These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#5501 - 2015-11-09 00:27:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
(...)

This is why the selling of skill points goes against what CCP stated :

"The investment of money in EVE should not give you an unfair advantage over the investment of time. "

CCP Hellmar
2011-10-05

Until now every single thing in game is about time invested, This corrupts the whole philosophy of that principle.

(...)


Probably CCP is planning to shift from an access monetization model to an activity monetization model.

When players do more things ingame than they log in, either you improve how many players log in or you monetize what they do.

And frankly, CCP's chances to improve subscriptions are scarce. They don't have any plans to call in new players with some groundbreaking feature that could enable them to start from zero and in equal terms to the veteran players. Even the new content will be added to the end of endgame content, requiring alliances/structures/nullsec/ PvP and what the hell to as much as consider moving into that new space, whatever it is. Also, EVE has been cutting through the same niche for 12 years.

And all in all since CCP failed so horribly to understand that the average subscriber used to be a highsec PvEr, and those players are just leaving the game, CCP as a company don't have many options.

They rely on access monetization, but they're running out of customers willing to access the game for a fee.

They also have added customization monetization, but that is related to how many people play the game. Less players mean less need to one-time sells of cosmetic items.

So what's left to sell and monetize?

Ingame activity. The things you do, which are effectively locked behind a time-controled skillpoint barrier. You need to pay access for t game time in order to have the skills to fly that ship or use that module.

But what if you can just buy those skills? Not from a void, but from the existing 12 years long pool, to protect the skillpoint market, at least initially.

Then, what CCP does is to charge you for what you do. Activity monetization.

And once they're charging players for something they do (fly a ship for money rather than time), sky is the limit. They can charge players for absolutely anything locked behind the skillpoint barrier.

For an instance, CCP a may charge them for any skillpoints, and give them skillpoints for free if they pay a subscription ("Premium" skillpoints).

Thus there is no need to charge them for access. That, of course, calls in every player interested in EVE but not interested in paying months of subscription to "fly the cool stuff".

Skillpoints still would be a barrier. And players still could grind their way to lift it for time (grind ISK, buy skillpoints).

To us the old farts, it is very simple.

Either we stick with EVE F2P or give up all we did for those subscriptions and the effort behind them. The money we paid to CCP? Thanks for it. Now we can sell the SP to lift the ISK access barrier, if that bothers us much.

CCP is a company. They've painted themselves in a corner and the only way out is a "freemium" model with skillpoints being the bonus for subscription and the barrier to limit what a player can achieve by paying.

Then numbers will rise up, old players will get lots of PvP targets and customization monetization also increases when whales (there's always whales in F2P) feel they need to fly every ship and SKIN it in every possible way. That's in the thousands of dollars even with the current stock of the NES.


So now that CCP is moving in that direction, what are you going to do when EVE goes Free to Play, for the future well of CCP?


I... I think I will keep playing the game. Having lots of people around could prove interesting. Yes, some will be the usual freetoplayaidscancerkids. But some will stick longer and love this old wh0re for what she is, no matter how you pay her services.

(But oh I will feel SO stupid about all those thousands of euros in subscriptions...)Ugh


That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there, with an obvious bias and a (not so) hidden agenda.

EVE has been doing fine, it started to go wrong when CCP DID start focussing on making EVE more idiot/PVE friendly.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#5502 - 2015-11-09 07:54:38 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
(...)

This is why the selling of skill points goes against what CCP stated :

"The investment of money in EVE should not give you an unfair advantage over the investment of time. "

CCP Hellmar
2011-10-05

Until now every single thing in game is about time invested, This corrupts the whole philosophy of that principle.

(...)


Probably CCP is planning to shift from an access monetization model to an activity monetization model.

When players do more things ingame than they log in, either you improve how many players log in or you monetize what they do.

And frankly, CCP's chances to improve subscriptions are scarce. They don't have any plans to call in new players with some groundbreaking feature that could enable them to start from zero and in equal terms to the veteran players. Even the new content will be added to the end of endgame content, requiring alliances/structures/nullsec/ PvP and what the hell to as much as consider moving into that new space, whatever it is. Also, EVE has been cutting through the same niche for 12 years.

