These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Introducing Clone States & the Future of Access to EVE

First post First post First post
Author
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE
#1121 - 2016-09-02 23:15:24 UTC
Quriel Arjar wrote:
This will backfire horribly, when people realize their accounts aren't "truly" F2P, like thought they would be, but simply trial accounts without time limitations. It will be even worse, if CCP puts "BUY NAO!" buttons on every single item, which Alphas won't be able to use. Imagine a reaction of a new player, who just went through the ship tree and saw all these cool, huge ships to only be greeted by an orange button reminding him to pay up or bugger off. If I were him, I wouldn't bother launching EVE ever again.

CCP, please, for the good of the game, don't redo interface to remind Alphas, that they are second class citizens every time they open their ship's inventory. No amount of "This is EVE" videos will ever fix that first impression of EVE looking like some cheap mobile game with cash shop ads taking every inch of screen.



Quoted because this is a really good point. My initial reaction was "How lame/cheesy" is that visual interface about Omega needed for module. The only people who won't find this a "bait and switch" will be the returning players who just are happy to have a free version of EVE....new players will find this offensive as it is so in your face.

Just leave the item usage ALONE like you do currently. IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE PREREQ's...you can't fit/fly it.
Eternus8lux8lucis
Guardians of the Gate
RAZOR Alliance
#1122 - 2016-09-02 23:18:32 UTC
Carniflex wrote:
A comparison of mining platforms. Alpha, as proposed in the devblog (Amarr one specifically, as it was the first one in the list), Max skill character with the same mining frigate vs Procurer and Retriver.

http://www.overclock.net/g/i/2864056/mining-yields-in-eve-online-alpha-vs-omega-in-mining-frig-and-max-skill-mining-barges/sort/display_order/

Alpha yield in Venture: 377 m3/min
Omega yield in Venture: 511 m3/min
Omega yield in Procurer: 928 m3/min
Omega yield in Retriever: 1012 m3/min

No implants, links or mining drones. As one can see Omega even in T1 barge would be yielding about twice as much minerals per minute than a T1 mining frigate can with max skills. So incentive to upgrade would be always there even if Alphas could have max skills for the modules fitted on their Venture. Combine this with lifting on simultaneous logins limitation (if its implemented for Alphas). The approx 120 m3/min difference between max skilled Venture and currently proposed Alpha Venture is not something I would be considering particularly threatening to the EVE economy compared to the number of potential Alpha Ventures mining.

And the funny thing is even fully tanked that Alphas venture can be one or two shotted by a suicide thrasher.Twisted

The reality that you will see hordes of ventures mining and then dying to thrasher gankers is huge. It is much greater a drive to upgrade to a more sane fit.

As for null, I mined in a venture in null once. It lasted a few days for a few hours and I was like OMG no!!Roll PS I just didnt have the barge up there at the time but a buddy had a venture hull he gave me, not lack of skills.Blink

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.

Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE
#1123 - 2016-09-02 23:24:49 UTC
Crack Spawn wrote:
Elite Dangerous - you need a bounty scan module before you can go around legally shooting people :P

Arrow So remove all bounties from eve info card.
Arrow Introduce module scan to show bounty like cargo scanner.
Arrow Buy license from Concord [monthly] based on bounty amount/scale 100k to 50mil bounty = x amount and so on.
Arrow In local chat introduce a war target type marking so you know a bounty hunter in system based on active license.
Arrow Bounty will be paid on amount of bounty not percentage of ship cost/lost Bounty hunting should be a trade in Eve.

These are just some quick basic thoughts on the bounty system. As CCP don't pay for ideas not my job but this is or could be good to introduce NEW content into eve.

I'm sure with some thought Bounty hunting and HiSec mercenaries, War Decing, Espionage could be good and enjoyable if only CCP would just spend some time on the subjects, right now that's 4 NEW content Upgrades CCP could make.

