These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

45 million ISK cover charge to PvP...

Author
Ron Maudieu
#141 - 2012-07-20 01:03:38 UTC
Skex Relbore wrote:
Ron Maudieu wrote:
Can't afford to lose your pod? Then don't undock. Lol


That's exactly what people are doing which is the problem. They either don't undock and there for don't PVP or they only engage when they are at no actual risk of loss as in in large blobs or severely uneven ganks.

The idea is to get people to undock and don't give me that "why don't we just make ships free too" it's not the same thing, because different ships do actually offer different capabilities depending on what you spend on them and hell if you really want you can use a free ship (hello newb ship) so it's not comparable.



EvE 101 says: Don't fly what you can not afford to lose.
Marconus Orion
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#142 - 2012-07-20 01:08:15 UTC
Ron Maudieu wrote:
Skex Relbore wrote:
Ron Maudieu wrote:
Can't afford to lose your pod? Then don't undock. Lol


That's exactly what people are doing which is the problem. They either don't undock and there for don't PVP or they only engage when they are at no actual risk of loss as in in large blobs or severely uneven ganks.

The idea is to get people to undock and don't give me that "why don't we just make ships free too" it's not the same thing, because different ships do actually offer different capabilities depending on what you spend on them and hell if you really want you can use a free ship (hello newb ship) so it's not comparable.



EvE 101 says: Don't fly what you can not afford to lose.

We trying to get them to fly, period.
Ron Maudieu
#143 - 2012-07-20 01:15:17 UTC
I understand that, but if they are unwilling to work up enough isk to pvp, why should they be allowed to pvp? It would be like me saying I'll gladly lose any ship/implants, as long as its on your dime.

I'm sorry if people are so used to being spoon fed things, but this is just a small thing that adds a little risk to the game.

Mutters, "In my day I had to walk to school up hills both ways, barefoot, in a blizzard."
Solaine Talvanis
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#144 - 2012-07-20 01:51:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Solaine Talvanis
Cass Lie wrote:
There is however also a counterargument, lowering clone costs would significantly increase power projection via death clone jumping.


This.

I agree with the fact that clone costs could be lowered -a bit-, but the system is in place for a reason..
The fact that EvE isn't a 'simply respawn' game is what keeps it interesting.. and keeps people from doing stupid stuff over and over.

And let's be honest, how many people are facing clone costs over 45 mill..?
And even those who do, it's not like you always get podded when losing a ship. If you are, you might want to take a good look at your strategy. Let's not act like clonecosts alone are a major anti-pvp mechanic. Roll

The fact that your pod has worth influences the gameplay experience in such a way that you want to try and get to safety..
Implants do the same, yes, but pvp'ing with implants is a choice, as stated earlier.

If clone costs are eliminated entirely, for alot of people who don't pvp with implants in, the need to get the pod to safety would become obsolete, if not even a burden. Much easier to just selfdestruct and get to station earlier to get back into the action.

This isn't as simple a matter as some people posting in this thread seem to think, it influences alot of aspects of the game.

I'd hate to see it get dumbed down.
JC Anderson
RED ROSE THORN
#145 - 2012-07-20 01:57:51 UTC  |  Edited by: JC Anderson
If costs are a problem, then just jump into a Rifter, or a Stabber.

Shouldn't be beyond the means for anybody even after clone costs.
Marconus Orion
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#146 - 2012-07-20 02:19:28 UTC
Solaine Talvanis wrote:
This isn't as simple a matter as some people posting in this thread seem to think, it influences alot of aspects of the game.


I'm so glad you mentioned this. You see me, along with many others who have posted in this thread, see much, much further down the road in how clone upgrade removal would influence the game. I see...

