Player Features and Ideas Discussion

No, Rain, I don't find your idea to be silly because it's 'out-of-the-box.' Nor do I care which alliance you come from.

I just do not see the idea as having any benefit to the game. At all.

The main 'reason' you described for this change is pretty much nullified, because people can change their avatars.
You had said:


But that will also fall short, because if you go to modify your avatar, it will display the parameters for your last portrait by default.
If people are lazy, which is generally how you make mistakes, then their portrait will look the same, by default.


Now, as I've said, if the items suddenly become destructible (and permanent), how many people do you think would be happy to remain using them? Painted ships provide the answer to that. (Hint: the answer is 'Not many').
It's quite simple, it is something that you can observe by just playing the game.



NES items are not a 'rarity' as you described in the OP, as they are brought with real money. Shiny modules are rare because loot tables.

NES items = set amount of Aurum.
Aurum = set price in RL economy.
I buy apparel and NES items with RL money, because it's damn convenient. I assume a lot of other people would do too.
And this is probably why they aren't on the market so much, because most people who use Aurum to buy NES items likely just buy the clothes directly, without using the market.

Now, if there becomes a risk to losing apparel, then there will be less people will using them overall.
If more are destroyed (and, going by your assumption that they will replace them every time) then more of the same people will want them.
In the end, hypothetical demand will be the same. No pressure on PLEX prices, no expansion of market.

Assuming that people are going to be buying from the market, Aurum prices fluctuate with PLEX, which means that Apparel prices are tied to PLEX, and not to their destruction.

If more are destroyed (and (ignoring the previous point for a moment) making the BIG assumption that they will be replaced, and having a higher overall demand) then yes, the market would increase for them. But suddenly, there would be opportunities to be made in that market, and the supply will increase.
Because they are not a rarity. If an NES item has been put in the game, it was brought with real money, and was not farmed from NPCs.

The end price of the NES item in ISK is/still would be roughly be equivalent to the ISK/Aurum value of PLEX.





This isn't particularly a new idea, either. The only new part you've added is the multiple portraits for different clones.

Here's a list of threads on the topic of destructible vanity items already:

If we pod someone, do they lose their aurum clothing?
Invincible MT-pimp gear? o_0
Destructable Clothing
Why Are Vanity Items Non-Destructible?
Does getting podded make one lose their monicle?
Question on Nex clothing.....
Clothing and Pod Kill

And funnily enough, clothes not travelling with your clone was already in the game, though through error.

This post provides you with a good reason as to why your clothes never seem to get destroyed.

In summary.


Apart from all of that,

It is my firm belief that a good use of development time is measured, not in how often something generated in the game, but by how often it is utilised as a feature.
More people using it means a success. That is the measure of success for developing a feature. People using it. Not how often they buy it.
S.K.I.N's don't affect the game.

Which is why I think this is a joke, because this feature would be such a waste of time to implement.
To what benefit?

Think bigger than just implants with jumpclones, because you're talking about a very specific group of people who would care to replace these items.
If CCP had sense, then things that don't affect the game shouldn't need to be made destructible.
Because they don't affect the game.

There is no balance to be made.
There is no problem to be fixed.

It just looks like another inconvenience.
One which can be totally evaded, and also one which does not actually make the core game better.


I respect that you respect my opinion, Rain, but simply, for above reasons, I think it's a bad idea and adds nothing to the game.



It's change for the sake of change.

There is legitimate change to be made, changes to mechanics that affect all players. The way that it should be done.



edit (nothing edited): @reply:
I'm not particularly concerned whether you reply or not.
Editing it? Strange, but ok. Do whatever you want.

Sure, there are probably quite a lot of moot points. I'm not cared, as not every point is 'wrong.'

If you choose to address only those points that are wrong... *shrugs* do what you will.