EDIT
The biggest problem which I think CCP are overlooking, there is no way to PVP unless you spend hours missioning or mining. Most games you can pvp and earn money from it, so bounty hunting or War Decing could open a new way to earn play and have fun ? just needs some thought that's all


D^mn man...I like your posts.

You should see Viturious' post in the new Dev blog thread. He talks about FW killing low sec. As a 12 year EVE player, I would be really interested to get your take on his post.

Long story short though, Bounties in EVE need to be fixed. and YES...PVP could be way more lucrative.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#1124 - 2016-09-02 23:28:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
Judaa K'Marr wrote:
the part of the community that would point flaws and provided needed skepticism are now gone (ie, Tippia) and the ones that remain don't have the energy anymore and are content to watch in fascination.


"Schadenfreude Fatigue".

Given their latest "update" blog for these F2P changes, it seems CCP is just throwing stuff against the wall to see what sticks, and their plan was not fleshed-out much, even though it has a delivery date. The CSM was bypassed until after-the-fact again.. big surprise.

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.

JamnOne
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1125 - 2016-09-02 23:43:23 UTC
This looks like it might work. It gives Eve the opportunity to attract new players without them having to pay upfront.

When it comes to PVE, I do think that there should be some new content made available both in general missions & storyline for the Alpha clones. On a side note, can you please return AE back to its original gameplay?

Suicide ganking will happen. That is part of the game. The idea of keeping safety turned on in high-sec - bad. In full disclosure, I always thought the safety was a bad idea and when it rolled out I turned it off and never turned it back on.

In the notes it is mentioned that you don't want to give Omegas advantages over Alphas by saying who is who. This is a good idea. Unfortunately, it will be learned by sharing of APIs. You might want to look into this.


Railyn Quisqueya
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1126 - 2016-09-03 00:28:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Railyn Quisqueya
This change will not save Eve. It will probably increase subscription numbers and overall PCU for a little bit. But it's just a gimmick to feed the few elite, tricking players into thinking they can be anything when in reality all they will be is fodder for gankers ~content creators~. Revenue is what Eve needs to sustain itself. But this change will not provide that, just inflated numbers. This is just a predictable and desperate Hail Mary Pass before the big game loss.

Sigh. It's a good try though.
Eternus8lux8lucis
Guardians of the Gate
RAZOR Alliance
#1127 - 2016-09-03 01:03:21 UTC
Given the lastest Feedback from CCP I have only this to say....

The number of concurrent alpha clones per person/IP/Computer will determine if ganking, anom whoring, FW, etc will be in a bad state.

The idea, if available, of creating 70 T1 catalysts and effectively hyperdunking a freighter solo is possible. I have 4 computers atm so if you limit it to 1 per computer I can run 4 myself at once, log off and log in another 4 till freighter is dead. Using VM you can do this already. WIth one per IP you can just use a VPN to do so.

If it CAN be done it WILL be done. Same with FW and other issues.

That not everyone will do it is true, yet some will.

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.

Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1128 - 2016-09-03 01:26:03 UTC
The problem may in fact not be with the clones, but with the multiboxing. And despite automation and scripting being outlawed, I am convinced there's still more than a few out there running such setups. Either that or my rig is getting really old because I can't see 28 clients running simultaneously and still respond at a moment's notice.

Free alts may not be the problem; they'll merely demonstrate the full capabilities of multiboxing while taking away the associated pricetag.

I for one am very curious to see how this plays out...
beakerax
Pator Tech School
#1129 - 2016-09-03 03:30:02 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
If you can come up with a bounty system that's not trvially exploitable, go for it.
I think the pointless/exploitable dichotomy with bounties is at least partly a result of their public availability. It would be neat to be able to set up bounty pools with (optional) access lists. For example, Corp A could set up a 30% bounty on Corp B's ship losses (perhaps capped at a certain amount) only available to their own members (or some trustworthy third party, or whatever).
FireFrost
TVMA
#1130 - 2016-09-03 03:40:26 UTC
Here's my views on this update

1) no new players
2) old players with 50 accounts to gank or mine out regions
3) the loss of most of the normal players in eve to #1 and #2

You should've just fixed the screw up to begin with when the Chinese players were free to join the rest of us for that 1 week , where plexs went from a managble 200-250 mil (which someone that works can do easily every month by running 20 or so lvl 4 missions) to an enraging 800-850 million for a plex (which no one that works can do running lvl 4s and would seriously cut into family time even running incursions )


Keep the subscription but set a price lock on the plexs cant be sold for over 300 million or something .

