These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Skill Points remapping/buying™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#521 - 2015-09-20 07:09:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Mike Voidstar
And what happens to the game when the 'norm' is a character with all combat relevant skills at 5? You will quickly find character builds and their prices, everyone who wants to participate in any fleet setup will be required to have the right build, and the game dissolves into pay to participate.

Each new expansion will correct balance problems uncovered in the last, a new profile will become the 'best' and you will have to purchase the new skill set or be frozen out, again. Over and over unless you buy the ultimate character, a guy with all skills at 5.

This game is not based on levels, it's based on choices. Skillpoints are the one immutable point of decision in the game, the *only* thing with real value. Allowing us to simply throw a $20 at ccp and instapoof a months sp on the character immediately devalues the choices we make now to nothing. All the time I have put in organically growing my character to my evolving needs in game can be simply purchased outright for a little over $1600, except dedicated exactly to a hyper efficient build dedicated to killing everyone just like me who has worn many hats over those years of play. A couple plex after that they have enough money to buy the perfect ship to go with the perfect build, and that will become the norm, with anything less being 'useless'. That's just how videogame culture works.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#522 - 2015-09-20 07:10:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Mike Voidstar
double post.
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#523 - 2015-09-20 07:47:06 UTC
Trynity Apol wrote:
1m sp is not that much even 2 m sp i think that nobody would be angry about this change
The plethora of very angry replies in this very thread should be proof enough that's not true.

And for your point of assigning skill points - you don't want to hand a 20 minute old character 2M unallocated SP. They are going to screw themselves up badly, and usually not realize it for several weeks.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#524 - 2015-09-20 13:05:36 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Ok, so we set the price at around 1,332,000 SP/PLEX or about a cost of 1 SP/750 ISK. Great. And why would CCP do this when I can go to the character bazaar and get a much, much better deal in terms of SP/ISK?

Technically, because it's not $500, which a lot of the gaming demographic has no place for, nor plausibility for saving that much.

Teckos Pech wrote:
It is something that is pretty much impossible to "get right".

This is completely fabricated.

Mike Voidstar wrote:
And what happens to the game when the 'norm' is a character with all combat relevant skills at 5? You will quickly find character builds and their prices, everyone who wants to participate in any fleet setup will be required to have the right build, and the game dissolves into pay to participate.

Each new expansion will correct balance problems uncovered in the last, a new profile will become the 'best' and you will have to purchase the new skill set or be frozen out, again. Over and over unless you buy the ultimate character, a guy with all skills at 5.

This game is not based on levels, it's based on choices. Skillpoints are the one immutable point of decision in the game, the *only* thing with real value. Allowing us to simply throw a $20 at ccp and instapoof a months sp on the character immediately devalues the choices we make now to nothing. All the time I have put in organically growing my character to my evolving needs in game can be simply purchased outright for a little over $1600, except dedicated exactly to a hyper efficient build dedicated to killing everyone just like me who has worn many hats over those years of play. A couple plex after that they have enough money to buy the perfect ship to go with the perfect build, and that will become the norm, with anything less being 'useless'. That's just how videogame culture works.

If SP is so problematic, then it's already an issue. On value, there are very valid points about how little value is perceived in a sub game that provides minimal amounts of its content (the trend of criticism is about paying a sub for the whole game including cosmetics), but also the following:

Aerasia wrote:
That's like saying there's an opportunity cost between having breakfast, or taking a **** in the morning.

I'm going to do both - I just pick which order.

EVE skills are largely the same. There are a few ways to completely ignore some mechanics, yes. I can choose to go full combat and put nothing into trading (can't entirely do that the other way around, as you start with some combat skills). But take trading. Once you have Industrial I, Trading I and Contracting I, that's largely going to be what you need mechanically to be a market trader. You certainly won't be a titan of industry or anything, but from there on out all the skills are "What I can do now, only more so."

So that's not really an 'opportunity cost', considering your options are to become better at what you've chosen to do... or become better at what you've chosen to do in a different order.

