These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Croc Evil
Croc's Family Business
#5141 - 2015-10-29 13:15:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Croc Evil
Mhari Dson wrote:
What I see happening with a system like is described in the blog is a sudden blast of 100's of 3.3m SP gank pilots that go to -10 sec status then get biomassed.

Counterproposal: Instead of an instant reward of SP, make it a 2x training speed til you use up the purchased bonus.


You can do this now with PLEX system just fine with just a bit more effort:

  • 3 characters per account
  • 1 character used for ganking
  • 2 other characters on skill training for ganking (2 PLEXes to run such account)
  • multiple accounts possible
  • destroy used gank character on any account where other character finished training, create new character ...


So if real money price of skill trading tools is set higher than PLEX/account schema above then I don't see a problem with skill trading regarding gank characters
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5142 - 2015-10-29 13:22:24 UTC
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Equal opportunity meaning that there is no game mechanic favouring one class specialization over another e.g. Warlock being overpowered by its current patch / expansion to any other class in game, Has no golden spell or golden ammo.

Seems pretty accurate. What's the problem?

Yes my statement is, you put :

Dror wrote:
Why would they say to give equal opportunity for any class to win!? What plays a character class? The player -- so, the player should be able to win

Thats not the place when the class is unbalanced, you'll always find in a class based games that one will be better than the rest between expansions and patches. When a game offers only one class you don't have that problem. Which leads to me your next proclamation you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ? Is this someone new to the game. ??

Yes, a huge portion of the study discusses that any player should be able to win in battle, and that's because the very definition of psychological ownership and control is how effective they are.

So, obviously, there's no discrepancy with what I'm saying about "classes winning because the character wins". That's the whole idea of tuning classes or skills for equal opportunity.

"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.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5143 - 2015-10-29 13:50:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Levi Belvar
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Equal opportunity meaning that there is no game mechanic favouring one class specialization over another e.g. Warlock being overpowered by its current patch / expansion to any other class in game, Has no golden spell or golden ammo.

Seems pretty accurate. What's the problem?

Yes my statement is, you put :

Dror wrote:
Why would they say to give equal opportunity for any class to win!? What plays a character class? The player -- so, the player should be able to win

Thats not the place when the class is unbalanced, you'll always find in a class based games that one will be better than the rest between expansions and patches. When a game offers only one class you don't have that problem. Which leads to me your next proclamation you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ? Is this someone new to the game. ??

Yes, a huge portion of the study discusses that any player should be able to win in battle, and that's because the very definition of psychological ownership and control is how effective they are.

So, obviously, there's no discrepancy with what I'm saying about "classes winning because the character wins". That's the whole idea of tuning classes or skills for equal opportunity.


To ensure a fair gaming environment, MMORPGs run in real time with a low level of live control [79], and players may therefore seek greater interpretive (secondary) control. Because secondary control is characterized by persistent behavior [69], by definition MMORPG players display secondary control behavior

2. Secondary Control over the Character
Scon1: I have invested a great deal of time in managing my character.
Scon2: I spend a great deal of time as my character.
Scon3: I frequently visit the game to manage my character.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5144 - 2015-10-29 14:18:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Dror
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Yes, a huge portion of the study discusses that any player should be able to win in battle, and that's because the very definition of psychological ownership and control is how effective they are.

So, obviously, there's no discrepancy with what I'm saying about "classes winning because the character wins". That's the whole idea of tuning classes or skills for equal opportunity.


To ensure a fair gaming environment, MMORPGs run in real time with a low level of live control [79], and players may therefore seek greater interpretive (secondary) control. Because secondary control is characterized by persistent behavior [69], by definition MMORPG players display secondary control behavior

2. Secondary Control over the Character
Scon1: I have invested a great deal of time in managing my character.
Scon2: I spend a great deal of time as my character.
Scon3: I frequently visit the game to manage my character.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

That italicized quote is discussing devs of MMORPGs. The original point is still valid.