If this does go through I can almost guarantee the game will be free to play for everyone cause all that will be in here are Chinese gold farmers , or huge groups of gankers , 1 account that's paid and 20-30 accounts that are free 30 t1 destroyers would be able to kill about anything .



End quote " The Massive quest for more money has left me with nothing ........"



na really I work and honestly I haven't played eve in a few years , I toss cash at it then train skills , Id like to do worm holes but during a server crash my ship and myself were reset to a station I was in prior to assaulting a wormhole that I had been in for a year or so waiting to get my station stuff in to take it over as my own , id love to live in null sec but as I said I work and cant get on everyday so what ever effort I made would be gone when logging in after getting home from work , I work out of town sometimes 3 days away from my pc , people on government assistance do spend money , but they like to eat also , and have cable ect so uyour limited to a certain amount of a welfare check or disability in your game funding , those of us that work don't just throw money away if its just going to get destroyed .

so ya its a rough choice - id personaly just cap the plexs so normal players can buy them , the lower price would allow people to pay for a sub with little effort and would not lead to hordes of ticked off paying players for losing a 2-3 bil ship to a free loader .


just my views - iwork and pay bills and still manage to buy 6 plexs every month or 2 - I will not be buying the plexs if the free players are allowed to fly anything more then they are now on a trial account - but I only have like fighter bomber lvl 5 to train before being done with training unless I go over min bs 5 ,


I was told to post this thread here not to create a new thread lol spend 104 bucks a month on the game and still get yelled at by ISP guys ( whats wrong with the game? hmm)

"Please use the existing feedback thread at this location instead of creating a new thread for the same topic. Thank you.

Thread closed.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to Evemails.
"
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1131 - 2016-09-03 04:51:43 UTC
Crack Spawn wrote:
Elite Dangerous - you need a bounty scan module before you can go around legally shooting people :P

Arrow So remove all bounties from eve info card.
Arrow Introduce module scan to show bounty like cargo scanner.
Arrow Buy license from Concord [monthly] based on bounty amount/scale 100k to 50mil bounty = x amount and so on.
Arrow In local chat introduce a war target type marking so you know a bounty hunter in system based on active license.
Arrow Bounty will be paid on amount of bounty not percentage of ship cost/lost Bounty hunting should be a trade in Eve.

These are just some quick basic thoughts on the bounty system. As CCP don't pay for ideas not my job but this is or could be good to introduce NEW content into eve.

I'm sure with some thought Bounty hunting and HiSec mercenaries, War Decing, Espionage could be good and enjoyable if only CCP would just spend some time on the subjects, right now that's 4 NEW content Upgrades CCP could make.

EDIT
The biggest problem which I think CCP are overlooking, there is no way to PVP unless you spend hours missioning or mining. Most games you can pvp and earn money from it, so bounty hunting or War Decing could open a new way to earn play and have fun ? just needs some thought that's all


So...you place a bounty on me, right? What is to stop me (the player) from having my alt scan my character's ship, shoot me and collect the bounty?

"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
#1132 - 2016-09-03 04:56:58 UTC
beakerax wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
If you can come up with a bounty system that's not trvially exploitable, go for it.
I think the pointless/exploitable dichotomy with bounties is at least partly a result of their public availability. It would be neat to be able to set up bounty pools with (optional) access lists. For example, Corp A could set up a 30% bounty on Corp B's ship losses (perhaps capped at a certain amount) only available to their own members (or some trustworthy third party, or whatever).


There is nothing stopping this now, if I understand your suggestion. Such a system would be an inverse of the SRP programs many corporations/alliances already have.