..Follow that thread if you like, but I'm not going to argue the existence of infinitesimal opportunity cost in choosing between "Adv. Industry I" vs. "Mass Production II" for the next spot in my skill queue.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#525 - 2015-09-20 15:23:22 UTC
SP are problematic because it's the only point of value in the game. More ISK than can be easily spent can be yours for the cash to buy a plex and put it on the market. The price of everything else is fairly stable. Unless you just purchased a cap pilot from the character bazaar, or enjoy detonating mauraders for fun, you are set for quite some time.

Similarly, faction/officer/deadspace loot is expensive, but not really valuable. If it's in space it can be turned to pixel dust without warning. Ships, Implants, Modules.... All of it is bought with casual to obtain ISK, and all of it without real value because of it.

The only thing of real value here is time. You can't blow it up, cheat it, scam it, or collect and spend it all at once on a whim. Devalue that, and you collapse the game as a whole.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#526 - 2015-09-20 15:27:48 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
The only thing of real value here is time. You can't blow it up, cheat it, scam it, or collect and spend it all at once on a whim. Devalue that, and you collapse the game as a whole.

That's the whole argument for how SP effects subscriptions / motivation.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#527 - 2015-09-20 15:50:27 UTC
Yes. You can shear a sheep many times, but you can only slaughter it once.

Keeping the game going generates New players and continuing long term cash.

On an individual basis it does not matter if they get their $15 once a month for 9 years, or $1600 in one payment. However, if they want my money, your money, Teckos's money, etc... They have to keep it going and keep it interesting to new generations of players.

If I had spent a few hundred dollars 9 years ago my son might never have even heard of the game. Now he plays it with me. Same for many of my friends, though not many play anymore.

You need value to get investment. Investment is where the real profits are. Take away the value in the game and you will lose the value of the game itself.
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#528 - 2015-09-20 18:21:43 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
The only thing of real value here is time. You can't blow it up, cheat it, scam it, or collect and spend it all at once on a whim. Devalue that, and you collapse the game as a whole.

Are you actually trying to argue that the main thing keeping people playing EVE is not wanting to lose the investment they've made over months/years of skill grinding?
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#529 - 2015-09-20 18:56:47 UTC
Not at all.

I am saying that it's what provides the basic value in the idea that choices matter. People play these kinds of game to progress with a character. Eve lacks many of the traditional growth measurements. We don't have character levels, we don't have end game zones or much in the way of uber loot.

If character advancement comes from instantly plopping down a bit of cash, then the one measure of true value loses all meaning. Rather than taking pride in the achievement of putting your marauder in space the first time it becomes the expected norm of anyone fielding a battleship.

Sure, simple time spent isn't a high impact measure of effort, but in the context of MMOs it is the only one really worth mentioning. Especially in EVE which prides itself on pure dickbaggery and douchenozzling. Either because of, or in spite of, the challenges and horrors of the game you are still here having your fun when many others fell to grief or ennui.

In that respect the calls for a way to buy SP are really calls to be able to buy the achievements of others without putting the time in to earn them. In context of other games it's like buying levels and exotic gear rolled into one heinous act of destructive catering.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#530 - 2015-09-20 19:56:28 UTC
Aerasia wrote:
Trynity Apol wrote:
1m sp is not that much even 2 m sp i think that nobody would be angry about this change
The plethora of very angry replies in this very thread should be proof enough that's not true.

And for your point of assigning skill points - you don't want to hand a 20 minute old character 2M unallocated SP. They are going to screw themselves up badly, and usually not realize it for several weeks.


Look, go ahead and sell 1 million SP/PLEX. IDGAF. But anyone would be a complete blithering moron to use it over the character bazaar. 1 million SP/PLEX translates into about 1,200 ISK/SP. In the character bazaar you almost never, ever see a price like that. Not even close. You might, once in a very, very great while, see some characters go for 500 ISK/SP, but that is rare. Typically the price is around 357 ISK/SP. That translates into about 3.431 million SP/PLEX.

Now one might be tempted to set the SP/PLEX price at that level...but here is the thing about markets...the price is rarely a constant. A change in supply or demand or both can cause the price to go up, down, or remain the same. And we have two markets here, not one. For example, what if after this change the price of PLEX goes up to 1.5 billion? Now the price of SP in terms of ISK is back up over 500 ISK/SP. Trying to predict these kinds of things is very, very hard (hint, if it were easy we'd all be billionaires in real life).