And all in all since CCP failed so horribly to understand that the average subscriber used to be a highsec PvEr, and those players are just leaving the game, CCP as a company don't have many options.

They rely on access monetization, but they're running out of customers willing to access the game for a fee.

They also have added customization monetization, but that is related to how many people play the game. Less players mean less need to one-time sells of cosmetic items.

So what's left to sell and monetize?

Ingame activity. The things you do, which are effectively locked behind a time-controled skillpoint barrier. You need to pay access for t game time in order to have the skills to fly that ship or use that module.

But what if you can just buy those skills? Not from a void, but from the existing 12 years long pool, to protect the skillpoint market, at least initially.

Then, what CCP does is to charge you for what you do. Activity monetization.

And once they're charging players for something they do (fly a ship for money rather than time), sky is the limit. They can charge players for absolutely anything locked behind the skillpoint barrier.

For an instance, CCP a may charge them for any skillpoints, and give them skillpoints for free if they pay a subscription ("Premium" skillpoints).

Thus there is no need to charge them for access. That, of course, calls in every player interested in EVE but not interested in paying months of subscription to "fly the cool stuff".

Skillpoints still would be a barrier. And players still could grind their way to lift it for time (grind ISK, buy skillpoints).

To us the old farts, it is very simple.

Either we stick with EVE F2P or give up all we did for those subscriptions and the effort behind them. The money we paid to CCP? Thanks for it. Now we can sell the SP to lift the ISK access barrier, if that bothers us much.

CCP is a company. They've painted themselves in a corner and the only way out is a "freemium" model with skillpoints being the bonus for subscription and the barrier to limit what a player can achieve by paying.

Then numbers will rise up, old players will get lots of PvP targets and customization monetization also increases when whales (there's always whales in F2P) feel they need to fly every ship and SKIN it in every possible way. That's in the thousands of dollars even with the current stock of the NES.


So now that CCP is moving in that direction, what are you going to do when EVE goes Free to Play, for the future well of CCP?


I... I think I will keep playing the game. Having lots of people around could prove interesting. Yes, some will be the usual freetoplayaidscancerkids. But some will stick longer and love this old wh0re for what she is, no matter how you pay her services.

(But oh I will feel SO stupid about all those thousands of euros in subscriptions...)Ugh


That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there, with an obvious bias and a (not so) hidden agenda.

EVE has been doing fine, it started to go wrong when CCP DID start focussing on making EVE more idiot/PVE friendly.


The cool thing about reality is that it is inmune to denial and ignorance. You don't know and don't want to know. But facts are there.

CCP is preparing Tranquility to handle hundreds of thousands of players online. When shown the dwindling population, their answer is that activity is on the rise so things are not going bad.

As I stated, CCP charges for login. But activity is doing better than logins, so what could they do to monetize what goes well (activity) over what goes bad (logins)?

This thread is about the beginning of charging players for their activity rather than for their login.

You should figure what road is this and where does it lead to.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5503 - 2015-11-09 10:27:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Levi Belvar
Gregor Parud wrote:
That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there, with an obvious bias and a (not so) hidden agenda.
EVE has been doing fine, it started to go wrong when CCP DID start focussing on making EVE more idiot/PVE friendly.

I would say it does give food for thought , nothing hidden in what was said either. Investing in hardware that far exceeds the needs of what was a PCU of over 65,000 which is now a good 45% lower.
I dont see much change in the PVE side, They have on the other hand made a pig's ear of the sov changes and jump fatigue which does affect PVP.

Then you give the ( you say idiot ) clueless new player the ability to buy his way into the game whats going happen - Ganked. We all know where that leads new players.

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#5504 - 2015-11-09 14:21:12 UTC
Levi Belvar wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there, with an obvious bias and a (not so) hidden agenda.
EVE has been doing fine, it started to go wrong when CCP DID start focussing on making EVE more idiot/PVE friendly.

I would say it does give food for thought , nothing hidden in what was said either. Investing in hardware that far exceeds the needs of what was a PCU of over 65,000 which is now a good 45% lower.
I dont see much change in the PVE side, They have on the other hand made a pig's ear of the sov changes and jump fatigue which does affect PVP.

