These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Ship Customization: Time to Show Some SKIN

First post First post
Author
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#161 - 2015-04-22 00:10:05 UTC
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
#162 - 2015-04-22 00:16:40 UTC
Is there any sort of timeline or ETA on when the Auroral pod skin will be changed over?
Dangeresque Too
Pistols for Pandas
#163 - 2015-04-22 00:26:31 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Natya Mebelle wrote:
I still wonder if it would not have been better to keep the skins around their old price but instead of making them unlock on account, they are like modules which you slot into a new slot on the ship.
You could have exchanged the skins on that compatible ship as you would have seen fit, so you could either risk them or not, by leaving the skin in station.

This would have cleared up the market as well but still kept the skins in the category of "destructible item" like anything else in Eve... okay, except the golden pod.

I'm still debating which way would have been better. Spending much more money on a permanent skin, or paying less money for a possible destruction.

But wait... what... if BOTH could be done? You know, options are awesome?
Maybe food for thought for future updates c:

Maybe this decision came about by observing the willingness of people to fly with skinned ships. Considering the relative skin to hull cost I'd imagine loss was a potential factor limiting adoption, thus this addresses that while leaving the skins with their same relative value.
Though they didn't exactly implement an "easy to use" test system, as you had to un-rig your ship in order to apply the skin... and I don't know many people that went so far to do that, or to buy a completely secondary ship and put a 2nd set of rigs on it.

So their test use case data was flawed to begin with. And then they went a completely different direction...
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#164 - 2015-04-22 00:33:14 UTC
On the one hand, the value of my ship hangar is going to drop by about 20b after the change. But on the other, all those new permanent skins I'll have should fetch me twice that or more.

As for the cost to buy them in the NES. Meh. They're vanity items. It's not like you need them. If you are unwilling to pay the asking price then don't buy them. I know I won't be.

I'm fine with it. I don't think CCP could have done much better with this change. It's certainly a far better system than we have currently. People may actually undock now in their fancy ships rather than just spin them.

Mr Epeen Cool
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#165 - 2015-04-22 00:36:57 UTC
Dangeresque Too wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Natya Mebelle wrote:
I still wonder if it would not have been better to keep the skins around their old price but instead of making them unlock on account, they are like modules which you slot into a new slot on the ship.
You could have exchanged the skins on that compatible ship as you would have seen fit, so you could either risk them or not, by leaving the skin in station.

This would have cleared up the market as well but still kept the skins in the category of "destructible item" like anything else in Eve... okay, except the golden pod.

I'm still debating which way would have been better. Spending much more money on a permanent skin, or paying less money for a possible destruction.

But wait... what... if BOTH could be done? You know, options are awesome?
Maybe food for thought for future updates c:

Maybe this decision came about by observing the willingness of people to fly with skinned ships. Considering the relative skin to hull cost I'd imagine loss was a potential factor limiting adoption, thus this addresses that while leaving the skins with their same relative value.
Though they didn't exactly implement an "easy to use" test system, as you had to un-rig your ship in order to apply the skin... and I don't know many people that went so far to do that, or to buy a completely secondary ship and put a 2nd set of rigs on it.

So their test use case data was flawed to begin with. And then they went a completely different direction...

As it so happens this solution addresses both of those issues. It works around loss and rig issues since it doesn't require ship repackaging. Still, since the skins concentrated on tech 1 ships where disposability is most commonly a factor I can't see the loss of the skin not being a factor under the current system.

Someone whelping thoraxes or ganking in catalysts would likely find the current system prohibitive without even encountering rigging issues. The incoming system allows you to more feasibly die in style.
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#166 - 2015-04-22 00:41:50 UTC
Ned Thomas wrote:
They are avoiding a version that you spend real world cash money on being rendered obsolete from the outset because the version you spend internet space money on is dirt cheap due to over abundance.

Frankly, I think the rarity of the two types involved will sort that out rather quickly. One takes Aurum, thus being vastly more rare, the others you can buy for 5-20 mil. The apparel market has the same kind of scaling, and I don't see clothes causing any kind of market disruption.

Ned Thomas wrote:
Surprisingly, CCP likes making money. Whodathunk?

All well and good, doubly so since we're ultimately talking about cosmetics. I just don't like the idea that a nearly worthless item at present becomes even more worthless by being basically a very limited, time-lapsed feature.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:
How can there be a money grab for something that isn't obtainable with money? That's really the fundamental difference there.

The moneygrab is in essentially gutting the allure from the "common" BC/dessy ship skins because they'll be temporary, to the much more fascinating (also, rare as hell now, rare as hell in the foreseeable future) Aurum-provided perma-skins.
Dangeresque Too
Pistols for Pandas
#167 - 2015-04-22 00:44:35 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Someone whelping thoraxes or ganking in catalysts would likely find the current system prohibitive without even encountering rigging issues. The incoming system allows you to more feasibly die in style.
Except in most cases with the common skins they were only a few million at most, so losing a Nug Merlin was just another Merlin. Now on the other hand you can spend more than you would to PLEX your account for an entire month. In addition to creating an unsustainable market condition in which you have increasingly smaller target audience.

