These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: A new Era of Clones

First post
Author
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#61 - 2014-12-02 17:46:05 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Querns wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Judging from some of the posts by players in this thread, I believe there are many other games which would be better suited to themselves other than eve.

What I am basically reading is people basically want to remove all consequences from the game.

Leave eve as one of the few niche game where consequences matter, there are plenty of other games for people who don't like consequences.

You are overreacting. Death still has plenty of consequence. In fact, it retains ALL the consequence it used to have — the current system doesn't actually introduce any consequence. The current system just means you have to remember to do a little bit of busywork every time you die. There's not a meaningful choice or any sort of skill involved in remembering to update your clone. Removing the mechanic is unabashedly positive.

Quintessen wrote:
Good change overall. Now I'd like to see other penalties removed that prevent people from playing the game itself. I'm thinking standings penalties for missions for factions you care about. I'm thinking about standings loss from faction warfare.

So Querns, you agree with stuff like this?

I'm not talking about the removal of clones, but some of the other suggestions which players are coming up with in this thread.

that thing is a good change yes, there are numerous idiots who equate "random vicious penalties" with "consequences" and who don't really get that random vicious penalties are not a great way to implement consequences in a game
CCP Terminus
C C P
C C P Alliance
#62 - 2014-12-02 17:47:03 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Terminus
In regards to the comments on making clones player created, and looking at how attributes and implants work. We are definitely looking at those kinds of things and we'll see where they go. We will be looking at removing unnecessary complexity, while keeping or adding to the depth of the mechanics.

@CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#63 - 2014-12-02 17:49:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Medalyn Isis
Quintessen wrote:
Good change overall. Now I'd like to see other penalties removed that prevent people from playing the game itself. I'm thinking standings penalties for missions for factions you care about. I'm thinking about standings loss from faction warfare.

EvilweaselFinance wrote:
that thing is a good change yes, there are numerous idiots who equate "random vicious penalties" with "consequences" and who don't really get that random vicious penalties are not a great way to implement consequences in a game

Interesting, so you think standing penalties should also be removed. Sorry but I disagree with you here, removing medical clones has some merit if it can be replaced with an alternative, but removing standing penalties is a step too far.
Alexis Nightwish
#64 - 2014-12-02 17:50:09 UTC
This change is better than the previous system, but I still think that simply sending a pilot a medical bill when podded (with a modal, unavoidable pop-up window upon respawn) based on the applicable SP of the ships he/she flew from the last time he/she was in a station with medical facilities would have been a better choice. You were in a supercap and then got podded? Expensive. You were in a T1 frig and then got podded? Cheap!

CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge

EVE Online's "I win!" Button

Fixing bombs, not the bombers

EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#65 - 2014-12-02 17:52:06 UTC  |  Edited by: EvilweaselFinance
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Interesting, so you think standing penalties should also be removed. Sorry but I disagree with you here, removing medical clones has some merit if it can be replaced with an alternative, but removing standing penalties is a step too far.

standings penalties, as implemented, are generally implemented poorly and should be looked at because it is an obtuse stupid mechanism where it's easy to screw yourself over long-term

that's not to say standings penalties are a bad thing generally speaking - they could be implemented well - but the idiotic notion that "it is a consequence therefore it should stay" is dumb

Alexis Nightwish wrote:
This change is better than the previous system, but I still think that simply sending a pilot a medical bill when podded (with a modal, unavoidable pop-up window upon respawn) based on the applicable SP of the ships he/she flew from the last time he/she was in a station with medical facilities would have been a better choice. You were in a supercap and then got podded? Expensive. You were in a T1 frig and then got podded? Cheap!

this exists, its called implants
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#66 - 2014-12-02 17:52:18 UTC
Barrett Fruitcake wrote:
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
CCP Terminus wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Will you refund the isk for the clones we are sitting in now?


There will be no refunds relating to the removal of the upgrade mechanic.

It is both impractical (determining when a person last bought their clone and for what price seeing as factional warfare and previous balancing has changed prices) and undesirable from our view to do so.


Isnt the current system an isk sink? What are you going to do to replace it and prevent isk inflation?



More pvp


Doesnt remove isk from the game - rather pvp just shuffles it around.

By allowing more isk to remain in the game there should be further isk inflation making everything more expensive.

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.

EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#67 - 2014-12-02 17:54:59 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:

Doesnt remove isk from the game - rather pvp just shuffles it around.

