These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Save Our Clones Initiative.

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#21 - 2014-11-15 04:48:17 UTC
DaReaper wrote:
Crumplecorn wrote:
13kr1d1 wrote:
then standings will probably go away altogether
We can only hope.

Also,
>mfw people responding to obvioustroll



They should go away, standings are a waste, esp when it comes to missions

Standings are a waste because they have few game mechanics attached to them. I rather have their functionality expanded instead of simply being removed.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2014-11-15 04:52:33 UTC
I, for one, welcome this new development, even though I've never paid more than 6mil for a clone.

CCP has no sense of humour.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#23 - 2014-11-15 05:22:49 UTC
13kr1d1, removing clone grades means they can split T2 skills into racial variants now. In the future, supports.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Ila Dace
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2014-11-15 05:27:46 UTC
13kr1d1 wrote:
The same can be said of putting modules on your combat based ships. It's not a choice of should I shouldnt I. It's a forced option just like the clone, because the consequences of not choosing is a blown up ship and no ability to kill anyone else.

So let's also replace module attachment with some other more fun mechanic instead of a boring one.

How about old games like Elite or Privateer? Putting armor on isn't a "choice". You buy it and do it not to die. In any game like that, the fundamental is that if you die, you lose time. Time invested in missions or the gain of in game currency. That means you have lost the time devoted to that stuff. The reset button or reload doesn't obviate you from this Cost. Similarly, the loss of a ship, and the loss of clone skill points for "forgetfulness" represents a loss of time/in game currency. SP are in game currency as much as ISK.

I don't agree that it's good game design objectively to try to "weed out" such decisions. I think it's subjective.
Quote:

Good game design isn't about punishing mere forgetfulness.


All games punish forgetfulness in some manner. Particularly more skill based games that rely on co-ordination.

MidnightWyvern wrote:

Hopefully this excellent and intelligent post is the end of these stupid threads.


And you've been invaluable to the thread.

No. No, no, no, NO.

Game design 101: Skinner boxes punish forgetfulness. We see that in the monetization of frustration with Pay-to-Win games.

Good game design prioritizes trade-offs. Ship fitting is about trade-offs. What do you think tiericide and all the rebalancing has been all about? Trade-offs make sandbox games more fun, punishment trains avoidance. We don't want players to avoid PvP.

Good skill-based games do not punish forgetfulness. In fact they often account for it by giving you an "out". Forgot to buy healing potions before heading out into the wilderness? Lucky you, that baddy you managed to kill dropped a couple. Neither Elite, nor Privateer were skill-based. They were item-based. Most modern games are hybrids.

CCP Darwin hit the nail on the head. When one "choice" is so overwhelmingly bad, there's little reason to keep it.

If you feel you need to be punished every time you get podded, feel free to send me 100M ISK each time.

If House played Eve: http://i.imgur.com/y7ShT.jpg

But in purple, I'm stunning!
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#25 - 2014-11-15 05:36:02 UTC
13kr1d1 wrote:
Unezka Turigahl wrote:
Ugh. I hope CCP doesn't add new clone-upgrade stuff. We have skills, ships, modules, implants, drugs, and command boosts. It's enough. We also don't need ship crews added into the game as some people suggest. If I were supreme dictator of EVE I'd gut the crap out of her and reduce it all down to skills, ships, and modules.


Then we need a new server for the old version of EVE updated with some reasonable streamlining of stuff that exists in the old/core version of EVE. That way CCP can please you by gutting EVE like they're doing already but even more, while pleasing people who enjoy the original. It's going to be a coke vs coke-zero debacle anyway. Let's get this over with.

I'm not saying you shouldn't have as much fun as you want, but I enjoyed EVE as it was. That game is going away. You're alternatively saying I shouldn't have as much fun as I want because you've decided certain mechanics should go.


Candy Crush Saga is ---------------------------------------------->

you want meaningless choices, go help yourself.

But in all seriousness, if you feel the urge to punish yourself, turn your monitor off for thirty seconds every time you forget to open the LP store window before undocking, or something equally idiotic.