Then you give the ( you say idiot ) clueless new player the ability to buy his way into the game whats going happen - Ganked. We all know where that leads new players.


On the hardware part, TQ2 haves a theorical maximum of 220,000 players online, based on the performance of Sol system (the synchronization core that updates the server at 1 Hz frequency). Anyway the old code for the Dogma system probably would had put the server in full TiDi well below that number of players.

As for TQ3, we don't know the maximum population sustainable by it, but the hardware is far bigger and more powerful than TQ2 and can handle lots more of players in every sense.
Portmanteau
Iron Krosz
#5505 - 2015-11-09 14:54:33 UTC
Doddy wrote:

A character is just a container of sp,

Bullshit
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#5506 - 2015-11-09 18:07:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Iowa Banshee
Levi Belvar wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there, with an obvious bias and a (not so) hidden agenda.
EVE has been doing fine, it started to go wrong when CCP DID start focussing on making EVE more idiot/PVE friendly.

I would say it does give food for thought , nothing hidden in what was said either. Investing in hardware that far exceeds the needs of what was a PCU of over 65,000 which is now a good 45% lower.
I dont see much change in the PVE side, They have on the other hand made a pig's ear of the sov changes and jump fatigue which does affect PVP.

Then you give the ( you say idiot ) clueless new player the ability to buy his way into the game whats going happen - Ganked. We all know where that leads new players.


I'm inclined to agree with the post that replied with "That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there"

There is no way activity can be doing better than logins as stated - Because Activity = Logins

do you think they have a secret way of doing something in game without using the login?.

*****

The concept of MMO financial models used is a little off:-

MMO Free to Play models are biased towards using the PvE content as the main form of monetization - SWTOR, LOTRO, Never-winter-nights etc, Once the PVE is state or completed the churn rate is typically much higher than games using PvP as the core function - The PvE of any of the games mentioned is superior to EVE but culminates in a mediocre (or bad) pvp experience.

The typical route for increased microtransactions in MMo's based on PvP - Is pay to win - Typically selling items with the specific purpose of winning - I.e Gold ammo in World of Tanks being an fine example, Guild Wars power-ups.

I not sure if in the future you wouldn't see something over powerful introduced just because of the high potential of profit

Buy a "Doomsday Shield" for 4800 Aurum or $24 would make a lot of cash
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#5507 - 2015-11-09 19:04:30 UTC
Iowa Banshee wrote:
I'm inclined to agree with the post that replied with "That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there"

There is no way activity can be doing better than logins as stated - Because Activity = Logins

do you think they have a secret way of doing something in game without using the login?.

People did say you should be forced to log in and cloak up in order to watch your pos, station, etc constantly. Remember siphons?

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5508 - 2015-11-09 19:32:12 UTC
Iowa Banshee wrote:
MMO Free to Play models are biased towards using the PvE content as the main form of monetization - SWTOR, LOTRO, Never-winter-nights etc, Once the PVE is state or completed the churn rate is typically much higher than games using PvP as the core function - The PvE of any of the games mentioned is superior to EVE but culminates in a mediocre (or bad) pvp experience.

Thats not strictly true, look at innogames with their grepolis,TW2 and the likes. Sandbox no pve you build your towns and upgrade them whilst building troops - The only action in those games is provided by all the other suckers who join - whoever thought of that idea must be laughing all the way to the bank. The only content is provided by the hordes coming for the freeplay Blink

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#5509 - 2015-11-09 20:15:27 UTC
Iowa Banshee wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there, with an obvious bias and a (not so) hidden agenda.
EVE has been doing fine, it started to go wrong when CCP DID start focussing on making EVE more idiot/PVE friendly.

I would say it does give food for thought , nothing hidden in what was said either. Investing in hardware that far exceeds the needs of what was a PCU of over 65,000 which is now a good 45% lower.
I dont see much change in the PVE side, They have on the other hand made a pig's ear of the sov changes and jump fatigue which does affect PVP.

Then you give the ( you say idiot ) clueless new player the ability to buy his way into the game whats going happen - Ganked. We all know where that leads new players.


I'm inclined to agree with the post that replied with "That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there"

There is no way activity can be doing better than logins as stated - Because Activity = Logins

do you think they have a secret way of doing something in game without using the login?.


