These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Exploring The Character Bazaar & Skill Trading

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#4981 - 2015-10-26 08:20:15 UTC
Dror wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Dror wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Dror wrote:
So, if it's a problem, what is the issue?
Everything that has ever changed by your reasoning, which means all those aspects need eliminated.

*Strawman*
So you're saying you didn't say "If SP is so fine, there would be no announcement to update it?"

It looks like you did, thus critiquing your logic isn't a *strawman*

You're strawman'ing the logic to make it more simple to critique.

Also, there's a question unanswered about the depth of SP as a problem.


Your fundamental problem is you are viewing the skillpoints as some kind of game crippling design flaw and want them removed, Your not giving anyone an idea to help to speed things up without harming the core mechanic of the game. Some would like X some would Y some Z. Your not offering a solution, your after a new game - your signature says it all.

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#4982 - 2015-10-26 08:21:02 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
If SP will become a commodity you are making access to them unequal. I must pay more to "fly geddon instead of ceptor". Why? It has nothing to do with "more control of my character".

Or you could not pay anything and train as normal. Nothing about the training to fly a geddon vs a ceptor is changing and there is no mandate to use the feature to progress. SP will still be generated by players equally as well.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#4983 - 2015-10-26 08:27:38 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Dror wrote:
You're strawman'ing the logic to make it more simple to critique.

Also, there's a question unanswered about the depth of SP as a problem.
The logic in the response presented was exactly that simple. You made no attempt at justification beyond "If SP is so fine, there would be no announcement to update it."

Regarding the depth of SP as a problem, there is none demonstrated. That you would have it changed leaves the burden of proof on you, and in none of the threads you've engaged on have you met that burden.

So, is that not accurate?

CCP has come up with the idea of SP trading. As is this thread's whole, it's on the community, now, to evidence that SP without trading is no problem, per se.

Beyond that, I've posted research on how SP reduces loyalty through limiting fair opportunity, character depth, and effectiveness.

"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.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#4984 - 2015-10-26 08:37:01 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Also CCP Seagull said this feature is important to the future of eve yesterday at Eve Vegas. Give it up lads, it's happening.
So I called it correctly. A PR exercise, but it's still a done deal.

It's actually great news, as now I know what was wrong from the start. Apart from the idea that is.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#4985 - 2015-10-26 08:42:51 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Also CCP Seagull said this feature is important to the future of eve yesterday at Eve Vegas. Give it up lads, it's happening.
So I called it correctly. A PR exercise, but it's still a done deal.

It's actually great news, as now I know what was wrong from the start. Apart from the idea that is.

..Which is?

"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.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#4986 - 2015-10-26 08:46:50 UTC
Dror wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Also CCP Seagull said this feature is important to the future of eve yesterday at Eve Vegas. Give it up lads, it's happening.
So I called it correctly. A PR exercise, but it's still a done deal.

It's actually great news, as now I know what was wrong from the start. Apart from the idea that is.

..Which is?
8.46 am.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#4987 - 2015-10-26 08:47:34 UTC
Dror wrote:
So, is that not accurate?

CCP has come up with the idea of SP trading. As is this thread's whole, it's on the community, now, to evidence that SP without trading is no problem, per se.

Beyond that, I've posted research on how SP reduces loyalty through limiting fair opportunity, character depth, and effectiveness.
Actually no, you haven't as you've never tested your hypothesis. You've not proven anything, but rather constructed a theory you cannot test. One that the vast majority of others, when presented with the same sources for your reasoning disagree with. You've yet to present credentials, data or experimentation with eve lending weight to your interpretation, thus it's still just an unproven and very unpopular opinion.

Regarding the change itself, it's not self justifying, as your statement implied. It has concrete goals, that I don't fall in opposition to, with concrete reasons and goals.

As far as being an issue, we actually know that to some degree it can be problematic, but to curb that potential, mostly coming from a black market in the void left without legitimate trade, we allow it under restrictions, and to make it accessible and not the playground of elites, as well as to build better character identity investment, we are looking at granulating it.