I am not an alt of Chribba.
Jvpiter
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#26 - 2014-11-15 05:47:20 UTC


I really don't think it helps newer players any for vets to be afraid of fighting them in little ships, like frigates and such.


EVE has many penalties for death, and the stigma of losing your pod won't really change, in my opinion. I think you believe this change is a slippery slope, and from the standpoint of death being harsh maybe it seems like it.


But CCP seems to have a longer term plan with our clones. These guys are making sweeping changes to their game world and they seem to have some kind of vision. Maybe we don't always need to assume that their long term plans are detrimental to EVE.

Call me Joe.
Jvpiter
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#27 - 2014-11-15 05:55:01 UTC



Rain6637 wrote:
13kr1d1, removing clone grades means they can split T2 skills into racial variants now. In the future, supports.



Be sure to shop this awful idea around in a corner where no one sees you.


You have no reason for advocating this change, except to add artificial longevity to your multimillion SP advantage on the backs of newer players.


Or perhaps this is the reaction you were hoping for.



Call me Joe.
Moonlit Raid
Doomheim
#28 - 2014-11-15 05:56:02 UTC
It's nothing but an isk sink. Other isk sinks have been created so I'm more than happy for this particular chore to be removed. **** even if they don't remove it I'd like an "auto-buy" option for clones so I don't have to think about it.

If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.

Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#29 - 2014-11-15 06:11:44 UTC
A rare sight to see a CCP Dev bite on such an obvious troll thread, and not once, but twice. Really gotta hand it to Darwin here though, perfect rebuttals to the ridiculousness of these requests. Having over 100mil sp on each of my 4 main characters; good riddance. Clone upgrades are nothing but an arbitrary chore with no meaningful content.
WhyYouHeffToBeMad IsOnlyGame
#30 - 2014-11-15 07:01:20 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
13kr1d1, removing clone grades means they can split T2 skills into racial variants now. In the future, supports.

let's not

Everything's a game if you make it one - Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci

CCP: Continously Crying Playerbase - Frostys Virpio
Katsumoto Moliko
Players vs. EVE
Goonswarm Federation
#31 - 2014-11-15 07:49:03 UTC
13kr1d1 wrote:
Unezka Turigahl wrote:
Ugh. I hope CCP doesn't add new clone-upgrade stuff. We have skills, ships, modules, implants, drugs, and command boosts. It's enough. We also don't need ship crews added into the game as some people suggest. If I were supreme dictator of EVE I'd gut the crap out of her and reduce it all down to skills, ships, and modules.


Then we need a new server for the old version of EVE updated with some reasonable streamlining of stuff that exists in the old/core version of EVE. That way CCP can please you by gutting EVE like they're doing already but even more, while pleasing people who enjoy the original. It's going to be a coke vs coke-zero debacle anyway. Let's get this over with.

I'm not saying you shouldn't have as much fun as you want, but I enjoyed EVE as it was. That game is going away. You're alternatively saying I shouldn't have as much fun as I want because you've decided certain mechanics should go.


This is a completely shortsighted, reactionary idea that is not only unfounded in its reasoning, but has been historically shown that it acts as a detriment. Dividing the playerbase between two servers so that a fractional minority may enjoy essentially the same game with a select few features different between them is an absolutely insane strategy on both a design and business level.

As for your main argument: from what I understand (and someone with more experience than I may feel free to correct me on this), clone grades were universally disliked from the beginning, and have been viewed widespread as an unnecessary feature since the day of their introduction.

And as it has been explained in the thread, the choices provided by upgrading your clone are completely meaningless. Upgrades, spare the select few scenarios which have been described, are absolutely necessary. You would be a fool to make the conscious decision to not upgrade your clone if you had the means to do so.

As for your counter argument: not choosing to fit a weapon may very much be a sound decision based on the scenario, and I can tell you personally that there are a plethora of scenarios where not fitting a weapon would be sensible.

The argument you are bringing forward is a logical fallacy.