By allowing more isk to remain in the game there should be further isk inflation making everything more expensive.

this is simplistic and not correct in the way you think it is

part of the cost of items in this game is isk - your ship cost isk to make in fees, your faction modules cost isk to buy (in addition to LP) from the LP store, your implants also cost isk and each of those was an isk sink

as they blow up they are replaced and isk goes into those sinks again

i don't believe you considered any of these

what makes this complex and not just you being wrong is the minor matter of default insurance and if that generally makes pvp a net isk faucet or a net isk sink
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#68 - 2014-12-02 17:58:07 UTC
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Interesting, so you think standing penalties should also be removed. Sorry but I disagree with you here, removing medical clones has some merit if it can be replaced with an alternative, but removing standing penalties is a step too far.

standings penalties, as implemented, are generally implemented poorly and should be looked at because it is an obtuse stupid mechanism where it's easy to screw yourself over long-term

that's not to say standings penalties are a bad thing generally speaking - they could be implemented well - but the idiotic notion that "it is a consequence therefore it should stay" is dumb

Alexis Nightwish wrote:
This change is better than the previous system, but I still think that simply sending a pilot a medical bill when podded (with a modal, unavoidable pop-up window upon respawn) based on the applicable SP of the ships he/she flew from the last time he/she was in a station with medical facilities would have been a better choice. You were in a supercap and then got podded? Expensive. You were in a T1 frig and then got podded? Cheap!

this exists, its called implants

Well before throwing out supposedly "dumb" mechanics which have been a pillar of eve for over ten years, perhaps an alternative should be implemented instead of this knee jerk and equally idiotic stance of lets just throw everything out that makes eve harsh.

What you consider random and vicious, is actually quite easy to avoid, it is only random if you don't know what you are doing as in the case of newbies who soon learn.

As for standing they have already implemented a safety net so you can grind your standing back up from below -2, and if you have completely wrecked them and then want to work with an opposing faction, well tough luck, either grind them back up from level 1 agents or HTFU and stick with your current factions that you have good standings with.

There is nothing random about any of the penalties you mentioned, and all can be easily avoided.
Draahk Chimera
Supervillains
#69 - 2014-12-02 17:58:13 UTC
Well since the Devs commenting in this thread is only qouting and answering the positive feedback it is quite clear it is one of those things they will put in regardless of player input. I will not threaten to quit as I find it a childish reaction but I will definitivly have a sour taste in my mouth while patching Rhea come dec. 9.

404 - Image not found

Ryek Darkener
Bluestar Enterprises
The Craftsmen
#70 - 2014-12-02 17:59:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Ryek Darkener
...

... The Current Medical Clone System - I recognized it after I lost 2 Clones, so I wasted some skillpoints ...
... New players can be badly surprised by this system since they have so many other important things to learn. ...


... and I want to say the following: This is the reason because I love the game. As it (not so much as years before) still punishes ignorance.

If I lose a 150 Mill. Skillpoint Clone, that is MY problem. If I can't afford an adequate clone, it is, already, MY problem. Because this is the reason I'm here. I find that the current clone system is in between pampered pet and die hard. If there is a good reason to improve the clone system, go ahead. But you should take into consideration that nearly anybody who survived the first year and is still playing EVE Online has the resources to buy a new skillclone or to upgrade the old one.
I'm in doubt that this improvement will motivate veterans to become podded in cheap ships more often. Cool

Just my 5 ISK.
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#71 - 2014-12-02 18:02:29 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:

Well before throwing out supposedly "dumb" mechanics which have been a pillar of eve for over ten years, perhaps an alternative should be implemented instead of this knee jerk and equally idiotic stance of lets just throw everything out that makes eve harsh.

What you consider random and vicious, is actually quite easy to avoid, it is only random if you don't know what you are doing as in the case of newbies who soon learn.

this is the sort of stupid eve design heresy that should be called out and hits nearly every aspect

1) because a thing is a certain way it should remain that way
2) using "harsh" or "sandbox" in a talismanic way without actually understanding what it means and how it interacts with design
3) using "well you can learn the stupid unfun obtruse mechanism that makes it tolerable"
Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#72 - 2014-12-02 18:04:21 UTC
Vartan Sarkisian wrote:
CCP Terminus wrote:
Valterra Craven wrote:
You know what's funny? I've made this exact same argument to Greyscale et al about skillpoints:

Quote:
Skill point acquisition is very much tied to your subscription and the real money you spent on the game, so taking some of their skill points away can feel like wasted money to the player.