I think you missed the point.

Now you pay for login and don't need to pay to do things ingame.

But CCP is changing that so you can pay to do things ingame.

The next logical step is allow free login and charge for what you do ingame. With that you get lots of new logins, which is something CCP can't achieve in its current situation. Logins feed activity and monetized activity feeds the wallet.

It's a win proposition... with a catch. I will let the smart guys here figure what's the catch.
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#5510 - 2015-11-09 21:34:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Iowa Banshee
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Iowa Banshee wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there, with an obvious bias and a (not so) hidden agenda.
EVE has been doing fine, it started to go wrong when CCP DID start focussing on making EVE more idiot/PVE friendly.

I would say it does give food for thought , nothing hidden in what was said either. Investing in hardware that far exceeds the needs of what was a PCU of over 65,000 which is now a good 45% lower.
I dont see much change in the PVE side, They have on the other hand made a pig's ear of the sov changes and jump fatigue which does affect PVP.

Then you give the ( you say idiot ) clueless new player the ability to buy his way into the game whats going happen - Ganked. We all know where that leads new players.


I'm inclined to agree with the post that replied with "That's a whole lot of nonsense you typed there"

There is no way activity can be doing better than logins as stated - Because Activity = Logins

do you think they have a secret way of doing something in game without using the login?.


I think you missed the point.

Now you pay for login and don't need to pay to do things ingame.

But CCP is changing that so you can pay to do things ingame.

The next logical step is allow free login and charge for what you do ingame. With that you get lots of new logins, which is something CCP can't achieve in its current situation. Logins feed activity and monetized activity feeds the wallet.

It's a win proposition... with a catch. I will let the smart guys here figure what's the catch.


The first introduction of a pay to win item didn't require the need to pay to do things "in game" it just increased CCP's returns on registered accounts.

Maybe this will be the path taken
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5511 - 2015-11-09 22:55:30 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
I think you missed the point.

Now you pay for login and don't need to pay to do things ingame.

But CCP is changing that so you can pay to do things ingame.

The next logical step is allow free login and charge for what you do ingame. With that you get lots of new logins, which is something CCP can't achieve in its current situation. Logins feed activity and monetized activity feeds the wallet.

It's a win proposition... with a catch. I will let the smart guys here figure what's the catch.
If this line of reasoning is in regard to this idea specifically I'm not seeing how it's true.

Training goes hand in hand with access to the game at the moment, and if SP trading is implemented it will continue to do so, but also allow trade of that game access privilege for isk. It becomes like PLEX in that respect.

That doesn't equate to charging for things to do in game. The things that can be done aren't payment gated. Some are SP gated, but we already have ways around that, whether one thinks them equivalent or not.

Thus free login isn't really a logical step since the only thing being sold is still the same type of access that has always been sold and the functions linked with it. We're just looking at decoupling one of those privileges from the current explicit character relationship while CCP takes their cut of the transfer cost, same as other game time transfer methods.
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#5512 - 2015-11-10 03:05:05 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
I think you missed the point.

Now you pay for login and don't need to pay to do things ingame.

But CCP is changing that so you can pay to do things ingame.

The next logical step is allow free login and charge for what you do ingame. With that you get lots of new logins, which is something CCP can't achieve in its current situation. Logins feed activity and monetized activity feeds the wallet.

It's a win proposition... with a catch. I will let the smart guys here figure what's the catch.
If this line of reasoning is in regard to this idea specifically I'm not seeing how it's true.

Training goes hand in hand with access to the game at the moment, and if SP trading is implemented it will continue to do so, but also allow trade of that game access privilege for isk. It becomes like PLEX in that respect.

That doesn't equate to charging for things to do in game. The things that can be done aren't payment gated. Some are SP gated, but we already have ways around that, whether one thinks them equivalent or not.

Thus free login isn't really a logical step since the only thing being sold is still the same type of access that has always been sold and the functions linked with it. We're just looking at decoupling one of those privileges from the current explicit character relationship while CCP takes their cut of the transfer cost, same as other game time transfer methods.