"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
#1133 - 2016-09-03 05:34:40 UTC
FireFrost wrote:

so ya its a rough choice - id personaly just cap the plexs so normal players can buy them , the lower price would allow people to pay for a sub with little effort and would not lead to hordes of ticked off paying players for losing a 2-3 bil ship to a free loader .


Yeah, no. Price controls rarely work like you are talking about. What typically happens when the price is set below the current market power is alot more people want to buy and alot more people who would sell stop. This creates a situation known as excess demand--i.e. a shortage.

See, at a price of say 250,000,000 ISK 50 people might be willing to buy PLEX and sell them. But 250 people might want to buy those PLEX. So this leaves 200 people without PLEX. And of these 200 people, 190 might be willing to buy at 260 million, and 180 at 270 million and so forth. So no, in the end people would not be able to pay for a sub for little effort because the PLEX simply won't be there.

The price system works moving buyers and sellers to a point where the number of buyers and sellers are close together. And nobody tells them how to do this.

"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

Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#1134 - 2016-09-03 05:46:06 UTC
Judaa K'Marr wrote:
Well the community embraced it because the part of the community that would point flaws and provided needed skepticism are now gone (ie, Tippia) and the ones that remain don't have the energy anymore and are content to watch in fascination.



I still see names I know who have few braincells to rub together. Many names are absent since the transition to the new forums / summer of rage but there is still people in EVE whose posts are worth noting. Not all of them are enthusiastic about this but most seem to be surprisingly OK.

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.

Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#1135 - 2016-09-03 05:50:15 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Judaa K'Marr wrote:
the part of the community that would point flaws and provided needed skepticism are now gone (ie, Tippia) and the ones that remain don't have the energy anymore and are content to watch in fascination.


"Schadenfreude Fatigue".

Given their latest "update" blog for these F2P changes, it seems CCP is just throwing stuff against the wall to see what sticks, and their plan was not fleshed-out much, even though it has a delivery date. The CSM was bypassed until after-the-fact again.. big surprise.



To be honest - I prefer the approach CCP has taken with this over them nailing it down to the finest details in the secret and then telling us how its going to be. At least in the present case it seems they might consider reconsidering some aspects if enough people voice concern about that particular aspect.

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.

Toobo
Project Fruit House
#1136 - 2016-09-03 06:07:37 UTC
I didn't want pissing contest mate, I fully respect your experience and glad that you have them so you can see the difference in both games properly.

But seriously, do you feel that 5m SP capped players with no access to T2 will have more appealing experience and reason to spend cash for full sub than somone who leveled to 20 in WOW?

If you feel that alpha toons in eve will have more fun than what WOW noobs can enjoy up to lvl 20, then fair enough. I accept we see things differently and won't claim you are wrong.

Just personally, I feel that WOW has a lot more to offer up to lvl 20 than EVE does up to 5m SP (and NO T2).

As for being 'farmed' pvp wise, yes pvp vets in EVE will kill anyone regardless of SP (and can be killed by anyone too). But the limitations on these alpha toons are just too extremely severe.

Cheers Love! The cavalry's here!

Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#1137 - 2016-09-03 06:09:10 UTC
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
The problem may in fact not be with the clones, but with the multiboxing. And despite automation and scripting being outlawed, I am convinced there's still more than a few out there running such setups. Either that or my rig is getting really old because I can't see 28 clients running simultaneously and still respond at a moment's notice.

Free alts may not be the problem; they'll merely demonstrate the full capabilities of multiboxing while taking away the associated pricetag.

I for one am very curious to see how this plays out...



Even without doing stuff against EULA you can control a fair number of accounts. For PVP combat, though, anything above 3 on grid and it's not really effective anymore for most people. Some other activities scale better. For example, I have used 5 Nighthawks/Tengus to blast through 0.0 anoms faster than I should have been able without using ISBoxer or other things that are no-go nowadays.