Edit: Link

PnP is pen and paper (RPG), and LARP is live action role-playing

Edit+:

There's also no reason to imply anything about newbies and capitals in reference to secondary control. If they get a carrier through gameplay, they are fulfilling the idea of secondary control and thus are more likely to return to the game. The implication that forcing players to be limited so that they're invested is baseless.

"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.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5145 - 2015-10-29 15:03:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Levi Belvar
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Yes, a huge portion of the study discusses that any player should be able to win in battle, and that's because the very definition of psychological ownership and control is how effective they are.

So, obviously, there's no discrepancy with what I'm saying about "classes winning because the character wins". That's the whole idea of tuning classes or skills for equal opportunity.


To ensure a fair gaming environment, MMORPGs run in real time with a low level of live control [79], and players may therefore seek greater interpretive (secondary) control. Because secondary control is characterized by persistent behavior [69], by definition MMORPG players display secondary control behavior

2. Secondary Control over the Character
Scon1: I have invested a great deal of time in managing my character.
Scon2: I spend a great deal of time as my character.
Scon3: I frequently visit the game to manage my character.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

That italicized quote is discussing devs of MMORPGs. The original point is still valid.

Edit: Link

PnP is pen and paper (RPG), and LARP is live action role-playing

No its not its in your study have you not read it correctly, Page 13, Ive never even seen that other thing you just offered.
So again i reiterate :

To ensure a fair gaming environment, MMORPGs run in real time with a low level of live control [79], and players may therefore seek greater interpretive (secondary) control. Because secondary control is characterized by persistent behavior [69], by definition MMORPG players display secondary control behavior

2. Secondary Control over the Character
Scon1: I have invested a great deal of time in managing my character.
Scon2: I spend a great deal of time as my character.
Scon3: I frequently visit the game to manage my character.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5146 - 2015-10-29 15:04:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Dror
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Yes, a huge portion of the study discusses that any player should be able to win in battle, and that's because the very definition of psychological ownership and control is how effective they are.

So, obviously, there's no discrepancy with what I'm saying about "classes winning because the character wins". That's the whole idea of tuning classes or skills for equal opportunity.


To ensure a fair gaming environment, MMORPGs run in real time with a low level of live control [79], and players may therefore seek greater interpretive (secondary) control. Because secondary control is characterized by persistent behavior [69], by definition MMORPG players display secondary control behavior

2. Secondary Control over the Character
Scon1: I have invested a great deal of time in managing my character.
Scon2: I spend a great deal of time as my character.
Scon3: I frequently visit the game to manage my character.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

That italicized quote is discussing devs of MMORPGs. The original point is still valid.

Edit: Link

PnP is pen and paper (RPG), and LARP is live action role-playing

No its not its in your study have you not read it correctly, Page 13, Ive never even seen that other thing you just offered.

That's the study that [79] is for context.

The previous post is edited for clarification on the other point [69].

"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.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5147 - 2015-10-29 15:07:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Levi Belvar
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Yes, a huge portion of the study discusses that any player should be able to win in battle, and that's because the very definition of psychological ownership and control is how effective they are.

So, obviously, there's no discrepancy with what I'm saying about "classes winning because the character wins". That's the whole idea of tuning classes or skills for equal opportunity.


To ensure a fair gaming environment, MMORPGs run in real time with a low level of live control [79], and players may therefore seek greater interpretive (secondary) control. Because secondary control is characterized by persistent behavior [69], by definition MMORPG players display secondary control behavior

2. Secondary Control over the Character
Scon1: I have invested a great deal of time in managing my character.
Scon2: I spend a great deal of time as my character.
Scon3: I frequently visit the game to manage my character.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

That italicized quote is discussing devs of MMORPGs. The original point is still valid.

Edit: Link

PnP is pen and paper (RPG), and LARP is live action role-playing

No its not its in your study have you not read it correctly, Page 13, Ive never even seen that other thing you just offered.

