're muttering about it all afternoon afterwards, right?

Cap the cost at 2.1M ISK. This provides a little ISK sink, allows characters some reduction up to 30M SP (at which point they are no longer newbies, surely) and all the other consequences of being podded are retained or even magnified by Phoebe.
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2014-11-03 16:54:50 UTC
Cristl wrote:
I have no objection to the general idea that being podded should have consequences, including maybe ISK consequences, but clone costs are currently tied very illogically to character SP. At 30M SP you pay 2.1M ISK per clone and have a decent skill-set and earning ability. But after 120M SP you're forking out *fifteen times that amount*. That isn't sensible scaling: you don't have anywhere near fifteen times as much power or income.

And the possibility of repeatedly losing 30M ISK when podded in a frigate (or dictor etc.) definitely does piss people off and discourage fun – which is terrible game design. It may not be the largest sum of money you'll lose in the game, but it's so disproportionate and arbitrary. It's like finding yourself in a shithole of a country and being charged $10 for a can of beer. Yeah, you pay, but you're muttering about it all afternoon afterwards, right?

Cap the cost at 2.1M ISK. This provides a little ISK sink, allows characters some reduction up to 30M SP (at which point they are no longer newbies, surely) and all the other consequences of being podded are retained or even magnified by Phoebe.
I completely agree the scaling is way out of whack.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!

DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#106 - 2014-11-03 17:34:16 UTC
The point that ccp made about this at eve vegas (and the csm minutes) was rather simple. CCP has come out of 'repair the game mode' and are now looking at old systems for ways to improve them and scale them towards the future. They are essentially looking at things and deciding to give more power and choice to the players. There is ZERO choice in upgrading your clone. Its automatic, you do it because the risk of having to retrain a long skill due to death is a pita.

And if you say live in WH space, upgrading your clone can be an even bigger pita.

The point ccp made, was they are reexamining everything in eve, and looking at places where stuff that made sense when the game was built, or seemed like a good idea at the time, now look like crap. They have data, and they are using it. CCP stated, that they want to look at death cloning, they feel it is unnessicary, provides no choice and no options to players, and should be removed. They had ideas for ways to improve the system, like giving you, a player, the choice. You can pay for extra bells and whistles on yoru clone if you want, or you can chose not to. But then at least you have a choice. And it gives ccp the ability to make things like perma death, with some people will play eve on.

You have games coming that are not so much sandboxes, but are in space. Games that will attract players who want less grit. CCP is focusing on the factor that makes eve awesome, the sand in the sand box. Death cloning is basicly the choice between wearing sunscreen at the beach, or getting cancer tomorrow. That's it. There is zero choice. However, if they change it.. just think of what they could do... 'you can wear sunscree, or sun tan oil and tan, or use an umbrella, or.. etc." The point is, choice for players is always a good thing.

And anyone saying 'well this was not a problem a few years ago' is correct. Because only recently I would say a majority of eve players broke the 100m sp mark. And I think when they made changes to ceptors and small ships they are not seeing as big an impact. And as I stated already, my clone is around 30-40m, so its not cost effective for me to fly in anything that cost less then my clone. a 10m isk setup for a frig that popes is not cost effective. Nor is it cost effective when I have to break a blockade in 0.0 and wind up dying 10 times in an hour (lucly when I did do this, I only had a 5m isk clone) But it still means you have no choice.

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.

Velarra
#107 - 2014-11-03 18:42:43 UTC
There is an indelible RL$ to Time/PLEX/SP acquisition rate consideration made when intending to undock dangerously.
The total cost of clone loss can't help but be linked to this consideration.
When the ~total~ cost of frigate & clone come to anywhere in the neighborhood of 70 to 80m isk, the frigate and fitting averaging 1-10m of that, there is a total* clone cost issue.

One solution is the focused frigate alt (or similar ship class). The benfits are a 5 to 6 month old character that flies a very specific ship in a very specific way. The clone costs are minor and the character, not being a main has no further intention to train. A carebearing alt on the same account can PVE up some isk and fit the alt several dozen frigates to be regularly undocked and taken into regular pvp.

Another is to pvp less on a broadly skilled older main. To pvp very rarely, accepting the total cost of clone loss. Espousing various 'hard on one's block' acronyms can equally be sprinkled into this viable play style when confronted with suggestions that one might feel would make eve risk-less.