What that actually says is SP is good as a function of building value in a players character, which is the opposite of the position you hold. Thus CCP's plan doesn't mesh with your idea of removing progression from the game.

Lastly, no, indistinguishable characters do not create character depth, and you've not shown anything proving SP hinders that or anything else you've claimed as nothing you've ever posted actually relates to or studies SP or even remotely relatable systems.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#4988 - 2015-10-26 08:58:09 UTC
Dror wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Dror wrote:
You're strawman'ing the logic to make it more simple to critique.

Also, there's a question unanswered about the depth of SP as a problem.
The logic in the response presented was exactly that simple. You made no attempt at justification beyond "If SP is so fine, there would be no announcement to update it."

Regarding the depth of SP as a problem, there is none demonstrated. That you would have it changed leaves the burden of proof on you, and in none of the threads you've engaged on have you met that burden.

So, is that not accurate?

CCP has come up with the idea of SP trading. As is this thread's whole, it's on the community, now, to evidence that SP without trading is no problem, per se.

Beyond that, I've posted research on how SP reduces loyalty through limiting fair opportunity, character depth, and effectiveness.


Your research though has been proven flawed at best, social seclusion isnt a mechanic, if you want the solo approach you wont probably leave hi sec, there is no fair or even playing field in a totally pvp orientated playpen, your character can be in a doctrine ship before the end of a trial period and the depth of character is how you invest your time in EvE, from the moment you enter the game there are a multitude of things to do, Your effectiveness is what you make of it do you want to be a miner or some ****house pirate, the universe is your oyster its there for you to fly in.

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#4989 - 2015-10-26 09:04:59 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
If SP will become a commodity you are making access to them unequal. I must pay more to "fly geddon instead of ceptor". Why? It has nothing to do with "more control of my character".
Or you could not pay anything and train as normal. Nothing about the training to fly a geddon vs a ceptor is changing and there is no mandate to use the feature to progress. SP will still be generated by players equally as well.

Game rules should be equal for everybody. Imagine rookies gets only queens instead of every other and pieces on chess board. Why? Because they are rookies? If I want to change from geddon to ceptor I must pay more (currency is meaningless here) to do this than new player. An option is created with unequal access to it. What next? Players to 1 year will have discount on subs, while I'll be paying twice?

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#4990 - 2015-10-26 09:12:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Delt0r Garsk
Daniela Doran wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:

Answer this one then.

When are you gonna resign from CCP?


Lol so mad.

Also ccp seagull said this feature is imprtant to the future of the future of eve yesterday at eve vegas. Give it up lads, it's happening.



Then Eve is finish and you'll be looking for another job within a year after it hits.

Have never heard that before... Oh Wait yes we have. Even back in the beta.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.
Natascha Kerenski
Immortal Legion
#4991 - 2015-10-26 09:14:39 UTC
I can not say that i like this ideaAttention


After reading the first 30 or so pages of this thread i think most of my points already said.
As it seems this will come to the game no matter what the people of the community say here,
there is just one point:

As a player who is far beyond the 80mil Sp i would like to ask if there will be a way to shift my skills around
instead of stripping unwanted skills off and buying new ones?

For example: i am a big fan of Deathstars and Pos gunning i have several Chars (all beyond) 80 mil Sp
with Star base Defense managment on level 5, if i dont like the new Citadel mechanics and do not use
Structure guns anymore, this feels like a punishment to strip the skillpoints of this unwanted skill off
and have to buy 10 times more Sp to get them back.

I feel in such a case this system favors strongly new characters and punish the older ones.
If you are unlucky enough to cross this 80mil Sp line after years of playing, reorganizing your skills
will be a horror compared to someone with 20 or 40mil Sp.


“Fighting for peace is like having sex for virginity."
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#4992 - 2015-10-26 09:17:39 UTC
I still think everyone now thinks SP are 100% from ISK. They are not.