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#531 - 2015-09-20 20:22:57 UTC
Dror wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Ok, so we set the price at around 1,332,000 SP/PLEX or about a cost of 1 SP/750 ISK. Great. And why would CCP do this when I can go to the character bazaar and get a much, much better deal in terms of SP/ISK?

Technically, because it's not $500, which a lot of the gaming demographic has no place for, nor plausibility for saving that much.

Teckos Pech wrote:
It is something that is pretty much impossible to "get right".

This is completely fabricated.


What? What does $500 have to do with anything I wrote?

And no, predicting future prices with considerable accuracy is not easy. And I'm not talking about a prediction "the price will be higher, or above X", but predicting the price to ensure that supply and demand are roughly in alignment.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#532 - 2015-09-20 20:37:17 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Not at all.
Really? Because you spend the rest of your post explaining that I was right.

Arguing that the total time spent subscribed is a character's measure of worth, and removing that link would "collapse the game" is wrong, and if you don't want to argue that anymore I'm happy to have changed your mind. But saying "I'm not saying the things I'm saying both before and after this statement" is silly.

Mike Voidstar wrote:
be able to buy the achievements of others
Like this. What achievements? The biggest hurdle to SP in EVE is not letting your sub lapse when you get a new credit card.

If somebody says "I've got X many SP", that's amount is directly related to time subbed, which is in turn convertible to money given to CCP. Whether the cash is spent on a 2 year session of skill-queue online, going to the character bazzar and buy a prebuilt character, or convincing CCP to buy SP directly the end result is exactly the same. There's no achievement, no gold star. You get your SP and go play having paid the same amount of cash regardless.

The only thing we risk 'collapsing' is the ego of people who consider having spent a lot of money on EVE subscriptions to be a moral virtue.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#533 - 2015-09-20 20:44:06 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
And what happens to the game when the 'norm' is a character with all combat relevant skills at 5? You will quickly find character builds and their prices, everyone who wants to participate in any fleet setup will be required to have the right build, and the game dissolves into pay to participate.


I made a similar point in another thread on SP. That a potential perverse effect of allowing for the purchase of SP is that it raises the bar for participating and that for players not buying SP it might be even longer till they could get into some aspects of the game. I've been on both sides of the Goon/"BoB" war and I can tell you one side is much more receptive to new players and the other is not nearly as receptive.

One of the potential pit falls when one monkey's around with markets is creating perverse incentives.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#534 - 2015-09-20 21:12:34 UTC
Aerasia wrote:


If somebody says "I've got X many SP", that's amount is directly related to time subbed, which is in turn convertible to money given to CCP. Whether the cash is spent on a 2 year session of skill-queue online, going to the character bazzar and buy a prebuilt character, or convincing CCP to buy SP directly the end result is exactly the same. There's no achievement, no gold star. You get your SP and go play having paid the same amount of cash regardless.


While the end result might be the same, there is definitely different implications in how the various programs work.

As I have pointed out. What is the upper limit on CCP in terms of SP? There is none. CCP can create SP in any amount they want. About the only upper limit is max SP*number of characters. Even then they can create more skills. In effect, there is no upper limit from a supply side. In fact, there is no supply function at all.*

The only limiting factor is demand. And since CCP sets the price it could end up having an unbalancing effect on the game by leading to a sudden injection of SP into the game, most likely from older/more established players if the price is related to PLEX.

As I have noted, there are strong similarities between buying SP directly from CCP and the private issuance of fiat money. Would you want money issued by a company that has complete control over the quantity of that money? I wouldn't. Because there is nothing stopping them from hyper-inflating that currency if the profits from doing so are large enough.

In other words, if CCP decided to start selling SP directly, there would be an incentive for CCP to push as many SP into the game as possible. The cost to CCP is minimal, if not zero, thus every sale would be pure profits. With an unlimited upper bound on the number of SP that could be pushed into the game, the potential profit is theoretically unbounded as well. If CCPs revenues from subscriptions start to fall, then the incentive to use the SP sales to counter that effect would provide an increasing incentive to basically "inflate" SP.

The character bazaar on the other hand allows for the buying and selling of SP via characters but at the same time CCP has largely taken a very minimal role in that market. This in effect, allows for a stable player driven market without the possible perverse incentives.

There is a considerable literature on this in economics, google the term time inconsistency.