Ponder this: suppose we are living in an alternate universe where mass-based spawn mechanics for wormholes have been around since the introduction of wormhole space, and hyperion instead added clone grades, along with their rather steep associated penalties for not participating in their use. This newly introduced feature would be universally panned, and rightfully so. Clone upgrades just do not need to stay, and only add in "complexity" for complexity's own sake.

In conclusion, there are good game design choices, and there are bad game design choices. Removing an unnecessary feature is a good game design choice, and so is replacing it with a meaningful feature. Keeping said unnecessary feature is a bad game design choice, and one that has no logical basis whatsoever.

That being said, on the off chance you are simply trying to find something to argue about, you may want to revise your strategy.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#32 - 2014-11-15 08:35:57 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
13kr1d1 wrote:
Unezka Turigahl wrote:
Most games have one death and it is meaningless. Eve has two deaths that are both full loot-loss deaths with the possibility for a third XP death if you're forgetful. It stupid. It adds nothing. Good riddance.

And no, I've never personally lost XP. I just know stupid when I see it.


So you don't like the core of Eve gameplay. Don't wander into lowsec, you may not enjoy it.


With the caveat that I'm not a game designer, I do understand the reasoning and I'll share it.

The fundamental issue is that clone grades don't add a choice. When you are pod killed, you aren't presented with an interesting question -- "Should I upgrade my pod? How much should I upgrade it?"

Instead, you either upgrade, and protect your skill points against an inevitable further pod kill, or you don't, and suffer. One choice is so incredibly better than the other that you'll always pick it, unless you happen to forget.

Good game design isn't about punishing mere forgetfulness. It should be about presenting a meaningful choice to a player and letting them pick which way to go, with benefits to offset risk. Clone upgrade costs just don't do that -- they present a choice for which there's only one right answer.




Now now Darwin. A lot of people rely on someone forgetting something in order to keep their stats up. This is why they always hated the ideas of arenas or in game combat simulation. They NEED that occasional player who thinks they can tank or escape or not get jammed to cross their path rather than find out beforehand and re-equip and re-plan.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Kaos Maximo
Shadow Legion X
Seriously Suspicious
#33 - 2014-11-15 08:40:45 UTC
13kr1d1 wrote:
Then we need a new server for the old version of EVE updated with some reasonable streamlining of stuff that exists in the old/core version of EVE. That way CCP can please you by gutting EVE like they're doing already but even more, while pleasing people who enjoy the original. It's going to be a coke vs coke-zero debacle anyway. Let's get this over with.

I'm not saying you shouldn't have as much fun as you want, but I enjoyed EVE as it was. That game is going away. You're alternatively saying I shouldn't have as much fun as I want because you've decided certain mechanics should go.


this bro is just drifting in his own ideas.. now is talking about ccp should open a new server with an old version of EVE? WTF so much drama only for clones.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#34 - 2014-11-15 08:54:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Zappity
Definitely WTB pod interdiction nullification. If we're talking choices, there is currently no choice about getting podded in 0.0. It just discourages implant use for no good reason.

Edit: also WTB Tags4Standings as discussed in the CSM9 minutes.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2014-11-15 09:33:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Mocam
CCP Darwin wrote:
13kr1d1 wrote:
Unezka Turigahl wrote:
Most games have one death and it is meaningless. Eve has two deaths that are both full loot-loss deaths with the possibility for a third XP death if you're forgetful. It stupid. It adds nothing. Good riddance.

And no, I've never personally lost XP. I just know stupid when I see it.


So you don't like the core of Eve gameplay. Don't wander into lowsec, you may not enjoy it.


With the caveat that I'm not a game designer, I do understand the reasoning and I'll share it.

The fundamental issue is that clone grades don't add a choice. When you are pod killed, you aren't presented with an interesting question -- "Should I upgrade my pod? How much should I upgrade it?"

Instead, you either upgrade, and protect your skill points against an inevitable further pod kill, or you don't, and suffer. One choice is so incredibly better than the other that you'll always pick it, unless you happen to forget.