For a character to get 10M sp, at *least* 10M SP from other sub charaters have to be given up. Alliances won't be giving anyone **** with SP, because they will want there higher SP pilots to keep the Points and still fly the better ships.

We is all this magic pixe SP coming from in all your heads? you can't just make them up. And to train 2 time faster at 50M sp you will need 10 farming subs+AURA. It will still be cheaper to just buy that account you want instead.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.
General Lootit
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4993 - 2015-10-26 09:23:07 UTC  |  Edited by: General Lootit
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
If SP will become a commodity you are making access to them unequal. I must pay more to "fly geddon instead of ceptor". Why? It has nothing to do with "more control of my character".
Or you could not pay anything and train as normal. Nothing about the training to fly a geddon vs a ceptor is changing and there is no mandate to use the feature to progress. SP will still be generated by players equally as well.

Game rules should be equal for everybody. Imagine rookies gets only queens instead of every other and pieces on chess board. Why? Because they are rookies? If I want to change from geddon to ceptor I must pay more (currency is meaningless here) to do this than new player. An option is created with unequal access to it. What next? Players to 1 year will have discount on subs, while I'll be paying twice?

Thats! That is sounds like personal reason which I wanted to heard for a while. Don't worry, we won't hurt you. Smile

In this thread we talked A LOT how vet could benefit from new system and you have been here for a while. And yet still you feel jealous about?

Main source of concerns and side effects

Typical loyal customer with eleventy accounts
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#4994 - 2015-10-26 09:23:14 UTC
Natascha Kerenski wrote:
I can not say that i like this ideaAttention


After reading the first 30 or so pages of this thread i think most of my points already said.
As it seems this will come to the game no matter what the people of the community say here,
there is just one point:

As a player who is far beyond the 80mil Sp i would like to ask if there will be a way to shift my skills around
instead of stripping unwanted skills off and buying new ones?

For example: i am a big fan of Deathstars and Pos gunning i have several Chars (all beyond) 80 mil Sp
with Star base Defense managment on level 5, if i dont like the new Citadel mechanics and do not use
Structure guns anymore, this feels like a punishment to strip the skillpoints of this unwanted skill off
and have to buy 10 times more Sp to get them back.

I feel in such a case this system favors strongly new characters and punish the older ones.
If you are unlucky enough to cross this 80mil Sp line after years of playing, reorganizing your skills
will be a horror compared to someone with 20 or 40mil Sp.



They have said more than once in more than one place that proper transitions will be done when POS are phased out. They are still relevant and will be around for the better part of a year at least.

And CCP have always just done a 100% pure skill point reimbursement once skills become obsolete. For someone who has +50M skill points, you should already know that.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#4995 - 2015-10-26 09:27:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Dror
Edit: @ Leevi, you're ignoring the definition of fair opportunity.

Mag's wrote:
Dror wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Also CCP Seagull said this feature is important to the future of eve yesterday at Eve Vegas. Give it up lads, it's happening.
So I called it correctly. A PR exercise, but it's still a done deal.

It's actually great news, as now I know what was wrong from the start. Apart from the idea that is.

..Which is?
8.46 am.

.."Was a problem from the start"?

Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Actually no, you haven't as you've never tested your hypothesis. You've not proven anything, but rather constructed a theory you cannot test. One that the vast majority of others, when presented with the same sources for your reasoning disagree with. You've yet to present credentials, data or experimentation with eve lending weight to your interpretation, thus it's still just an unproven and very unpopular opinion.

Regarding the change itself, it's not self justifying, as your statement implied. It has concrete goals, that I don't fall in opposition to, with concrete reasons and goals.

As far as being an issue, we actually know that to some degree it can be problematic, but to curb that potential, mostly coming from a black market in the void left without legitimate trade, we allow it under restrictions, and to make it accessible and not the playground of elites, as well as to build better character identity investment, we are looking at granulating it.