Quote:
Monetary policy makers suffer from dynamic inconsistency with inflation expectations, as politicians are best off promising lower inflation in the future. But once tomorrow comes lowering inflation may have negative effects, such as increasing unemployment, so they do not make much effort to lower it. This is why independent central banks are believed to be advantageous for a country. Indeed, "a central bank with a high degree of discretion in conducting monetary policy would find itself under constant political pressure to boost the economy and reduce unemployment, but since the economy cannot exceed its potential GDP or its natural rate of unemployment over time, this policy would instead only lead to higher inflation in the long run".[2] The first paper on this subject was published by Finn E. Kydland and Edward C. Prescott in the Journal of Political Economy in 1977, which eventually led to their winning the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2004


The basic idea is that sometimes, limiting your ability to do something, to purposefully "tie your hands", can have a desirable outcome where if your "hands were free" you could not achieve that outcome.

*Monopolists do not have a supply function. Monopolists pick a price/quantity pair to maximize profits at a given point in time. That is not a supply function.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#535 - 2015-09-20 21:30:21 UTC
Aerasia wrote:
If somebody says "I've got X many SP", that's amount is directly related to time subbed, which is in turn convertible to money given to CCP. Whether the cash is spent on a 2 year session of skill-queue online, going to the character bazzar and buy a prebuilt character, or convincing CCP to buy SP directly the end result is exactly the same. There's no achievement, no gold star. You get your SP and go play having paid the same amount of cash regardless.

The only thing we risk 'collapsing' is the ego of people who consider having spent a lot of money on EVE subscriptions to be a moral virtue.

As well, the idea that "these kinds of games" are played for progression with a character is of little evidence. There's already a character bazaar; and roleplay probably favors the playing part over progression that the character has no control over. If just discussing motivation, it's the less valuable extrinsic reward (something for subbing) vs the intrinsic reward of , for example, gaining that something intuitively and competently (a sense of purpose, choice, competence, and progress).

On those (copy-pasted):

  • Sense of meaningfulness. This reward involves the meaningfulness or importance of the purpose you are trying to fulfill. You feel that you have an opportunity to accomplish something of real value—something that matters in the larger scheme of things. You feel that you are on a path that is worth your time and energy, giving you a strong sense of purpose or direction.

  • Sense of choice. You feel free to choose how to accomplish your work—to use your best judgment to select those work activities that make the most sense to you and to perform them in ways that seem appropriate. You feel ownership of your work, believe in the approach you are taking, and feel responsible for making it work.

  • Sense of competence. You feel that you are handling your work activities well—that your performance of these activities meets or exceeds your personal standards, and that you are doing good, high-quality work. You feel a sense of satisfaction, pride, or even artistry in how well you handle these activities.

  • Sense of progress. You are encouraged that your efforts are really accomplishing something. You feel that your work is on track and moving in the right direction. You see convincing signs that things are working out, giving you confidence in the choices you have made and confidence in the future.

    • If these are established by neither SP nor its purchase, then the argument is very little about if SP purchases could effect the game.

    "SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
    Aerasia
    Republic University
    Minmatar Republic
    #536 - 2015-09-20 22:34:13 UTC
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    In other words, if CCP decided to start selling SP directly, there would be an incentive for CCP to push as many SP into the game as possible. The cost to CCP is minimal, if not zero, thus every sale would be pure profits. With an unlimited upper bound on the number of SP that could be pushed into the game, the potential profit is theoretically unbounded as well. If CCPs revenues from subscriptions start to fall, then the incentive to use the SP sales to counter that effect would provide an increasing incentive to basically "inflate" SP.
    And I can't completely argue against this point. I doubt CCP has gone along with the idea that multiple accounts are basically SOP for over a decade because they think having to remember 15 passwords is core gameplay.

