These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

A thought about Boosters:
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#261 - 2015-07-31 21:27:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Legatus1982
Correct, that would not be pay-to-win, it'd be recruit to win. And, I can't imagine your fleet would always want you in that role over just bringing another ship or actually using your command ship on the actual grid.

I will ask you again: are you currently using money to provide an in-game direct combat bonus to youreslf? y/n
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#262 - 2015-07-31 21:30:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
There is no command ship that would be useful on field in a skirmish nano fleet (apart from claymore boosted drake fleet, but dont see many of them anymore).

Why do you care if its 2 guys behind a screen or just 1 with 2 screens?

Keep your argument flailing, its amusing.

Smells like butthurt though.
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#263 - 2015-07-31 21:37:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Legatus1982
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
There is no command ship that would be useful on field in a skirmish nano fleet.

Why do you care if its 2 guys behind a screen or just 1 with 2 screens?

Keep your argument flailing, its amusing.


There is a pretty big difference between 1 guy with 2 screens and two guys with 1 screen each. Much of which comes from the fact that there are a limited supply of bodies in the game.

You're being childish for no reason. You know as well as everyone here exactly what is going on and you simply don't want to admit that you are abusing a pay to win mechanic because it undermines your credibility as a player, especially as a "solo" player, because right now you can attack true solo players who are only running a single account with what is actually 2 accounts appearing to be one.

To begin with, removing links from the game doesn't provide an advantage to either large or small fleets; both size fleets can currently employ them. The key difference is that you won't have an advantage over fleets who don't have their own links alt. But at the end of the day it's "even" for everyone either way, the difference is you don't have to pay extra money for one way and you do have to pay extra money for the other way.

So now I have to wonder what you have at stake. What do you stand to lose if links are removed? Why do you oppose the idea? Everyone can use it currently, so fleet size is not even the least bit a valid argument. All that would happen is that yourself in addition to many others could close one of your other accounts because you don't need it anymore.

Are you opposed to paying less money to CCP? I know CCP is, but I'm not sure why you would be. Your position sounds very fake.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#264 - 2015-07-31 21:39:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Your previous posts were all just making a bad argument about alts-being-bad disguised as a horrible and inept anti pay-to-win argument.

I really cannot decipher any argument in this post that is pro or anti anything so i will leave it alone.
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#265 - 2015-07-31 21:40:58 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
You previous posts were all just making a bad argument about alts-being-bad disguised as an anti pay-to-win argument.

I really cannot decipher any argument in this post that is pro or anti anything so i will leave it alone.


Anti p2w is the argument you're looking for friend.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#266 - 2015-07-31 21:43:38 UTC
Then make it, instead of an anti alt-to-win argument lol.
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#267 - 2015-07-31 21:45:11 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Then make it, instead of an anti alt-to-win argument lol.


In the case of links it's the same argument. You can stop dancing around the issue.

Are you paying money for an in-game combat bonus to yourself? y/n
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#268 - 2015-07-31 21:48:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Im not paying for an advantage that i dont need another account for. That would be pay-to-win.

You argument is strictly against alts, and is not the strongest argument against boosters since alts are ubiquitous in eve.

You seem focused on the effects of boosts on solo, i assure you that for most boost users, giving boosts weapon timers and putting them on mails deter many users and put their boosts at much greater risk.
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#269 - 2015-07-31 21:52:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Legatus1982
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Im not paying for an advantage that i dont need another account for. That would be pay-to-win.

You argument is strictly against alts, and is not the strongest argument against boosters since alts are ubiquitous in eve.

You seem focused on the effects of boosts on solo, i assure you that for most boost users, giving boosts weapon timers and putting them on mails would deter many users.


My argument is not specifically against alts at all. It's specifically about alts in the usage of links, because this is the #1 pay to win offender in eve online. Removing links fixes this issue. Removing alts would also fix this issue, but that's nearly impossible to do in a realistic sense. You can only use solutions that make sense from a game-programming perspective.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#270 - 2015-07-31 21:54:44 UTC
You still dont understand, having an alt do anything in eve is not pay to win.

You must make a legitimate argument against the mechanic itself.

Making an argument about how many people are controlling how many clients is not valid in the slightest (not counting ISBOXING).
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#271 - 2015-07-31 22:00:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Legatus1982
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
You still dont understand, having an alt do anything in eve is not pay to win.