- More PvP happening

-Thus more stuff blowing up

-Thus the need to replace said blow up stuff

-Thus more market transactions

-Thus more sales tax (hello ISK sink)

-Also higher skill point players opting to slide behind the wheel of a smaller ship

-Thus closing the available skill point game when facing a lower skilled player

-Thus evening the odds a bit more for the newer player

-Thus giving the newer player a chance at success

-Thus making him crave for more PvP and less missioning

-Also due to smaller ships being fielded, it will require other smaller ships to catch them

-Thus less players dry humping some titan bridge

-Thus causing them to get in smaller ships

-Thus having to spread out to deal with other players in smaller ships

-Thus blobbing less

Anyways.... I'm just theorizing, but some of what I said is not far fetched at all.

We don't want free ships or free PvP at all. All we want is what you risk to be tied to the ship, implants and fittings you decided to bring into combat, NOT of how long you have been a customer.
Marconus Orion
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#147 - 2012-07-20 02:25:09 UTC
Cass Lie wrote:
There is however also a counterargument, lowering clone costs would significantly increase power projection via death clone jumping.

No one is saying this 'issue' should remain untouched to prevent power projection abuse. That said people need to stop hiding behind one broken mechanic as an argument for another one to not be fixed. Believe it or not, but there is nothing wrong with fixing more than one issue at a time. Blink
Solaine Talvanis
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#148 - 2012-07-20 02:41:38 UTC
Marconus Orion wrote:
- More PvP happening
-Thus more stuff blowing up
-Thus the need to replace said blow up stuff
-Thus more market transactions
-Thus more sales tax (hello ISK sink)


Though listing it like that looks impressive, I think all these things all touch the same subject.
"Lower clone cost = more stuff getting destroyed."
Don't know if that would be the case.
Like I said before, getting podded is far from certain most of the time. Your ships will still get destroyed though, making all the above true without having to eliminate clone costs completely. Like I stated before, I think they should be a bit cheaper. Just not eliminated or 1 price fits all.


Marconus Orion wrote:
-Also higher skill point players opting to slide behind the wheel of a smaller ship
-Thus closing the available skill point game when facing a lower skilled player
-Thus evening the odds a bit more for the newer player
-Thus giving the newer player a chance at success
-Thus making him crave for more PvP and less missioning


Don't think the fact that new players will benefit from lower clone costs because older players would start flying smaller ships.
Bit farfetched, sorry. Besides, flying a bigger ship hardly means assured victory against a smaller one as we all know.


Marconus Orion wrote:
-Also due to smaller ships being fielded, it will require other smaller ships to catch them
-Thus less players dry humping some titan bridge
-Thus causing them to get in smaller ships
-Thus having to spread out to deal with other players in smaller ships
-Thus blobbing less


Hardly think the blob will be stopped if older players started flying smaller ships. The whole idea of the blob is more EHP, DPS, etc. You don't achieve that by downgrading to smaller ships.

Marconus Orion wrote:
We don't want free ships or free PvP at all. All we want is what you risk to be tied to the ship, implants and fittings you decided to bring into combat, NOT of how long you have been a customer.


I understand that's not what you want. Don't get me wrong, I'm not calling you an idiot for suggesting this change, I'm just disagreeing with the (in my view) eventual outcome. No clonecosts would have a drastic effect on the way the game is played.
More frantic and in quicker succession pvp is not what I think to be an improvement to overal pvp.
Tactics, planning and strategy is, and eliminating clonecosts would take away from these in the big picture.
More explosions is not the same as better pvp.

Again, I do think clonecosts could be reduced a bit. I also think this is not a major problem for alot of players.
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#149 - 2012-07-20 03:11:57 UTC
people complaining about clone costs is hilarious.
it isnt even remotely an issue till youre upwards of 71mil SP or so and if you havnt figured out how stupidly easy isk is to make by then, well, then i feed bad for you son...

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#150 - 2012-07-20 03:40:49 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
people complaining about clone costs is hilarious.
it isnt even remotely an issue till youre upwards of 71mil SP or so and if you havnt figured out how stupidly easy isk is to make by then, well, then i feed bad for you son...