Having the SKIN as a rig or module slot would keep the market sustainable. And if they went with a module slot option (or even a specialized SKIN slot) then you would be able to remove it or exchange it for a different one, so the risk of loss wouldn't be as heavy.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#168 - 2015-04-22 00:52:04 UTC
Magosian wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
How can there be a money grab for something that isn't obtainable with money? That's really the fundamental difference there.

The moneygrab is in essentially gutting the allure from the "common" BC/dessy ship skins because they'll be temporary, to the much more fascinating (also, rare as hell now, rare as hell in the foreseeable future) Aurum-provided perma-skins.

Their scarcity provides their value, their permanence reduces their value. If the become permanent that's a character whose demand is permanently fulfilled. After enough characters have them there is diminished demand for more, with that demand further diminishing as prices drop accordingly. Making them temporary preserves the market.

Giving incentive for the aur market is a flawed argument. The aur market will largely be determined by isk:aur return and diminishing velocity since that market is pretty much set up to saturate. Making the in game ones temporary does a lot of nothing to change that for the actual cash buyers.
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#169 - 2015-04-22 00:57:03 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
...Making them temporary preserves the market....

This is where we have vastly different conclusions then. I, for one, would never buy a skin that is temporary, and thus it becomes entirely worthless, at least to me.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#170 - 2015-04-22 01:03:14 UTC
Dangeresque Too wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Someone whelping thoraxes or ganking in catalysts would likely find the current system prohibitive without even encountering rigging issues. The incoming system allows you to more feasibly die in style.
Except in most cases with the common skins they were only a few million at most, so losing a Nug Merlin was just another Merlin. Now on the other hand you can spend more than you would to PLEX your account for an entire month. In addition to creating an unsustainable market condition in which you have increasingly smaller target audience.

Having the SKIN as a rig or module slot would keep the market sustainable. And if they went with a module slot option (or even a specialized SKIN slot) then you would be able to remove it or exchange it for a different one, so the risk of loss wouldn't be as heavy.

I'm not sure how a merlin at 10x the price is just another merlin. Your entire argument seems based on the idea that the cost differences are trivial when proportionally they aren't. Neither of the use cases I mentioned are actually addressed by this at all.

And while you do correctly nail the point of sustainability, allowing for greater adoption though permanence widens the potential audience and increases use which becomes it's own advertizing. If most people only skin ships they almost never lose for cost reasons, or worse just don't skin ships for the same reason, you still have a sustainability issue with sales. If that's already the case then you don't lose much by making them more attractive to a wider range of buyers.
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#171 - 2015-04-22 01:04:31 UTC
Magosian wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
...Making them temporary preserves the market....

This is where we have vastly different conclusions then. I, for one, would never buy a skin that is temporary, and thus it becomes entirely worthless, at least to me.


I'd buy a temp skin to see what it looked like and try it out for a bit to see if I liked it. That's why I'd like to see temporary options for the permanent skins and permanent options for the temporary skins. One market would be low cost and high turnover, while the other would be high cost but slow moving.

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#172 - 2015-04-22 01:06:32 UTC
Magosian wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
...Making them temporary preserves the market....

This is where we have vastly different conclusions then. I, for one, would never buy a skin that is temporary, and thus it becomes entirely worthless, at least to me.

Then you aren't the intended market for those skins. The value is preserved over time for those who do want them renewing their ability to use them, thus they can withstand a smaller pool of potential buyers and come out ahead long term.
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#173 - 2015-04-22 01:10:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Ned Thomas
Also, why are we assuming that the skins will make ships more valuable to kill or lose?

You won't be able to BUY the ships with skins on them, there is no LOSS of the skin when the ship dies, and (outside of color scheme) there is no difference between, say, a Quafe Tristan and a Standard Tristan. There will be a rarity factor, sure, but it won't show up in the final value of the ship.

And who's to say these things will show up on killmails in the first place? EDIT: Forgot it was in the dev blog. The skins won't show on killmails initially, but it'll be added later.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#174 - 2015-04-22 01:18:11 UTC
Ned Thomas wrote:
Also, why are we assuming that the skins will make ships more valuable to kill or lose?

You won't be able to BUY the ships with skins on them, there is no LOSS of the skin when the ship dies, and (outside of color scheme) there is no difference between, say, a Quafe Tristan and a Standard Tristan. There will be a rarity factor, sure, but it won't show up in the final value of the ship.

And who's to say these things will show up on killmails in the first place? EDIT: Forgot it was in the dev blog. The skins won't show on killmails initially, but it'll be added later.

We aren't making the assumption they will in the soon to be implemented skin system; I made the assumption, backed up by pre announcement market prices, that they currently are more expensive and will be until the change is made unless I'm missing a part of the conversation.
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#175 - 2015-04-22 01:24:01 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Ned Thomas wrote:
Also, why are we assuming that the skins will make ships more valuable to kill or lose?

You won't be able to BUY the ships with skins on them, there is no LOSS of the skin when the ship dies, and (outside of color scheme) there is no difference between, say, a Quafe Tristan and a Standard Tristan. There will be a rarity factor, sure, but it won't show up in the final value of the ship.