You must make a legitimate argument against the mechanic itself.

Making an argument about how many people are controlling how many clients is not valid in the slightest (not counting ISBOXING).


I just did and I have throughout this thread. Links is the single easiest way for a user to pay CCP money to provide him/her self with an in-game combat bonus. Alts cannot be controlled, links can. I don't know how simple I need to make it for you. Would you like me to draw it for you with crayon on a napkin?
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#272 - 2015-07-31 22:02:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
But i can fix your objection just by claiming that my booster and me are two different people then it doesnt apply.

That is why this has to be the worst argument since 'FW is too big an isk faucet'. Also, both are based on a bold faced ignorance of the terminology.
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#273 - 2015-07-31 22:07:26 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
But i can fix your objection just by claiming that my booster and me are two different people then it doesnt apply.

That is why this has to be the worst argument since 'FW is too big an isk faucet'. Also, both are based on a bold faced ignorance of the terminology.


No, you can't. You can't fabricate a magic person out of thin air. Either the player exists or the player doesn't exist. This is an intentionally ignorant argument because you've run out of ideas. Why would you pay for a second account if you could already very easily just have a friend use a links ship? This is the worst attempt I've seen from you on this thread.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#274 - 2015-07-31 23:01:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
So you are asking for a change of habit. People should only log one toon on at a time and only boost for other people.

Well, that is a fantastic solution to all the problems in eve lol. Thanks for the input.

You are a serious intellectual and have really helped us plebeians out.
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#275 - 2015-07-31 23:13:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Legatus1982
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
So you are asking for a change of habit. People should only log one toon on at a time and only boost for other people.

Well, that is a fantastic solution to all the problems in eve lol. Thanks for the input.

You are a serious intellectual and have really helped us plebeians out.


Is this even an argument? Are you even trying anymore?

I've said a hundred times in this thread what I'm looking for is to fix the biggest p2w offender by removing links. Either you need a finger painting diagram to understand, or you'll never get it, because I've said the same thing 100 times already, and everyone understands but you.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#276 - 2015-07-31 23:17:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
We are all so stupid, i have never heard anyone say boosts are pay-to-win. Lots of newbs call them lame but no one has the insight to label them something they are not.

You are so intelligent, you should abandon us newbs to our fate and go play something more stimulating, like WoW.
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#277 - 2015-07-31 23:34:22 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
We are all so stupid, i have never heard anyone say boosts are pay-to-win. Lots of newbs call them lame but no one has the insight to label them something they are not.

You are so intelligent, you should abandon us newbs to our fate and go play something more stimulating, like WoW.


You are paying money for a direct in-game combat bonus to yourself y/n?
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#278 - 2015-07-31 23:50:23 UTC
no. Im paying money for a second account who performs a role.

If i was buying a golden ammo or golden tank that was just arbitrarily better then that would be pay to win.

Also, i dont pay any money to play eve.
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#279 - 2015-08-01 00:08:52 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
no. Im paying money for a second account who performs a role.

If i was buying a golden ammo or golden tank that was just arbitrarily better then that would be pay to win.

Also, i dont pay any money to play eve.


Somebody is paying for it whether it's you or not. And you are paying for significant combat bonuses which are all arbitrarily better.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#280 - 2015-08-01 00:19:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Paying for an alt to sit and watch a hostile titan is also giving an arbitrary bonus to fleet survivability. Perhaps far superior to any booster. Is that pay-to-win also?

Again, your argument is purely against alts in general. All alts give an advantage otherwise people wouldnt use them. It has nothing to do with boosters. Please keep your anti-booster arguments to the mechanics themselves rather than terms you are misapplying in the context of eve where alts are accepted.

That way you can be constructive instead of just complaining about how everyone that plays eve, plays eve.

Lets clarify once more, for futilities sake. For all intents and purposes,1 person running 2 accounts is exactly the same as 2 people running 1 account each. but the way you have defined 'pay-to-win' applies to one scenario, but not the other.

Therefor i suggest that there is a lack of consistency in your argument. You clearly lack the aptitude to recognise that and would be much happier playing WoW.

There is an argument to be had about if boosters are fair at solo, or if solo should be a consideration when balancing eve at all. But wading in with a misapplied pay-to-win argument makes you look stupid.