    Of course, I also don't *have* to argue that point too much because while I think Mike's argument that allowing purchasable SP will collapse the game is silly, my own preference is to remove SP entirely - neatly sidestepping the possible black, capitalist heart of CCP.
    Mike Voidstar
    Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
    #537 - 2015-09-20 23:51:20 UTC
    Aerasia wrote:
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    In other words, if CCP decided to start selling SP directly, there would be an incentive for CCP to push as many SP into the game as possible. The cost to CCP is minimal, if not zero, thus every sale would be pure profits. With an unlimited upper bound on the number of SP that could be pushed into the game, the potential profit is theoretically unbounded as well. If CCPs revenues from subscriptions start to fall, then the incentive to use the SP sales to counter that effect would provide an increasing incentive to basically "inflate" SP.
    And I can't completely argue against this point. I doubt CCP has gone along with the idea that multiple accounts are basically SOP for over a decade because they think having to remember 15 passwords is core gameplay.

    Of course, I also don't *have* to argue that point too much because while I think Mike's argument that allowing purchasable SP will collapse the game is silly, my own preference is to remove SP entirely - neatly sidestepping the possible black, capitalist heart of CCP.


    And what measure of progress and accomplishment will you replace it with?

    Because the game you are describing is a variant of Battlefield--- Everything all at once with no limits.
    Aerasia
    Republic University
    Minmatar Republic
    #538 - 2015-09-21 00:23:33 UTC
    Mike Voidstar wrote:
    And what measure of progress and accomplishment will you replace it with?
    Lemme see if I can think of something...


    Blue donuts.
    Tritanium empires.
    Enforcing the CODE.
    ISK efficient killboards.
    Popular video series.
    Evicting newbie alliances.
    Domination over Red/Blue.
    Venture capitalism.
    Having an anomaly named after you.
    Exploding a PLEX tanked Interceptor.
    Being able to afford a blinged out ship.
    Delivering Torpedos.
    Provi Safaris.
    Making friends.
    Completing 100 space trucking contracts without getting ganked.
    Scamming your first billion in Jita local.
    Theorycrafting a better wrecking ball.
    Shiptoasting.
    Helping newbies.
    Cornering the market.
    Mapping wormholes.
    Devising a better fit.
    Owning all of FW space.
    Beating Bettick on o7.
    Violencing the biggest rocks.
    Winning the AT.
    Building all the battleships.
    Awoxing blue donuts.


    The skillqueue wasn't left out of the "This is EVE" video by accident.
    Teckos Pech
    Hogyoku
    Goonswarm Federation
    #539 - 2015-09-21 00:33:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
    Aerasia wrote:
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    In other words, if CCP decided to start selling SP directly, there would be an incentive for CCP to push as many SP into the game as possible. The cost to CCP is minimal, if not zero, thus every sale would be pure profits. With an unlimited upper bound on the number of SP that could be pushed into the game, the potential profit is theoretically unbounded as well. If CCPs revenues from subscriptions start to fall, then the incentive to use the SP sales to counter that effect would provide an increasing incentive to basically "inflate" SP.
    And I can't completely argue against this point. I doubt CCP has gone along with the idea that multiple accounts are basically SOP for over a decade because they think having to remember 15 passwords is core gameplay.

    Of course, I also don't *have* to argue that point too much because while I think Mike's argument that allowing purchasable SP will collapse the game is silly, my own preference is to remove SP entirely - neatly sidestepping the possible black, capitalist heart of CCP.


    First off I use KeePass, so I don't have to remember more than 1 password.

    Yes, I know you and a few others have advocated for removing all SP, and while that gets around my issue of CCP inflating SP it also can be terribly unbalancing. For example, I have 3 accounts. Currently 2 have characters who can park an ishtar in an anomaly and rake in ISK. With removing SP, I'll be able to rake 33% more ISK than I do now. If I can rake in say 1.5 billion now, with no SP I'll bring in 2 billion. I doubt I'm alone so we'll see a substantial increase in ISK entering the game. That can be unbalancing. Sure your noob can fly a Claw or a Taranis, but what if they cost 75 million or more for just the hull? They wont be flying that ship until they have the ISK.

    You guys just don't think at all when it comes to game balance. Not all, IMO.

    Oh, and given how the profit potential is unbounded...how do you argue against that? Just curious?

    "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

    8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
    Aerasia
    Republic University
    Minmatar Republic
    #540 - 2015-09-21 14:13:21 UTC
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    Oh, and given how the profit potential is unbounded...how do you argue against that? Just curious?
    I don't have to, because it's not a problem. Your doomsday scenario can also be described as "What if more people subbed to EVE, and decided not to mine for a living? Oh, the humanity!"