A single 4K screen can hold 12 clients with very minor overlap but still so that every client is usable by just click of the mouse. Minimum EVE resolution supported is 1024x768 byt you can make the client smaller than that if really putting your mind into it - just some UI elements will not fit then on screen.

Even a normal 1080p screen can hold 3 clients with some overlap (but still usable) although more comfortable is 2 per screen. Thing is practically all modern GFX card can run 4 or more of these. A long while ago, for example: http://www.overclock.net/g/i/2864533/srs-business/sort/display_order/ that is 10 clients on AMS 1055T @ 3.9 GHz and 8 GB of RAM. I believe at the time I had probably two 6770 GFX cards in that machine. Frame rate was good enough for EVE - somewhere in the 20'ies. Now that I have more 4K screen and PC with much stronger internals I could probably get away with as high as about 32 on my primary GFX card. Perhaps 8 more on my auxiliary card for a total of 40 clients. Although for me personally that would be far too intense probably and I probably would not go over 10 ... 15 clients at a time when there is no restrictions.

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.

Aehren Armitage
#1138 - 2016-09-03 06:14:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Aehren Armitage
I feel the biggest issue here is gonna be, as stated, new players encountering a paywall as soon as they try out PvP and realize they've been wrecked by modules they can't use unless they pay. They will scream P2W from every rooftop, and Eve's reputation will plummet. If they're gonna do free to play (they are, don't get your little head confused with terminology like "alpha", and see it for what it is), they have to do it right- and if they do, it could be a COLOSSAL boon for the game, surpassing anything we've seen before.


"But Aehren, you gorgeous minx, how would CCP go about this F2P utopia of which you speak?"


Simple, darling.


(Numbers below are PLACEHOLDERS and ELASTIC. And calm your inevitably tumultuous ****, and read all the below before quoting a single line with criticism- a lot of these rely on the entire framework to work.)



1. No multiple accounts for Alphas. At all. No Alpha + Alpha, no Alpha + Omega. None. Only permittable (active) multiple accounts are Omega + Omega. Introduce a returning player mechanic that grants a free week as an omega for returning accounts that have been unsubbed for more than X months.

2. Remove limitations on skill training. Alpha accounts train whatever the hell they want, just like we do now, with one exception.

3. Alpha Skillpoint acquisition speed exponentially decreases as total SP goes up. These numbers can be whatever, but let's say 80% speed at less than 5m, 60% from 5-10m, 40% at 10-20m (or 10m+). Alternatively, set it to a flat 50% training speed (but his might make training seem excessively long for new players, hence the above).

4. Alpha accounts have considerably increased jump clone timers.

5. Alpha accounts cannot train into or use capitals.

6. No skill extraction on Alpha accounts. Omega accounts can only use extractors after being subbed for a consecutive 3 (4? 10?) months.


******* BAM. Results?

- New players don't hit a paywall until they're considering training into capitals, by which point they're invested into the game enough to not see it as P2W as they understand the differences between cap and subcap combat.

- New players don't feel like it's P2W, as they can train into whatever that guy was using to kill them, without paying.

- New players have a real incentive to sub, as it doubles training speed. Older players have an incentive to stay subbed, as they can't use caps OR ALTS without (just like now).

- Older players can't abuse this at all. They want a cyno alt? PI alts? Skill farm alts? Sub it, like you do now. Nothing changes for us.

-Newer players wanting alts will have to sub. If you like the game enough to go to the effort of juggling multiple accounts for an edge, you can pay for it. No dramas.

There's one issue I can see with this (and doubtlessly a few I can't); vets with perfect skills who don't care for alts and only stick around for subcap combat. CCP would lose those subs, as they probably wouldn't find jump clone timers that important in general to pay for. If some of you have ideas for a limitation that would incentivize these people subbing (but not force it), that would be great. That being said, I'd think the amount of fresh blood and subs coming in would make up for the loss in that area.

Our lives are not our own.

From womb to tomb, we are bound to others, past and present.

And by each crime, and every kindness, we birth our future.