Good game design isn't about punishing mere forgetfulness. It should be about presenting a meaningful choice to a player and letting them pick which way to go, with benefits to offset risk. Clone upgrade costs just don't do that -- they present a choice for which there's only one right answer.


Hmm.. Looks like someone shares an idea with this old video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg8fVtKyYxY
Arla Sarain
#36 - 2014-11-15 09:40:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Arla Sarain
13kr1d1 wrote:
It was fine for 10 years.


You just didn't know any better.

Only thing clone costs achieve is locking an older player in bigger ships, since some clone grades cost more than frigs/destros.

It also made a soft cap for SP. Players who wouldn't want to pay large clone costs wouldn't bother getting the SP above a certain clone grade.

I suppose it also made sure that ISK had value even if all market stuff crashed for any hypothetical reason.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#37 - 2014-11-15 10:18:14 UTC
So basically some people are complaining about the removal of clone costs? Shocked

What's wrong with you??

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
Clueless Noobness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2014-11-15 10:22:30 UTC
This change may possibly result in effectively closing off low sec systems with medical facilities. What good will it do to kill 3 or 4 times each of the horde of crap frigates attacking you when they show back up 45 seconds later with almost zero expense to their side. There is being more friendly to new players and then there is changing the game to arcade mode. This feels like a step towards the latter. I hope the actual implementation will prove me wrong.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#39 - 2014-11-15 10:27:26 UTC
13kr1d1 wrote:
Fun is all about a person's intrinsic motivators. It has nothing to do with game mechanics. It worries me that whatever complaints were voiced that are getting this removed are coming from the people that come into a game and complain about it instead of accept what is, when they'll be leaving in 2 months anyway because they already don't like the core of the game. The core of the game being exhibited by ancillary mechanics like clones, obviously.

Language is a funny thing. Calling it "anti-progressive" or "stagnant" implies a negative, despite reality being that sometimes things are the way they are for good reasons.

Quote:
Freedom of speech hasn't changed that much in the U.S. consitution. It's so anti-progressive and stagnant. Better change it.


As an example of why this strawman of calling things "anti-progressive" is exacttly that, a strawman.

i don't think you should be trying to pull the 'fallacy' card

13kr1d1 wrote:
Clones and clone costs have always been a part of Eve. They make sense in the scope of the game. They aren't a problem for anyone to pay off, ever. Anyone who can fly a T3 can pay off medical clones. Why would the empires simply hand out clones for free just cause of feels?

First it was the removal of needed standings for certain game mechanics, now it's clone costs. If we don't halt this now, it'll be learning implants gone next, and then standings will probably go away altogether. Why is the original vision of Eve being torn apart? It was fine for 10 years.


you start with an appeal to tradition (which is an argument against change because it's change) and end with a slippery slope argument. the only statement in here that matters gamewise is 'they aren't a problem for anyone to pay off, ever'. i have no idea what the reference to t3s is. t3 pilots lose skills which they lose a ship

... and it doesn't matter that people are or are not capable of paying the clone cost, what matters is if they should be punished in this manner for pvping in an environment where they're almost certain to lose a pod and where upgrading the clone is the only viable course of action

what, exactly, is there to enjoy about upgrading clones
mr roadkill
Silent but Violent
#40 - 2014-11-15 10:37:39 UTC
There is no enjoyment factor in upgrading clones. It is also something that makes the game more complicated from a beginners point of view.

Not sure this makes it any easier but one thing i picked up from reading the books is how someone could have many clones available in a VAT (at one point when some dude dies it says something like 'all his clones had been destroyed and his real death was coming blah blah blah')

I kinda like the idea that you would simply maintain a stash a clones somewhere and these would be your backup. Perma-death would occur if you died and hadn't maintained them maybe.

As a starter in the game being supplied with a stash of 15 or so clones and being told upon your first death 'make sure you never run out of these' maybe easier than training for a week or 2, not realizing you have to buy a new clone then dying and being told sorry bub you have to start again.

Not sure what the option is that CCP are putting forward other than its going to change.