That's the study that [79] is for context.

The previous post is edited for clarification on the other point [69].

So your strawman on the study.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5148 - 2015-10-29 15:11:26 UTC
Levi Belvar wrote:
So your strawman on the study.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

No, there is no strawman. You're trying to quote something without context, simultaneously implying that setting up investment as a game requirement before the player has even invested anything is what's being discussed.

There is no secondary control if there is no character investment yet. If a character has yet to get a capital, they have no investment -- no secondary control. If they have no SP, they have none either.

"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.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5149 - 2015-10-29 15:21:49 UTC
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
So your strawman on the study.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

No, there is no strawman. You're trying to quote something without context, simultaneously implying that setting up investment as a game requirement before the player has even invested anything is what's being discussed.

There is no secondary control if there is no character investment yet. If a character has yet to get a capital, they have no investment -- no secondary control. If they have no SP, they have none either.


Thats fine then, its ok your were baselining WoW on entering PvP at lvl 100 but if there is no character investment yet its to be done from starting lvl 1
Im also in the process of emailing - Edward J. Garrity on confirmation on if the study was based on a character model with X amount of years play / If they were all new characters created solely for the study / and if we were to compare Game X over Game Y would they both need to be a certain length of time age wise or good to compare at a month old with full interaction and minimum interaction.

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5150 - 2015-10-29 15:25:23 UTC
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
So your strawman on the study.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

No, there is no strawman. You're trying to quote something without context, simultaneously implying that setting up investment as a game requirement before the player has even invested anything is what's being discussed.

There is no secondary control if there is no character investment yet. If a character has yet to get a capital, they have no investment -- no secondary control. If they have no SP, they have none either.


Thats fine then, its ok your were baselining WoW on entering PvP at lvl 100 but if there is no character investment yet its to be done from starting lvl 1
Im also in the process of emailing - Edward J. Garrity on confirmation on if the study was based on a character model with X amount of years play / If they were all new characters created solely for the study / and if we were to compare Game X over Game Y would they both need to be a certain length of time age wise or good to compare at a month old with full interaction and minimum interaction.

It already says:

Quote:
The 34 females and 139 males who responded had played at least one or more MMORPGs, such as World of Warcraft, EverQuest, EverQuest II, Lineage, Lineage II, Star Wars Galaxies, City of Heroes/Villains, RuneScape, and Final Fantasy XI; all had at least two months’ playing experience..

"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.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5151 - 2015-10-29 15:35:59 UTC
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
So your strawman on the study.

Also : you never answered - you stated how are newbies to challenge sov ?Newbie -newplayer

So seeing as the study states long term time investment ,you say new, do you want to go with completely new to both games or that theyre stating minimum of 10 to 12 months old ??

No, there is no strawman. You're trying to quote something without context, simultaneously implying that setting up investment as a game requirement before the player has even invested anything is what's being discussed.

There is no secondary control if there is no character investment yet. If a character has yet to get a capital, they have no investment -- no secondary control. If they have no SP, they have none either.


Thats fine then, its ok your were baselining WoW on entering PvP at lvl 100 but if there is no character investment yet its to be done from starting lvl 1
Im also in the process of emailing - Edward J. Garrity on confirmation on if the study was based on a character model with X amount of years play / If they were all new characters created solely for the study / and if we were to compare Game X over Game Y would they both need to be a certain length of time age wise or good to compare at a month old with full interaction and minimum interaction.