What that actually says is SP is good as a function of building value in a players character, which is the opposite of the position you hold. Thus CCP's plan doesn't mesh with your idea of removing progression from the game.

Lastly, no, indistinguishable characters do not create character depth, and you've not shown anything proving SP hinders that or anything else you've claimed as nothing you've ever posted actually relates to or studies SP or even remotely relatable systems.

Following the order of those replies, you're asking for evidence and testing and proof that "if there was no problem with SP, there would be no update announcement"? That's a pretty shallow response.

"Hey, it seems like there's a problem with SP. Why else would CCP switch it up so drastically?"

"Prove it."

Like, it's not about proving it.. but about figuring out what the problems are (as is well-requested in this thread). That level of shallow response provides nothing for the conversation. Again, it has nothing to do with what I can prove at that point, but what we can evidence as a community.

You say that a large part of the problem that SP trading fixes is black market sales. There would be no black market without SP. It's fixing a problem it's developing, just like it does as a reward system for its own limitations. That it "improves character identity investment" directly negates the definition of game identity -- which comes from opportunity and gameplay.. 99% of characters are esteemed for nothing about SP, but them as characters and as effective for their niche. From the study, "Social identity is defined as the knowledge of belonging to a social group, as well as the emotional and value significance of his or her group membership." Value is very correlative with SP, and lower value is lower social identity.

Protip: lower social identity (value) "is lower loyalty (subscription potential)."

"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.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#4996 - 2015-10-26 09:44:43 UTC
General Lootit wrote:
In this thread we talked A LOT how vet could benefit from new system and you have been here for a while. And yet still you feel jealous about?

Righhht, because character that has >50 mil SP must pay more to switch doctrines than <50 mil SP, benefit...It's nothing about jealous, you don't understand a single word again. SPs will be commodity like for example PLEX. Everybody can buy it (PLEX) and it will have same effect on every user despite the in game age. It won't be the same with SPs.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Natascha Kerenski
Immortal Legion
#4997 - 2015-10-26 09:49:41 UTC
Delt0r Garsk wrote:



They have said more than once in more than one place that proper transitions will be done when POS are phased out. They are still relevant and will be around for the better part of a year at least.

And CCP have always just done a 100% pure skill point reimbursement once skills become obsolete. For someone who has +50M skill points, you should already know that.



It seems you totally missing my point. First the new Structures will have guns and its not sure yet that there will be a
different skill needed to use them. But that served just as an example.

I am not totally against Sp Trading....It is there now in form of buying characters and what i like about the
Idea is that skill points will be Terminated in the process (after clone upgrades are obsolete only way now is losing a T3 cruiser)

My point is since not all people will be treated equal with this system will there be a way of shifting Sp instead of selling them.

“Fighting for peace is like having sex for virginity."
General Lootit
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4998 - 2015-10-26 09:59:27 UTC  |  Edited by: General Lootit
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
General Lootit wrote:
In this thread we talked A LOT how vet could benefit from new system and you have been here for a while. And yet still you feel jealous about?

Righhht, because character that has >50 mil SP must pay more to switch doctrines than <50 mil SP, benefit
...
SPs will be commodity.

Are you ranting that being high SP is tough thing? OK. I repeat once again Could I have your SP? And then maybe I grow up... I can't promise.

Main source of concerns and side effects

Typical loyal customer with eleventy accounts
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#4999 - 2015-10-26 10:14:16 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
If SP will become a commodity you are making access to them unequal. I must pay more to "fly geddon instead of ceptor". Why? It has nothing to do with "more control of my character".
Or you could not pay anything and train as normal. Nothing about the training to fly a geddon vs a ceptor is changing and there is no mandate to use the feature to progress. SP will still be generated by players equally as well.