That's fine. We couldn't expect you to understand with the clone equivalent of a squirrels cerebral cortex. It's not your fault.
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#151 - 2012-07-20 07:32:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Kahega Amielden
Quote:
If costs are a problem, then just jump into a Rifter, or a Stabber.

Shouldn't be beyond the means for anybody even after clone costs.


Who the **** is going to PVP in a 350K ISK ship if they're going to lose 40+ mil upon its loss? At that point t1 frigates and cruisers start to become useless from a cost efficiency standpoint if you're in a situation where you're likely to lose your pod (e.g. all of nullsec).
Quote:

Bit farfetched, sorry. Besides, flying a bigger ship hardly means assured victory against a smaller one as we all know.


Bigger and flashier ships are, in a direct slugfest, generally better. Small ships have the advantage of cost and mobility but an AF will virtually always beat a t1 frig, a t1 cruiser virtually always beat a t1 frig, and a battlecruiser will generally **** on both of those.
Clone costs in mean that in nullsec there is a certain bare minimum level of shiny that it makes sense to use. When you shoehorn veterans into flying shinies then it becomes harder for newbies to compete.

EVE PvP relies on the fact that no one can afford to (or wants to, anyway) only PVP in the shiniest things they have the skill for. By adding an artificial cost to any ship loss you hurt that.
hedge betts Shiyurida
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#152 - 2012-07-20 08:29:31 UTC
Nirnias Stirrum wrote:
Maybe an option to forget skills?

Havnt thought much about it so dunno what the consequences would be.

Personally i think the way it is now works. As previously stated, good ISK sink and we definitely need more ISK sinks in this game.


He idea of forgetting learned skills has some merit.

Take PI as an example. Most if not all jumped on it, how Many regret wasted time on it.

If you had an option to pay to forget a skill it is a an isk sink for ccp and should you wish to train again you have to purchase again.

Players win by getting rid of unwanted skills, ccp benefits by getting isk out of players. Win win

Pog mo thoin

Marconus Orion
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#153 - 2012-07-20 08:38:51 UTC
hedge betts Shiyurida wrote:
Nirnias Stirrum wrote:
Maybe an option to forget skills?

Havnt thought much about it so dunno what the consequences would be.

Personally i think the way it is now works. As previously stated, good ISK sink and we definitely need more ISK sinks in this game.


He idea of forgetting learned skills has some merit.

Take PI as an example. Most if not all jumped on it, how Many regret wasted time on it.

If you had an option to pay to forget a skill it is a an isk sink for ccp and should you wish to train again you have to purchase again.

Players win by getting rid of unwanted skills, ccp benefits by getting isk out of players. Win win


I guess I could 'forget' the 500 skill points in mining and maybe the 100 in P.I. Hell even a few hundred skill points in marketing. So lets see. That is like 800 skill points in total and only millions upon millions of skill points to go to get the clone upgrade cost to drop below the cost of a fully T2 fit battlecruiser. Ugh
Haoibuni
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#154 - 2012-07-20 10:39:37 UTC
The proposal by Malcanis to stop training at a certain amount of SP and train up an alt is deeply flawed as there is no mechanism in place to unlearn skills and reduce your amount of sp.

If we go on the premise that we want to optimally fly our ships, it requires that a day 1 noob:

has to decide what will be the maximum clone cost that he will be prepared to pay when he eventually get there (lets say it will be the approx 90mill clone that takes 4 years to get)

specialise. So he has to have an EFT plan in place that takes him up to that limit as optimally as possible

not spend SP on anything else for those 4 years. If he does spend SP on anything else it means he has to go over his clone limit to optimally fly the ships that are on his plan or change the plan



So day 1 noob creats a Caldari toon. 1st mistake, because in 4 years he is going to be an Amarr titan pro so he has 8000 sp in Caldari frigate whereas that should have been in Amarr frigate (a prereq for the titan) and the 8000 wasted sp could theoretically push him over the clone limit.

