EVE General Discussion

Lol, don't even get me started on people who think minerals are free.

The reason mining is such a **** profession compared to mish running has nothing to do with loot tables anymore; named module reproc payout is nerfed to hell.

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-to-succeed-in-your-homebased-business.html



(The only reason for insulation from this in Eve and the continuation of sweatshop-like work is because we won't starve to death by being stupid in a video game)

Now, this really struck a chord with me. It's practically endemic that people who work in mining or "the mineral trade business" (traders, margins, haulers, reprocessors, I'm looking at you too), generally don't try for higher prices. At a certain point, you have to be willing to say you're not going to sell at all, rather than try to liquidate your inventory constantly. Liquidation and fire sales are for people going out of business, not for people who want to stay in business.

Alternatively, it could be said these are the results of people doing sweatshop work. Minimal pay for a lot of work. Let's draw analogues to the real world. People that own rare metal mines don't flood the market, they restrict flow. Restriction allows people to profit. Guitar center doesn't sell mass produced guitars at their real world production cost. Everything is enormously expensive, because they need the markup to compensate for lower volume sold. They could probably produce some stuff at 30-40 dollars they're selling at 300-400 dollars. You ever try buying a replacement pre-amp circuit to go inside a guitar? 100 dollars for 10 or 20 resistors and capacitors that cost less than a penny each, especially with bulk deals they get, and the IC which probably cost around 50 cents. But why are they charging so much? Are you going to make your own, learn the trade, etc? They have the manufacturing and the knowledge down, and they have limited sales potential. They need to charge more. You don't see ubiquitous stuff in our daily life selling for so much, because, counterintuitively, the demand part of supply and demand can go both ways. If there's a lot of demand, it's easy to sell something cheap and still make profits. If there's little demand, you would want to jack up the price so that it's worth staying in business. Most people assume prices rise when demand rises, but the equation is too simplistic viewed like that.

If a person in Eve works harder than other people like mish runners, and they make a lot less, perhaps they're selling themselves too cheap, or need a profession change.

Anyway, clone costs are part of the flavor of EVE. Let's hope it isn't diluted by the salty water of carebears.





yeah, attrition.

If attrition becomes meaningless, than wars fought become meaningless. Clone costs being start of a slippery slope and all that.

As for the person you quoted saying people will fear PvP less and that'll create more content, I call bullshit. They'll just shift the fear onto something else, their expensive ships, dying for the e-peen gratification of others because they picked a frig ("LOL I just ganked this 10 year vet's ass, post his KM and laugh in local!"), etc. People who don't want to PvP because of the clone costs now, will still find reasons not to PvP if clone costs disappear tomorrow.

Grinding ISK and SPs to be able to buy and fly ships is pointless, time and isk sinking content. Please remove it with clone costs so we can add more content to the game through ships blowing up.

Oh wait. Suddenly now game mechanic removal steps on your toes.

I can pretty much headshot this argument with one acronym. PvP.

PvP doctrine in nullsec caused some players to have to gain more SP, in their very own words. Why would doctrine change if it yielded no advantage?

PvP is all about maximizing advantages of a certain ship and a certain fit to counter other ships and other fits, and also is countered in turn by various ships and fits on the other side.

If you think diversity isn't an advantage, then dont cross train.Oh wait, you can't fly pirate faction now?

What about when prices of a certain faction's ships take an overall decline while the other factions rise? Is it an advantage to fly those in PvP conflicts to fuel better replaceability and attrition an opposing side who's ships have gotten more expensive? How you going to do that without more SPs?

I think you're confusing immediate "in the moment" advantage with strategic advantage. More SP is more strategic advantage, fullstop.

Even arguing that in a limited engagement time, there's no advantage conferred by, say, mining, in a PvP 1v1, what about the ability of being able to active tank with all cap and rep skills at level 5 vs someone who can't ever fit an active tank? Is the latter character simply "incomplete" because they lack SP, or at a disadvantage because they lack SP? It's funny how the nebulosity of the term "advantage" can allow it to be twisted to mean some undefinable rhetoric.