Game rules should be equal for everybody. Imagine rookies gets only queens instead of every other and pieces on chess board. Why? Because they are rookies? If I want to change from geddon to ceptor I must pay more (currency is meaningless here) to do this than new player. An option is created with unequal access to it. What next? Players to 1 year will have discount on subs, while I'll be paying twice?
Rules are equal for everyone, nothing is changing in that regard. Nothing in this proposal asks you to pay anything. If you want a ceptor train for it. If a new player wants a ceptor, they train for it. Plain and simple. No option is being added that you won't be able to use, though to less effect because you already have a large number more abilities than that player. When they reach you're level they will be under the same diminishing returns.

That assumes they even have the resources to take advantage of this extensively.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5000 - 2015-10-26 10:28:45 UTC
Dror wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Actually no, you haven't as you've never tested your hypothesis. You've not proven anything, but rather constructed a theory you cannot test. One that the vast majority of others, when presented with the same sources for your reasoning disagree with. You've yet to present credentials, data or experimentation with eve lending weight to your interpretation, thus it's still just an unproven and very unpopular opinion.

Regarding the change itself, it's not self justifying, as your statement implied. It has concrete goals, that I don't fall in opposition to, with concrete reasons and goals.

As far as being an issue, we actually know that to some degree it can be problematic, but to curb that potential, mostly coming from a black market in the void left without legitimate trade, we allow it under restrictions, and to make it accessible and not the playground of elites, as well as to build better character identity investment, we are looking at granulating it.

What that actually says is SP is good as a function of building value in a players character, which is the opposite of the position you hold. Thus CCP's plan doesn't mesh with your idea of removing progression from the game.

Lastly, no, indistinguishable characters do not create character depth, and you've not shown anything proving SP hinders that or anything else you've claimed as nothing you've ever posted actually relates to or studies SP or even remotely relatable systems.

Following the order of those replies, you're asking for evidence and testing and proof that "if there was no problem with SP, there would be no update announcement"? That's a pretty shallow response.

"Hey, it seems like there's a problem with SP. Why else would CCP switch it up so drastically?"

"Prove it."

Like, it's not about proving it.. but about figuring out what the problems are (as is well-requested in this thread). That level of shallow response provides nothing for the conversation. Again, it has nothing to do with what I can prove at that point, but what we can evidence as a community.

You say that a large part of the problem that SP trading fixes is black market sales. There would be no black market without SP. It's fixing a problem it's developing, just like it does as a reward system for its own limitations. That it "improves character identity investment" directly negates the definition of game identity -- which comes from opportunity and gameplay.. 99% of characters are esteemed for nothing about SP, but them as characters and as effective for their niche. From the study, "Social identity is defined as the knowledge of belonging to a social group, as well as the emotional and value significance of his or her group membership." Value is very correlative with SP, and lower value is lower social identity.

Protip: lower social identity (value) "is lower loyalty (subscription potential)."
CCP isn't changing SP up drastically. People train over time to produce SP and unlock skills currently, soon people will train SP to unlock skills or trade for other to do the same. We still have a finite amount of skills being unlocked by training over time. That isn't changed by this proposal. That isn't the goal of this proposal, thus even by the flawed metric of "if it's being changed it's broken" this doesn't qualify as proof of SP being in any way bad because it's not changing how SP works or is generated.

So yes, since there is no proof of SP being an issue you still need to provide that proof.

And yes, SP, like any limited in game commodity fuels black markets. Isk has a black market. That doesn't mean we should do away with currency in the game. So the existence of a black market isn't proof that an aspect is bad. Rather it proves it's desired and actually worth investing in at the character level.

And your idea of SP being a social value is still fundamentally flawed and wrong to the point that it invalidates every conclusion you draw from it. Fact of the matter is that being new actually creates social value. Opportunity was also discussed with you in another thread, but you dismissed concrete examples of opportunity for no other reason than them not supporting your narrative.

Also no, flat, indistinguishable and uninvestable characters still don't create strong identities or value. It removes potential for character investment rather than creating it.