In one case Eve is provided with pvp content multiple times over the course of one day by a single character, in another perhaps once a day, relative to a players time availability in-game.

Does CCP wish for this choice to exist and continue as an element of eve-play?
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#108 - 2014-11-03 18:49:48 UTC
The most whining in this thread is coming from people in alliances with ship replacement policies. PVP for free is just not good enough for these entitled 'elite PVPers'. Now they're demanding near free clone replacement on these characters that they chose to train to the level they can't afford to lose.

Here's an idea. Just don't update your clone. Get podded enough times and you'll find it affordable again.

Mr Epeen Cool
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#109 - 2014-11-03 19:05:05 UTC
Pssst.

watch CCP FoxFour's presentation from Eve Vegas.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Ama Scelesta
#110 - 2014-11-03 19:28:00 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
The most whining in this thread is coming from people in alliances with ship replacement policies. PVP for free is just not good enough for these entitled 'elite PVPers'. Now they're demanding near free clone replacement on these characters that they chose to train to the level they can't afford to lose.

Here's an idea. Just don't update your clone. Get podded enough times and you'll find it affordable again.

Mr Epeen Cool


Seriously do you think the system currently is any good? It's a minor ISK sink in the overall system of sinks and EVE certainly doesn't need it. If it is deemed vital it can be easily compensated for in other areas. There also aren't any good choices or gameplay there. You always upgrade your clone after death, no exceptions. SP loss itself sucks ass and isn't a consequense of a meanigful choice. It's just punishment for ignorance or forgetfulness. It could go and 99% of players wouldn't know the difference. Hell CCP could stealth patch it today and most people would probably go through their entire EVE careers without knowing it has been removed. What exactly do you find so good about it or did you just want to make a Grrrr nullsec - post?
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#111 - 2014-11-03 19:35:26 UTC
I wonder how fast people would change their minds if the restrictions on bubbles were removed.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#112 - 2014-11-03 19:57:53 UTC
A large isk sink has just been added to the game with Industry. There is certainly room for the removal of a small isk sink from clones.
Additionally a perpetually scaling cost that hits your oldest players the hardest is never a good thing. If there is to be a cost associated with pod loss, it should be a flat fee to replace the pod. However since the Pod is actually a Jovian experiment, the base pod/clone should be 'free' i.e. So cheap as to be basically inconsequential. Also if there is a cost then anyone with a 0 wallet can't ever PvP even if given ships. Which is... Bad.
There can then be vanity pods which do cost isk when you lose them to maintain a small sink. (Army of pink pods!)
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
#113 - 2014-11-03 20:01:04 UTC
I guess if they don't want to remove clone ISK cost all together, they can have the cost be based on the last ship you flew before you were podded, rather than being based on total SP as it is now. So you would still have to buy a new clone but you would be charged only for the skills that were active in your brain basically.

So when a noob player looses a frigate that they have supported by X amount of skills trained to level 3, they won't loose much ISK at all if they're then podded. A veteran flying the same frigate with all relevant skills at 5 will lose a little more ISK if podded, but still a tiny amount compared to if they had been flying a more SP-intensive ship. A veteran player flying a capital ship with max skills and then podded would be charged a good bit of ISK in comparison, but would still not be charged for their total SP like they are now.

They'd have to make it charge you based on the most SP-expensive ship you flew in the last 10 minutes before being podded probably, to prevent people from gaming the system.

I like that idea better than introducing yet another fiddly skill to train to reduce clone cost.

But if they remove SP loss then how will they enforce the clone's ISK cost? They'd have to just automatically bill you rather than require you to buy a new clone in the station. But what happens when you have no ISK in your wallet? You get a negative wallet? Who cares, if you're just a pvp character, being gifted all your ships and such from an alt.

Being charged more per SP used might not even make sense, it kind of goes against the rock paper scissors idea. Bigger ships aren't necessarily better, more SP-intensive ships are not necessarily better. Depends on the situation.

It would be cleanest to just get rid of all SP and ISK costs related to clones all together. Only purpose is implants.
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
#114 - 2014-11-03 20:07:08 UTC
Personally I think they should get rid of implants too, but I'm a crazy person.
Leoric Firesword
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#115 - 2014-11-03 20:11:18 UTC
Unezka Turigahl wrote:
- Remove clone costs/updating (remove ISK sink)
- Remove insurance (remove ISK faucet)

Even stevens.