And who's to say these things will show up on killmails in the first place? EDIT: Forgot it was in the dev blog. The skins won't show on killmails initially, but it'll be added later.

We aren't making the assumption they will in the soon to be implemented skin system; I made the assumption, backed up by pre announcement market prices, that they currently are more expensive and will be until the change is made unless I'm missing a part of the conversation.


Let's take a Sebiestor Hurricane as an example. Under the new system, after I buy the skin, I will buy a regular run of the mill Hurricane and apply the skin to it. When I leave the ship, it goes back to being a regular run of the mill Hurricane until I get back in it. If someone manages to kill me, I'll just go buy another regular run of the mill Hurricane as that's all I've lost. I haven't actually lost the Sebiestor Hurricane. Further, there will be no way for me to buy a "Sebiestor Hurricane" on the market, so there's no way to assess the value of that ship versus the value of the run of the mill Hurricane.

So there's no actual value added to the ship. There's no market to determine the value from. I don't see why there would be added value reflected in kills or losses of skinned ships.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#176 - 2015-04-22 01:31:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Ned Thomas wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Ned Thomas wrote:
Also, why are we assuming that the skins will make ships more valuable to kill or lose?

You won't be able to BUY the ships with skins on them, there is no LOSS of the skin when the ship dies, and (outside of color scheme) there is no difference between, say, a Quafe Tristan and a Standard Tristan. There will be a rarity factor, sure, but it won't show up in the final value of the ship.

And who's to say these things will show up on killmails in the first place? EDIT: Forgot it was in the dev blog. The skins won't show on killmails initially, but it'll be added later.

We aren't making the assumption they will in the soon to be implemented skin system; I made the assumption, backed up by pre announcement market prices, that they currently are more expensive and will be until the change is made unless I'm missing a part of the conversation.


Let's take a Sebiestor Hurricane as an example. Under the new system, after I buy the skin, I will buy a regular run of the mill Hurricane and apply the skin to it. When I leave the ship, it goes back to being a regular run of the mill Hurricane until I get back in it. If someone manages to kill me, I'll just go buy another regular run of the mill Hurricane as that's all I've lost. I haven't actually lost the Sebiestor Hurricane. Further, there will be no way for me to buy a "Sebiestor Hurricane" on the market, so there's no way to assess the value of that ship versus the value of the run of the mill Hurricane.

So there's no actual value added to the ship. There's no market to determine the value from. I don't see why there would be added value reflected in kills or losses of skinned ships.

Repeated for emphasis: "We aren't making the assumption they will in the soon to be implemented skin system"

For further explanation: We were actually discussing how they WON'T be more expensive in the new system compared to how they are NOW.
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#177 - 2015-04-22 01:35:04 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Ned Thomas wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Ned Thomas wrote:
Also, why are we assuming that the skins will make ships more valuable to kill or lose?

You won't be able to BUY the ships with skins on them, there is no LOSS of the skin when the ship dies, and (outside of color scheme) there is no difference between, say, a Quafe Tristan and a Standard Tristan. There will be a rarity factor, sure, but it won't show up in the final value of the ship.

And who's to say these things will show up on killmails in the first place? EDIT: Forgot it was in the dev blog. The skins won't show on killmails initially, but it'll be added later.

We aren't making the assumption they will in the soon to be implemented skin system; I made the assumption, backed up by pre announcement market prices, that they currently are more expensive and will be until the change is made unless I'm missing a part of the conversation.


Let's take a Sebiestor Hurricane as an example. Under the new system, after I buy the skin, I will buy a regular run of the mill Hurricane and apply the skin to it. When I leave the ship, it goes back to being a regular run of the mill Hurricane until I get back in it. If someone manages to kill me, I'll just go buy another regular run of the mill Hurricane as that's all I've lost. I haven't actually lost the Sebiestor Hurricane. Further, there will be no way for me to buy a "Sebiestor Hurricane" on the market, so there's no way to assess the value of that ship versus the value of the run of the mill Hurricane.

So there's no actual value added to the ship. There's no market to determine the value from. I don't see why there would be added value reflected in kills or losses of skinned ships.

Repeated for emphasis: "We aren't making the assumption they will in the soon to be implemented skin system"

For further explanation: We were actually discussing how they WON'T be more expensive in the new system compared to how they are NOW.


*goes back and re-reads the posts*

Ah......well I was just way off then Big smile
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#178 - 2015-04-22 01:54:07 UTC
This looks great - really looking forward to it! So how regularly can we expect new SKIN 'packs'? It would nice to see some new additions every release as a lot of us are anxiously awaiting T2, Pirate, Faction, etc. SKINs (there's a certain Kronos PoPo that will be a big hit).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#179 - 2015-04-22 02:08:32 UTC
It's a relief to see you acknowledge the market saturation problem. Any chance you'll do the same with clothing?
Jane Pantris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#180 - 2015-04-22 02:37:06 UTC
I can say that you single-updatedly restored my faith in your ability to do the right thing CCP.