A character can have 2M SP in combat skills, while having maybe 5M SP in industry/mining stuff. Meaning this character will have no advantage over a 2M SP character with the same combat skills.

Therefore, the numerical value of SP, is a stupid way to measure "strength" of a character and shouldn't have a constantly increasing tax tied to it.

Narh, this is going too far. Removing clone costs is a good thing. Will create more opportunity for high SP characters to undock in much cheaper ships.

Removing implant loss, would just make it mandatory to have implants, thus removing the risk-reward effect implants bring to the game.

So keeping implant losses is a good thing, cause you need to have some risk of losing them, when you inject those 2B implant into your head.

If people ragequit cause of losing implants, then EVE wasn't a game for them in the first place anyway.

Ship cost is a barrier to PvP as well. We need to reduce it by 90% or something. Right?



An ironic post. The core of EvE is a game where choices matter, and can cost you. You're free not to upgrade your clone, as you're free not to buy insurance.

Hey, why aren't you guys whining about insurance, since there's no real reason to buy anything less than full payout? Buying anything less is just a bad financial decision if you expect to lose your ship. Why do we even have grades of insurance when you either want bare minimum for hi-sec carebearing or full on platinum for active PvP?

In the interest of reducing mechanics which you feel have no value or are a waste, start with mid-grades of insurance.

What about all those modules/rigs that are useless except as newbie traps, like small energy ambit extension? Are they valid content or should we be removing them as mechanically flawed?

Medical clones are insurance to SP as ship insurance is insurance to ships. They both reduce downtime between pvps.

Your argument is predicated on the assumption that you deserve to never lose SP. The risk of losing SP is part of the game, as clone costs can attest.

Would you be fine with removal of clones so that every death is a loss of SP? Or would you suddenly cry out for clone upgrades back because it's "too harsh"? The people glad it's gone makes me want to see what it'd be like (in game howling, forum bombs) if the removal was accompanied by assured losses in SP.

The risk of losing SP should not be part of the game. That's my argument.

I'm all for making EVE harsh, cold, and dark. But having someone lose a month of training because they drunkenly decided to go out and have some fun in-game instead of staying docked up is a bad gameplay decision. Making every ship loss or pod loss inflict SP loss is an even worse idea in a game where the only way to replace that SP is to wait, let time pass, and SP recover.

The removal of clones is coming, and I welcome it.

You are only looking at it from a defender's or loser's point of view. From an attacker's or winner's point of view, podding someone and having them have a penalty for loss makes perfect sense. You want to inflict damage on your enemy so you pod them knowing they have to buy a new clone (or lose SP). Every battle has a winner and a loser, which means there is always a side in every battle that can benefit from podding someone and making them pay for a clone. You can also chose to ransom them or let them go and not inflict that damage.

Under the new rules it would be advantageous punish someone by not podding them and making them fly all the way back from wherever they came from to get a new ship. Except oh wait! since pods are free they can just self destruct and get a free ride home anyway.

So under the new rules, you are taking choice away from the winner/attacker. Now the winner has no choice to A) kill the pod to do more damage. B) ransom the pod because they want to save their clone, or c) let them go. Under the new rules they get a free ride home no matter what.

And before you go on about implants. Really look at how many pods actually have implants in null. The vast majority of pods I have killed have no implants , which taking away medical clones will not change (not perfect statistical analysis I know, but I have podded a lot of people). Most pods that DO have implants are very cheap ones worth only a few mil. Then there is the rare pod worth a lot. So from the attacker's standpoint, for the majority of pods with no implants, you at least know you did some damage to them either by some isk or annoyance. For the ones that have implants, you know they can afford the loss.

typing typing words tippity tap wow i love the sound my keyboard makes