You know whats worse? When that logical argument is ignored by the devs every time they change a skill. One of the biggest changes I can remember is the change to the ME % in industry recently. Players complained and complained about losing something valuable and replacing it with something worthless. And you know what? You guys didn't have a single GOOD argument for why you shouldn't have refunded everyone's SP.

In my opinion every time a skill is changed regardless of how trivial or major, you should refund the SP of that skill. Period. No questions asked. SP is simply too intertwined with the subscription costs to treat changes to them so nonchalantly.



Your point did not go undebated in the office.


Debated and yet ultimately ignored it would seem.


If it was debated then, by definition, it was not ignored.

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.

Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#73 - 2014-12-02 18:05:01 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:

Well before throwing out supposedly "dumb" mechanics which have been a pillar of eve for over ten years, perhaps an alternative should be implemented instead of this knee jerk and equally idiotic stance of lets just throw everything out that makes eve harsh.

What you consider random and vicious, is actually quite easy to avoid, it is only random if you don't know what you are doing as in the case of newbies who soon learn.

As for standing they have already implemented a safety net so you can grind your standing back up from below -2, and if you have completely wrecked them and then want to work with an opposing faction, well tough luck, either grind them back up from level 1 agents or HTFU and stick with your current factions that you have good standings with.

There is nothing random about any of the penalties you mentioned, and all can be easily avoided.

The fact that it is easy to avoid is precisely why it is being removed — there is no nuance to clone grades, and the penalty is so severe that there is no choice to comply. It adds no nuance and requires no skill to mitigate, nor any sort of long term planning — it's just this constant burden that you can never forget about, ever.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#74 - 2014-12-02 18:09:29 UTC
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:

Well before throwing out supposedly "dumb" mechanics which have been a pillar of eve for over ten years, perhaps an alternative should be implemented instead of this knee jerk and equally idiotic stance of lets just throw everything out that makes eve harsh.

What you consider random and vicious, is actually quite easy to avoid, it is only random if you don't know what you are doing as in the case of newbies who soon learn.

this is the sort of stupid eve design heresy that should be called out and hits nearly every aspect

1) because a thing is a certain way it should remain that way
2) using "harsh" or "sandbox" in a talismanic way without actually understanding what it means and how it interacts with design
3) using "well you can learn the stupid unfun obtruse mechanism that makes it tolerable"

What you miss, is I didn't say the mechanics cannot be improved upon. I'm in favour of replacing the medical clone mechanic with something better as at the moment it is pretty terrible. Improving mechanics does not mean you need to completely throw them out though as the posters had been suggesting in the quotes I linked.

So standing penalites are harsh, answer = lets scrap standings.
Medical clone mechanic doesn't offer interesting choices = lets scrap medical clones.
I don't like losing implants when podded = lets remove attributes so everyone is on a level playing field.

That mentality is completely wrong for the game which is what I stated, and there are already plenty of other games for players who think like this.
Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#75 - 2014-12-02 18:11:02 UTC
Querns wrote:

The fact that it is easy to avoid is precisely why it is being removed — there is no nuance to clone grades, and the penalty is so severe that there is no choice to comply. It adds no nuance and requires no skill to mitigate, nor any sort of long term planning — it's just this constant burden that you can never forget about, ever.


This.

There was absolutely no net benefit for upgrading your clone. You did so to avoid a net penalty, and there was no choice or decision making involved. You either paid the fee and kept your skill points, or you didn't, and you suffered.

In that way, it was kind of like an old school protection racket. Pay up, or lose them.

"Nice skill points. Be a shame if something bad happened to them."

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.

Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#76 - 2014-12-02 18:11:52 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:

Well before throwing out supposedly "dumb" mechanics which have been a pillar of eve for over ten years, perhaps an alternative should be implemented instead of this knee jerk and equally idiotic stance of lets just throw everything out that makes eve harsh.

What you consider random and vicious, is actually quite easy to avoid, it is only random if you don't know what you are doing as in the case of newbies who soon learn.

this is the sort of stupid eve design heresy that should be called out and hits nearly every aspect

1) because a thing is a certain way it should remain that way
2) using "harsh" or "sandbox" in a talismanic way without actually understanding what it means and how it interacts with design
3) using "well you can learn the stupid unfun obtruse mechanism that makes it tolerable"

What you miss, is I didn't say the mechanics cannot be improved upon. I'm in favour of replacing the medical clone mechanic with something better as at the moment it is pretty terrible. Improving mechanics does not mean you need to completely throw them out though as the posters had been suggesting in the quotes I linked.