I'm good with this
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#116 - 2014-11-03 20:13:09 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
The same 'content' didn't suffer before 2012 when i was living in 0.0 and participated in some wars.... And yes, i was always using set of +4 implants, even when i was flying on CTA.

Just because you didn't notice it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Nullsec stagnation is a related but separate issue.

March rabbit wrote:
This 'content' started to suffer when YOU won the null-sec. And then suddenly space 'doesn't worth the effort', 'clone are too much', etc....

This was a problem back then as much as it is now. Nobody's "suddenly" saying any of these things.
Maybe if you slowed down and typed properly instead of things like "doesn't worth the effort" you'd be able to collect your thoughts.
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#117 - 2014-11-03 20:15:17 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
The most whining in this thread is coming from people in alliances with ship replacement policies. PVP for free is just not good enough for these entitled 'elite PVPers'. Now they're demanding near free clone replacement on these characters that they chose to train to the level they can't afford to lose.

Here's an idea. Just don't update your clone. Get podded enough times and you'll find it affordable again.

Mr Epeen Cool

You're welcome to look in my killboards and figure out the last time I was podded. You'll find that it doesn't happen very often, mainly because I don't usually fly anything smaller than a carrier.

Would I, if clone costs changed? Probably not. But you can see I'm not arguing for this for myself.
Velarra
#118 - 2014-11-03 20:29:24 UTC
Unezka Turigahl wrote:
Personally I think they should get rid of implants too, but I'm a crazy person.


It's extremely irrational at a base level, when you consider the differences between type X or type Y are frequently only a matter of hours or a couple days over the course of a year, - triggering replies to the effect of 'just fly with cheaper implants... however:

Total clone cost ends up coming down to Learning implants + Med Clone.

While perhaps nearly heretical and seemingly entitled to suggest it: Remove both costs, and you remove the irrational risk vs. cost calculation they create when a player considers undocking in a pvp frigate. Frigates will still cost what they do but more of them can be undocked and lost in pvp.

Or just stop training / build a focused alt.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#119 - 2014-11-03 20:46:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Pssst.

watch CCP FoxFour's presentation from Eve Vegas.

Steve, sir, I am directly opposed to your suggestion that CCP's powerpoint slides are something to trust.

Foxfour's exact words from that stream (starts at 7:20)

"We're not sure exactly what we're doing, but we do know we want to look at it. We'll probably be looking at it for December, and we'll see what happens. We're interested in knowing what you guys think. If you guys have any strong opinions on this, on what we should do, we'd love to hear from you."

This thread has been sarcastic at times but we've also kept it civil for Fozzie, and it's relatively tame by EVE standards.

So here's the strong opinions, where's the Dev participation that Fozzie said happens on EVE-O
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#120 - 2014-11-03 22:27:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Aqriue
Primary This Rifter wrote:

Quote:
+1 for this idea. It's sensible.

We already know what you think of your own idea, Aqriue.

Weird how silly and stupid some people are, I am not trying to promote my idea except for every time some complaint about a pod/clone cost comes up. That's someone else, haven't visited the thread in like 4 days.

As always, risk what you can fly and that pod included. Thread keeps going, means lots of terrible players who keep dying and not shooting red crosses and/or other ways to make isk like playing the market (hint: EVE isn't a FPS, respawn aka Planet Side and keep going....you do have to do other things). Don't have to PVP 30 days a month, set some time aside and fund enough to keep you pods updated Roll

edit: typo

Also, here is another idea. Purchase more than 3 character slots using PLEX (CCP would love this idea), allow death clones or sectioning off of SP of your main to a "lesser clone" with the same name that doesn't even have to die. Done. We have multiple clones, like 10 now? fully skilled out (only came back less than 2 months ago, still figuring out that jump clone skill) and why can you not just have clones that fly small ships, medium ships, medium combo ships (BC class), and large ships with only their SP asscosiated + support....now you got smaller clone costs, with specialized clones, with the same character name, only problem is that nasty jump timer Ugh. Meh, think of it as changing out "character" class in some of the other MMO games out there.