It already says:

Quote:
The 34 females and 139 males who responded had played at least one or more MMORPGs, such as World of Warcraft, EverQuest, EverQuest II, Lineage, Lineage II, Star Wars Galaxies, City of Heroes/Villains, RuneScape, and Final Fantasy XI; all had at least two months’ playing experience..

yes but when i said previously about any form of comparison you stated that leveling xp was not a valid equation to sp so your reference point was at 100, best to clear it up properly then you can say for definate that all your waffle is just that and if its case by case . if it was everything based on 2 months you wouldnt even be close to your level cap if youve never played the game before let alone be up there playing with the vets in WoW

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5152 - 2015-10-29 15:43:19 UTC
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:

It already says:

Quote:
The 34 females and 139 males who responded had played at least one or more MMORPGs, such as World of Warcraft, EverQuest, EverQuest II, Lineage, Lineage II, Star Wars Galaxies, City of Heroes/Villains, RuneScape, and Final Fantasy XI; all had at least two months’ playing experience..

yes but when i said previously about any form of comparison you stated that leveling xp was not a valid equation to sp so your reference point was at 100, best to clear it up properly then you can say for definate that all your waffle is just that and if its case by case . if it was everything based on 2 months you wouldnt even be close to your level cap if youve never played the game before let alone be up there playing with the vets in WoW

Actually the point was that a level 10 character is irrelevant for PvP tuning. How is leveling progression relevant if the idea is equal opportunity?

"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.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5153 - 2015-10-29 15:52:54 UTC
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:

It already says:

Quote:
The 34 females and 139 males who responded had played at least one or more MMORPGs, such as World of Warcraft, EverQuest, EverQuest II, Lineage, Lineage II, Star Wars Galaxies, City of Heroes/Villains, RuneScape, and Final Fantasy XI; all had at least two months’ playing experience..

yes but when i said previously about any form of comparison you stated that leveling xp was not a valid equation to sp so your reference point was at 100, best to clear it up properly then you can say for definate that all your waffle is just that and if its case by case . if it was everything based on 2 months you wouldnt even be close to your level cap if youve never played the game before let alone be up there playing with the vets in WoW

Actually the point was that a level 10 character is irrelevant for PvP tuning. How is leveling progression relevant if the idea is equal opportunity?

You stated that everything should be equal, i asked how can you balance a game thats been running for 12 years, you offered the study and cherrypicked info out of it. Im now going to ask the same question to the man behind it, just waiting to be accepted as follower so i can chat or mail him. What i need to know is if as you say that everyone should be equal in an enviroment when its 12 years old or that you have to look at it from how you would be playing from the start, If you can compare EvE to WoW as in a comparison from start in 1 month blocks for game advancement.

You have always maintained that you should be able to do anything in game, im going to see if thats what the study states or that all things concidered equal its progression that gives you access e.g. your time investment opens the opportunities for you.

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5154 - 2015-10-29 16:01:39 UTC
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:

It already says:

Quote:
The 34 females and 139 males who responded had played at least one or more MMORPGs, such as World of Warcraft, EverQuest, EverQuest II, Lineage, Lineage II, Star Wars Galaxies, City of Heroes/Villains, RuneScape, and Final Fantasy XI; all had at least two months’ playing experience..

yes but when i said previously about any form of comparison you stated that leveling xp was not a valid equation to sp so your reference point was at 100, best to clear it up properly then you can say for definate that all your waffle is just that and if its case by case . if it was everything based on 2 months you wouldnt even be close to your level cap if youve never played the game before let alone be up there playing with the vets in WoW

Actually the point was that a level 10 character is irrelevant for PvP tuning. How is leveling progression relevant if the idea is equal opportunity?

You stated that everything should be equal, i asked how can you balance a game thats been running for 12 years, you offered the study and cherrypicked info out of it. Im now going to ask the same question to the man behind it, just waiting to be accepted as follower so i can chat or mail him. What i need to know is if as you say that everyone should be equal in an enviroment when its 12 years old or that you have to look at it from how you would be playing from the start, If you can compare EvE to WoW as in a comparison from start in 1 month blocks for game advancement.

You have always maintained that you should be able to do anything in game, im going to see if thats what the study states or that all things concidered equal its progression that gives you access e.g. your time investment opens the opportunities for you.

You're trying to make the discussion about balance and leveling progression, but it's essentially about equal opportunity.