Lets be clear on this - SP trading is an UNLIMITED pay to win system - The previously introduced pay to win item (Duel Training Certificate) can only used 2 time per account per month - SP trading allows for as many transactions as you can afford

At present the maximum I can pay for advantage over other players is 2 plex or $24 - If you have a pot of isk you can now buy victory - the limiting factor is how much you are prepared to spend
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5513 - 2015-11-10 03:32:47 UTC
Iowa Banshee wrote:
Lets be clear on this - SP trading is an UNLIMITED pay to win system - The previously introduced pay to win item (Duel Training Certificate) can only used 2 time per account per month - SP trading allows for as many transactions as you can afford

At present the maximum I can pay for advantage over other players is 2 plex or $24 - If you have a pot of isk you can now buy victory - the limiting factor is how much you are prepared to spend
We should at some point probably clear up the apparent perception that SP = winning. If that was the case we late comers lost by not entering the game in 2003.

Second, 2/month/account with no limit on accounts holdable, meaning the number consumable is again only capped by the amount of money or isk someone wants to throw at it, granted with a much lower bar of desirability.

Character buying bypasses your limit as well. I can acquire SP as fast as I'm willing to spend to get them (differences/limitations aside the core effect is the same).

And there is actually a limit to the system, though that limit is likely going to go up significantly if this is implemented. That limit is the SP produced by subscribed accounts that the subscriber is willing to part with.

But most importantly, it's not even pay to win, it's play to win really. The packets trade in isk. Isk being earned in game is the backbone of the system. PLEX can be used, but only as something to barter for isk, and even then only from those that gathered it. PLEX can't even be used directly as PLEX > AUR only gives the capacity to extract SP.
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#5514 - 2015-11-10 03:56:36 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Iowa Banshee wrote:
Lets be clear on this - SP trading is an UNLIMITED pay to win system - The previously introduced pay to win item (Duel Training Certificate) can only used 2 time per account per month - SP trading allows for as many transactions as you can afford

At present the maximum I can pay for advantage over other players is 2 plex or $24 - If you have a pot of isk you can now buy victory - the limiting factor is how much you are prepared to spend
We should at some point probably clear up the apparent perception that SP = winning. If that was the case we late comers lost by not entering the game in 2003.

Second, 2/month/account with no limit on accounts holdable, meaning the number consumable is again only capped by the amount of money or isk someone wants to throw at it, granted with a much lower bar of desirability.

Character buying bypasses your limit as well. I can acquire SP as fast as I'm willing to spend to get them (differences/limitations aside the core effect is the same).

And there is actually a limit to the system, though that limit is likely going to go up significantly if this is implemented. That limit is the SP produced by subscribed accounts that the subscriber is willing to part with.

But most importantly, it's not even pay to win, it's play to win really. The packets trade in isk. Isk being earned in game is the backbone of the system. PLEX can be used, but only as something to barter for isk, and even then only from those that gathered it. PLEX can't even be used directly as PLEX > AUR only gives the capacity to extract SP.



Please feel to hop onto the character bazaar and buy 10 Titan pilots, 20 Supers and 20 carrier pilots - Oh that's right you can't as they are a rare commodity ... However I'm sure there are plenty pilots out there 12 to 36 months away from any of the above that would love to jump into one very quickly

The Plex to isk system mean you can buy anything you want and can afford - It removes the rarity of end game ships - the only limiting factor is SP

As for the safeguard of subscribed being the SP limit - didn't you say you can have unlimited accounts


Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5515 - 2015-11-10 04:20:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Iowa Banshee wrote:
Please feel to hop onto the character bazaar and buy 10 Titan pilots, 20 Supers and 20 carrier pilots - Oh that's right you can't as they are a rare commodity ... However I'm sure there are plenty pilots out there 12 to 36 months away from any of the above that would love to jump into one very quickly

The Plex to isk system mean you can buy anything you want and can afford - It removes the rarity of end game ships - the only limiting factor is SP
I'm sure some would like to, would there be sufficient SP to get them all there available? If you treat this like an resource that is infinite at any specific point in time then sure, it looks like an issue (but still isn't as SP != winning anyways), but they still have every other demand for SP to compete with for whatever SP exists in tradable form at that point in time.