Aehren Armitage
#1139 - 2016-09-03 06:21:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Aehren Armitage
*doublepost,Cry*

Our lives are not our own.

From womb to tomb, we are bound to others, past and present.

And by each crime, and every kindness, we birth our future.

Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#1140 - 2016-09-03 07:04:38 UTC
Aehren Armitage wrote:
I feel the biggest issue here is gonna be, as stated, new players encountering a paywall as soon as they try out PvP and realize they've been wrecked by modules they can't use unless they pay. They will scream P2W from every rooftop, and Eve's reputation will plummet. If they're gonna do free to play (they are, don't get your little head confused with terminology like "alpha", and see it for what it is), they have to do it right- and if they do, it could be a COLOSSAL boon for the game, surpassing anything we've seen before.


"But Aehren, you gorgeous minx, how would CCP go about this F2P utopia of which you speak?"


Simple, darling.


(Numbers below are PLACEHOLDERS and ELASTIC. And calm your inevitably tumultuous ****, and read all the below before quoting a single line with criticism- a lot of these rely on the entire framework to work.)



1. No multiple accounts for Alphas. At all. No Alpha + Alpha, no Alpha + Omega. None. Only permittable (active) multiple accounts are Omega + Omega. Introduce a returning player mechanic that grants a free week as an omega for returning accounts that have been unsubbed for more than X months.

2. Remove limitations on skill training. Alpha accounts train whatever the hell they want, just like we do now, with one exception.

3. Alpha Skillpoint acquisition speed exponentially decreases as total SP goes up. These numbers can be whatever, but let's say 80% speed at less than 5m, 60% from 5-10m, 40% at 10-20m (or 10m+). Alternatively, set it to a flat 50% training speed (but his might make training seem excessively long for new players, hence the above).

4. Alpha accounts have considerably increased jump clone timers.

5. Alpha accounts cannot train into or use capitals.

6. No skill extraction on Alpha accounts. Omega accounts can only use extractors after being subbed for a consecutive 3 (4? 10?) months.


******* BAM. Results?

- New players don't hit a paywall until they're considering training into capitals, by which point they're invested into the game enough to not see it as P2W as they understand the differences between cap and subcap combat.

- New players don't feel like it's P2W, as they can train into whatever that guy was using to kill them, without paying.

- New players have a real incentive to sub, as it doubles training speed. Older players have an incentive to stay subbed, as they can't use caps OR ALTS without (just like now).

- Older players can't abuse this at all. They want a cyno alt? PI alts? Skill farm alts? Sub it, like you do now. Nothing changes for us.

-Newer players wanting alts will have to sub. If you like the game enough to go to the effort of juggling multiple accounts for an edge, you can pay for it. No dramas.

There's one issue I can see with this (and doubtlessly a few I can't); vets with perfect skills who don't care for alts and only stick around for subcap combat. CCP would lose those subs, as they probably wouldn't find jump clone timers that important in general to pay for. If some of you have ideas for a limitation that would incentivize these people subbing (but not force it), that would be great. That being said, I'd think the amount of fresh blood and subs coming in would make up for the loss in that area.


In my opinion this sounds quite reasonable, however, I do think that there should be a ship size restriction to some degree under capitals as well at least. Giving the free players battleships and T2 ships and most importantly - mining barges could be quite disruptive to the economy. Predominantly for PvE reasons - it would make it viable for Alphas to run incursions with shiny BS groups which I believe would go a bit too far up the pole to be reasonable for a free account.

No T2 and up to cruiser size would be what I would consider good balance, as is proposed in the original devblog.

While at first glance the suggestion to have exponentially decaying skill training rate as a function of total SP seems pretty good the problem would be industry related skills, as these can be had at relatively good levels at fairly low sp amount and industry scales damn good with the number of accounts one can throw at it. combined with some form of skill list restriction for Alphas it would be pretty reasonable idea. Say, starting at full speed at 400k SP and more or less linearly decaying to 50% speed at about 10 mil SP or so.

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.