Week 1 noob is enjoying frigaes and wants to get tech 2 guns. He can't, not needed for the titan and pushes him over his limit. Same for PI, mining, destroyers, stealth bombers etc

Day 1 noob is clued up and knows about his optimal titan path. Great, for the next 4 years he is going to have crappy frig skills, no dessie skills, no stealth bomber skills etc

Day 1 n00b is clued up and has decided to scrap the titan plan and be a small ship specialist. Now he can't make any decent money as the best bucks come from ratting in a battleship

Now these are all choices. You can train whatever you want but Malcanis's suggestion was to stop training and train up an alt. That only works if you don't make a single mistake. If you do you are flying a sub-optimal toon.

Look at your skills, Malcanis. You have Mining 4 and a load of crap in Social. Mine much? Lvl4 mission much? No, you don't. So those sp would have been better placed in other skillS that improves the ship /modules that you can fly. Therefore, your toon is sub-optimal as you are not prepared to train those better skills as you have imposed a training ban upon yourself.

Have fun flying your sub-optimal toon. Urgh.


Grey Stone
BRUTAL GENESIS
GaNg BaNg TeAm
#155 - 2012-07-20 11:57:37 UTC
I vote for clone cost changes. I can say that in my case it really stops me for going into pvp on a regular basis in a small ships (or for that case any BC or BS hulls).

Why? Well it was explained here by many and I will not repeat it.

I can only say that people that don't see the problem surely doesn't have high amount of SP. And therefore it is for them not possible to comprehend and understand this issue.

Losing pod in 0.0 space is very easy. If there is a bubble (and there is a bubble almost in every engagement in 0.0) you have I would say 95% that you will get podded.

My clone costs 45 mi. Fully fitted t1 frig is what? 10 mil? t1 cruiser? 20 mil? Hurri, Drake 70 mil? and my clone costs 45... It was even worse before mineral prices change where my clone would cost more than fully fitted BC...

Let's say that I go fighting every day for 2 hours in 0.0 in said ships. I will not always die for sure :) but **** can happen and will. You will lose your ship in 0.0 soon or a later. I can lose 2 clones in 1 day of playing or more, or none. 10 clones costs almost as plex... and you can lose it in 5 to 10 days active pvp. That is just too much even if you have steady income.

Implants are my choice. Clone is not. It cannot go under "don't fly what you cannot afford to lose" because I have no choice but to fly my clone....

my 2c
Dradius Calvantia
Lip Shords
#156 - 2012-07-20 12:07:59 UTC
Meh, I don't have a pod that is worth less than 2 bill isk.... why would I care about 45 mil?
Grey Stone
BRUTAL GENESIS
GaNg BaNg TeAm
#157 - 2012-07-20 12:11:28 UTC
Dradius Calvantia wrote:
Meh, I don't have a pod that is worth less than 2 bill isk.... why would I care about 45 mil?


Maybe when you un-dock for a fun t1 frig roam with your friends or alone?

And lol boosting about 2 bil clone... every cap pilot and his mother has at least one of those.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#158 - 2012-07-20 12:19:55 UTC
Dradius Calvantia wrote:
Meh, I don't have a pod that is worth less than 2 bill isk.... why would I care about 45 mil?

I totally believe you.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#159 - 2012-07-20 12:30:05 UTC
Although ISK is not an issue.

Losing 3 Pods alone would cost me almost 100M ISK. Which is pretty absurd regardless of how much ISK I have in my wallet.

As a regular PVPer in low sec, I can get away with this pretty stress-free. But I know quite a few older players who end up playing in Low Sec for the better opportunities it gives for more veteran PVPers.





Where I am.

BrutalButFair
Fleet of the Damned
#160 - 2012-07-20 12:33:37 UTC
Maybe already mentioned, but i don't understand why de cost of the clone isn't on the killmail. It's always 1mil (well in eve-kill at least)