Also no, PLEX doesn't bring end game ships into existence in any way shape or form. The means to create "end game" ships comes purely from game play. No amount of isk allows you to buy something that doesn't exist to be bought, and if it can be bought it already existed, thus rarity is in no way linked to PLEX.

Not to mention the entire principle the thought is based on is flawed. There should be no need for ships to remain limited by SP gating to assure rarity to begin with. It's obviously not a lasting solution (how rare are those super pilots after that 12 to 36 months?). Rarity should be a function of usefulness and weaknesses for anything with a means to be reproduced.

Iowa Banshee wrote:
As for the safeguard of subscribed being the SP limit - didn't you say you can have unlimited accounts
Yeah, but until you literally do have unlimited accounts you have limited SP. So I guess if we're counting theoretical infinite spenders we have a loophole of sorts.
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#5516 - 2015-11-10 05:06:11 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Iowa Banshee wrote:
Please feel to hop onto the character bazaar and buy 10 Titan pilots, 20 Supers and 20 carrier pilots - Oh that's right you can't as they are a rare commodity ... However I'm sure there are plenty pilots out there 12 to 36 months away from any of the above that would love to jump into one very quickly

The Plex to isk system mean you can buy anything you want and can afford - It removes the rarity of end game ships - the only limiting factor is SP
I'm sure some would like to, would there be sufficient SP to get them all there available? If you treat this like an resource that is infinite at any specific point in time then sure, it looks like an issue (but still isn't as SP != winning anyways), but they still have every other demand for SP to compete with for whatever SP exists in tradable form at that point in time.

Also no, PLEX doesn't bring end game ships into existence in any way shape or form. The means to create "end game" ships comes purely from game play. No amount of isk allows you to buy something that doesn't exist to be bought, and if it can be bought it already existed, thus rarity is in no way linked to PLEX.

Not to mention the entire principle the thought is based on is flawed. There should be no need for ships to remain limited by SP gating to assure rarity to begin with. It's obviously not a lasting solution (how rare are those super pilots after that 12 to 36 months?). Rarity should be a function of usefulness and weaknesses for anything with a means to be reproduced.

Iowa Banshee wrote:
As for the safeguard of subscribed being the SP limit - didn't you say you can have unlimited accounts
Yeah, but until you literally do have unlimited accounts you have limited SP. So I guess if we're counting theoretical infinite spenders we have a loophole of sorts.



All this talk of buy from the Bazaar & Unlimited accounts is just a red herring -
s
Unlimited Account does not mean unlimited SP for a Character
Unlimited ISK does not mean unlimited SP for a Character
Unlimited RL money does not mean Unlimited SP for a Character

SP trading allows for Unlimited SP for a character

Time investment is the limiting factor - If you remove the tie a Character has to his SP you remove the last obstacle pure Pay To Win.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5517 - 2015-11-10 05:13:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Iowa Banshee wrote:
All this talk of buy from the Bazaar & Unlimited accounts is just a red herring -
s
Unlimited Account does not mean unlimited SP for a Character
Unlimited ISK does not mean unlimited SP for a Character
Unlimited RL money does not mean Unlimited SP for a Character

SP trading allows for Unlimited SP for a character

Time investment is the limiting factor - If you remove the tie a Character has to his SP you remove the last obstacle pure Pay To Win.
No, that's just a factual falsehood that you created. Demonstrably so.

Simply put, only a certain amount of SP exists, even if all that SP was placed into a single character and every other character used to generate SP solely for transfer to that character it still doesn't become unlimited.

Not character linked? Sure, but no one is arguing that isn't the case.

Actually unlimited over time? Yes, but then every other method you mentioned generates unlimited SP as well.

Pay to win? No, as SP != winning and people can't buy SP for cash even if it was.
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#5518 - 2015-11-10 06:30:39 UTC

This feature has been proposed as a way to help the new player. Without the ability to play the game well, SP does not confer victory. On this, we both agree.

However, let's look at ways in which SP is winning:

1. Flexibility in fitting (choice of modules)
2. Flexibility in ships you can fly
3. Making tighter fits
4. With two players of equal ability, victory favors higher SP

Now think about what #1, #2, and #3 does in large groups.