"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.
Erik Sokarad
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#5155 - 2015-10-29 16:12:42 UTC
that is way too many posts to read there.

i like the idea, having more skillpoints for newer characters would be a good thing overall, even if they dont know how to really use those SP yet. it has minimal benefit to older characters who have enough skills to be good at things, so mostly it will help newer players compete more quickly.

end result depends a lot on where they put the cuttoffs for % gain, but the ones listed in the devblog look decent. i can see why players with older characters are worried about it, since it does put them at a net disadvantage in general, but most of em have enough of an advantage already for it to not really matter in the grand scheme of things. plus, this may help with CCP's bottom line and player retention.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5156 - 2015-10-29 16:23:32 UTC
Dror wrote:
You're trying to make the discussion about balance and leveling progression, but it's essentially about equal opportunity.

How can you give equality on something that is 12 years old, there is equal opportunity for anyone who wants to invest there time in the game, there isnt for someone who expects it all for no effort.

How long have you played EvE in total, have you ever played WoW at all, Ive got over 10 years of EvE and over 11 years of WoW so im not blowing smoke outta my ass, I have alot of experience in both.

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5157 - 2015-10-29 16:25:54 UTC
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
You're trying to make the discussion about balance and leveling progression, but it's essentially about equal opportunity.

How can you give equality on something that is 12 years old, there is equal opportunity for anyone who wants to invest there time in the game, there isnt for someone who expects it all for no effort.

How long have you played EvE in total, have you ever played WoW at all, Ive got over 10 years of EvE and over 11 years of WoW so im not blowing smoke outta my ass, I have alot of experience in both.

Isn't the game without SP equal opportunity?

"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.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5158 - 2015-10-29 16:33:18 UTC
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
You're trying to make the discussion about balance and leveling progression, but it's essentially about equal opportunity.

How can you give equality on something that is 12 years old, there is equal opportunity for anyone who wants to invest there time in the game, there isnt for someone who expects it all for no effort.

How long have you played EvE in total, have you ever played WoW at all, Ive got over 10 years of EvE and over 11 years of WoW so im not blowing smoke outta my ass, I have alot of experience in both.

Isn't the game without SP equal opportunity?

No to get without effort creates boredom. back to the question i asked originally what is your experience of actual gameplay.

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5159 - 2015-10-29 16:35:35 UTC
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
You're trying to make the discussion about balance and leveling progression, but it's essentially about equal opportunity.

How can you give equality on something that is 12 years old, there is equal opportunity for anyone who wants to invest there time in the game, there isnt for someone who expects it all for no effort.

How long have you played EvE in total, have you ever played WoW at all, Ive got over 10 years of EvE and over 11 years of WoW so im not blowing smoke outta my ass, I have alot of experience in both.

Isn't the game without SP equal opportunity?

No to get without effort creates boredom. back to the question i asked originally what is your experience of actual gameplay.

Plenty.

There's no effort in SP. It's just a payment wall.

"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.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5160 - 2015-10-29 16:38:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Levi Belvar
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Dror wrote:
You're trying to make the discussion about balance and leveling progression, but it's essentially about equal opportunity.

How can you give equality on something that is 12 years old, there is equal opportunity for anyone who wants to invest there time in the game, there isnt for someone who expects it all for no effort.

How long have you played EvE in total, have you ever played WoW at all, Ive got over 10 years of EvE and over 11 years of WoW so im not blowing smoke outta my ass, I have alot of experience in both.

Isn't the game without SP equal opportunity?

No to get without effort creates boredom. back to the question i asked originally what is your experience of actual gameplay.

Plenty.

There's no effort in SP. It's just a payment wall.

Well enlighten us then, Youve spent the past 6 days baffling with your fancy words meaning and values of why your the only one here who thinks the way you do.
Lets hope its worth it too, it took me 20 minutesto fill that researchgate form in i even needed to do it with my lads details for uni as not your average jo shmoe can get on.

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”