So standing penalites are harsh, answer = lets scrap standings.
Medical clone mechanic doesn't offer interesting choices = lets scrap medical clones.
I don't like losing implants when podded = lets remove attributes so everyone is on a level playing field.

That mentality is completely wrong for the game which is what I stated, and there are already plenty of other games for players who think like this.

The problem with this is that you're conflating completely unrelated things. You're imagining a slippery slope that simply does not exist.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

King Fu Hostile
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#77 - 2014-12-02 18:16:40 UTC
Querns wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:

Well before throwing out supposedly "dumb" mechanics which have been a pillar of eve for over ten years, perhaps an alternative should be implemented instead of this knee jerk and equally idiotic stance of lets just throw everything out that makes eve harsh.

What you consider random and vicious, is actually quite easy to avoid, it is only random if you don't know what you are doing as in the case of newbies who soon learn.

As for standing they have already implemented a safety net so you can grind your standing back up from below -2, and if you have completely wrecked them and then want to work with an opposing faction, well tough luck, either grind them back up from level 1 agents or HTFU and stick with your current factions that you have good standings with.

There is nothing random about any of the penalties you mentioned, and all can be easily avoided.

The fact that it is easy to avoid is precisely why it is being removed — there is no nuance to clone grades, and the penalty is so severe that there is no choice to comply. It adds no nuance and requires no skill to mitigate, nor any sort of long term planning — it's just this constant burden that you can never forget about, ever.


No, you are not making a case for removing it, only listing reasons why it could be improved.



Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#78 - 2014-12-02 18:16:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jean Luc Lemmont
Querns wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:


So standing penalites are harsh, answer = lets scrap standings.
Medical clone mechanic doesn't offer interesting choices = lets scrap medical clones.
I don't like losing implants when podded = lets remove attributes so everyone is on a level playing field.

The problem with this is that you're conflating completely unrelated things. You're imagining a slippery slope that simply does not exist.


To expand on what Querms is saying:

Unlike medical clone purchases, there are meaningful choices to be made with both standings and implants. In the one case, you can make large areas of the map unaccessible, or get worse market rates on buy and sell orders. In the second case, the correct implants can make a massive difference in your performance in the game, and so choosing the correct ones (since some are conflicting choices in a single clone) becomes a decision making process with meaningful tradeoffs (do I get more direct DPS, or a higher rate of fire. If I get the higher rate of fire, do I need more capacitor to compensate...).

Upgrading your medical clone had none of these. There was no decision - you simply did it because the alternative was too unpalatable to accept.

King Fu Hostile wrote:


No, you are not making a case for removing it, only listing reasons why it could be improved.



The point being that, in this case, there is no reason to wait for the new mechanic before removing the old one becuse the old one has no net benefit to anyone.

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.

Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#79 - 2014-12-02 18:17:00 UTC
Querns wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:

Well before throwing out supposedly "dumb" mechanics which have been a pillar of eve for over ten years, perhaps an alternative should be implemented instead of this knee jerk and equally idiotic stance of lets just throw everything out that makes eve harsh.

What you consider random and vicious, is actually quite easy to avoid, it is only random if you don't know what you are doing as in the case of newbies who soon learn.

this is the sort of stupid eve design heresy that should be called out and hits nearly every aspect

1) because a thing is a certain way it should remain that way
2) using "harsh" or "sandbox" in a talismanic way without actually understanding what it means and how it interacts with design
3) using "well you can learn the stupid unfun obtruse mechanism that makes it tolerable"

What you miss, is I didn't say the mechanics cannot be improved upon. I'm in favour of replacing the medical clone mechanic with something better as at the moment it is pretty terrible. Improving mechanics does not mean you need to completely throw them out though as the posters had been suggesting in the quotes I linked.

So standing penalites are harsh, answer = lets scrap standings.
Medical clone mechanic doesn't offer interesting choices = lets scrap medical clones.
I don't like losing implants when podded = lets remove attributes so everyone is on a level playing field.

That mentality is completely wrong for the game which is what I stated, and there are already plenty of other games for players who think like this.

The problem with this is that you're conflating completely unrelated things. You're imagining a slippery slope that simply does not exist.

Lol, well I linked the posts which were calling for these things to be scrapped in the thread earlier, so not sure how much more factual you want.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#80 - 2014-12-02 18:18:06 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Lol, well I linked the posts which were calling for these things to be scrapped in the thread earlier, so not sure how much more factual you want.

You're not the only one making this mistake, is what I am saying.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.