If you don't think the game stagnates because of the increasing gap betweens the haves and have-nots, this feature will arm large, wealthy groups with another tool that widens the gap between them and anyone who's not them.



Making a general statement like "SP isn't winning" and applying that to all aspects of EVE is a disingenuous argument. Of course SP confers an in-game advantage. This is why we are all skilling, and this is why this thread doesn't end.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#5519 - 2015-11-10 06:37:29 UTC

And again, the difference between Bazaar and SP trading is this:

With the Bazaar, an IRL rich player still depends on the availability of high SP characters which is controlled by other players. High SP characters are not available in all favorable combinations of skill specialties, character histories, and so on. Availability is limited and SP is split up amongst multiple characters.

With SP Trading, an IRL rich player is only restricted by the size of his wallet. Other players and their choices no longer factor into how many SP can be gained. All of the SP can freely be voltron-ed into a single character.



People arguing that these two mechanisms are functionally equivalent are engaging in intellectual dishonesty.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5520 - 2015-11-10 07:14:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Sibyyl wrote:
This feature has been proposed as a way to help the new player. Without the ability to play the game well, SP does not confer victory. On this, we both agree.

However, let's look at ways in which SP is winning:

1. Flexibility in fitting (choice of modules)
2. Flexibility in ships you can fly
3. Making tighter fits
4. With two players of equal ability, victory favors higher SP

Now think about what #1, #2, and #3 does in large groups.

If you don't think the game stagnates because of the increasing gap betweens the haves and have-nots, this feature will arm large, wealthy groups with another tool that widens the gap between them and anyone who's not them.

Making a general statement like "SP isn't winning" and applying that to all aspects of EVE is a disingenuous argument. Of course SP confers an in-game advantage. This is why we are all skilling, and this is why this thread doesn't end.
If SP didn't confer advantages this conversation wouldn't be here as you state. That isn't being disputed. What is being disputed is that:

a) The only way to obtain this advantage should be through tenure
b) Once conveyed they should be immutable, even if loss would be involved otherwise
c) Trading these advantages should require whole character transfers and the significant investment this entails
d) These advantages are fair to characterize as "winning" and
e) The ability to sell or trade SP between players for in game currency is therefore fair to characterize as pay to win

I'm not sure the issues with large groups. Those entities are most likely to a) have access to high SP players unless specifically new player oriented and b) be able to mitigate SP inefficiencies through numbers, reducing the noteworthiness of any individuals performance gains.

The statement that SP isn't winning, when in the face of the even more disingenuous "this is P2W" argument is really just a less wordy version of "conveying an advantage created by players and traded between them on their terms doesn't constitute a pay for advantage from CCP equivalency or insurmountable or unfair barrier for those that chose or have chosen to train normally"

I just don't feel like typing that all out every time someone says "P2W."

Sibyyl wrote:
And again, the difference between Bazaar and SP trading is this:

With the Bazaar, an IRL rich player still depends on the availability of high SP characters which is controlled by other players. High SP characters are not available in all favorable combinations of skill specialties, character histories, and so on. Availability is limited and SP is split up amongst multiple characters.

With SP Trading, an IRL rich player is only restricted by the size of his wallet. Other players and their choices no longer factor into how many SP can be gained. All of the SP can freely be voltron-ed into a single character.

People arguing that these two mechanisms are functionally equivalent are engaging in intellectual dishonesty.
The 2 are fundamentally equivalent for the purposes of those that use them, even if not completely so.

But the core objection here, that there is no financial constraint seems like a non-issue unless we're going back to the explicit relationship between SP and winning, not the considerably more accurate and subjective measure of SP conveying advantages or options.

With caps existing for both of those, performance and options, there will always be a cap to what someone can buy with any specific tool set and again for the complete tool set. They can't pull further ahead than the skill system supports and no amount of investment can change that.

So we have a system that naturally caps abuse at lvl V, gets exponentially more expensive as approaching that level in 2 ways (sp/lvl approaching V and packet returns as total SP increases), and is likely a very rare case causing little to no actual effect on the game as a whole.

That there are differences is a fact, that they are meaningful and even pointed in the proper direction (IE: vets selling the negative rep they've earned to new players) isn't so factual, in my opinion anyways.