EVE Information Portal

a) My bad, what happened there was I said it didn't represent earnings potential and you said it was a median, but didn't specify median wallet vs earnings, thus I got confused. Now that you've specified what you meant:

Yes, it still holds true because we're looking at, per best estimations, the average character affording 2 each, before any economic influence fro motivation is visible, if it even becomes visible because players are free to say no to it or seek it at any pricepoint. Expensive isn't the metric here. If you want to talk about the list then do that or point out where there it was suggested that it wouldn't be.

b) It was expressed via the example how it is better. A player is now able to accumulate SP outside of normal training without having to have any gained abilities divorced from their identified character. That is a solid fact. It's not possible now. It would be possible with TSP. It's a choice denied by current mechanics and a choice enabled by TSP. That new factually proposed individual choice is the benefit.

Your behavioral prediction makes some interesting assumptions though:
- That the compulsion to purchase SP remains relatively constant even as the amount and distribution of SP grow
- That the desire to purchase TSP on any occasion will likely inherently become habit
- That the desire to compulsively purchase TSP will build to the point of making a purchase multiple times that of TSP in cost

None of these are inherent with TSP purchases. TSP actually is designed such that it works against the the last in fact. Further when we look at what we already know of character purchases we're left wondering if the first 2 are true. I'd like to see numbers to figure out what the repeat rate of buyers is, for certain, but "many" new player buyers suggests unique customers rather that a high repeat market.

If that does happen it's going to be because they've peaked TSP returns, don't mind disassociation with their main at that point, which is more likely once reputation is established, and/or whatever skill set their after is alt centric. Still, it means that the TSP option was the preferable one until it was exhausted, meaning it's benefits were appreciated.

e) "Because due to diminishing returns it become inefficient?" - Diminishing returns max at over 3 years of SP. Unless you're expanding the definition ow new to that range, which is absurd, this is irrelevant.

"Because skilled players can earn for it if they want?" - And? Skilled players can earn their own ships if they want but SRP still exists.

"Because if the corp wants to help player it is easier to provide him with ship and equipment worth that much which will help him to earn it on his own if he wants?" - Who said they weren't. I don't expect this to be an either/or type of thing for these benefits when the org can support them.

"If we go to the original question (how it will be better) what is the difference for non new players? They get 300mil value item, isk on hands, ships or equipment, what is the difference? Then answer how is it actually better and why?" - Simple, it's another benefit player orgs can offer to distinguish themselves and compete for members or attract the unrecruited, possibly placing more players in those orgs vs solo or or in weak orgs which data suggests is better for retention.

And yes, we're back to where we belong, on the list as you requested. Because you deflected into whole other topics than started complaining. So here we are fixing that and you're still whining.

g) Well if we're not taking SP into account were assuming a complete unknown price in which case your every argument on cost prohibitiveness is baseless until we know extractor cost. At that point we can begin to gauge the extent of PLEX impact and base cost. Until then we're at a stalemate here.

h) Well, yes, factually they will have diminishing returns over 5m SP, but that doesn't invalidate anything. This is because a) independence isn't universally sought (see any cap ship placement program ever offered), and b) people don't stop wanting free stuff because they can earn their own.

And yeah, many new players probably would want shinys over SP, but not a lot of corps offer those shinys because the capacity to use them effectively and the ease of their loss as a result is a bad idea compared to something you can stick and keep in their head and scales benefit accordingly. Understand the difference being explained here, are corps willing? Yes, but they don't have too many opportunities that aren't likely to backfire more often than work. This offers one.

Funny thing is, when I was new I didn't want shiny things because I lost ships and didn't want to pay to replace that stuff. SP on the other hand? Well, lets just say I almost became one of the cases CCP could use against attributes standing in the way of gameplay.

m) Look at the market. Are you having issue finding PLEX? Are there fewer posted? Yes, you know what would help that? A strong and sustained desire for isk. It's not a challenge on market data. Rather it directly addresses part of the issue your player analysis identifies. Incentivizing the introduction of PLEX to increase supply.

n) Nah, at this point you're just being vague and broadening your range to insert anything looking like a counterpoint even where it doesn't belong. Fact is the whole "side effects" thing was a deflection from the contents of the list you're now claiming you want to stick to. What losses may occur from "hurt feelings" don't apply to anything on the list and as such are misdirection for the purpose of arguing on point n). If you want that as an unrelated negative of the change not pertaining to the list then sure.

Otherwise no, it's deflection.

Your viewing the TSP with all it's erroneous use attached. The way i'm trying to describe is that the "Tempus Fugit" mechanic should only apply to the people who most need it which is those entering the game new / second character or someone tempted back after hearing that there is a way to speed the start process. There will be no effect to subs, even those who continue to sub whilst on a sabbatical. It's use is to get you into the game at a functioning level without any lengthy waiting period.


0 – 5 million skillpoints = 500,000 unallocated skillpoints added
5 – 25 million skillpoints = 400,000 unallocated skillpoints added
25 –50 million skillpoints =300,000 unallocated skillpoints added

Capped of no use above 50 million skill points.

You quote the figure of 300m but that's a minimal figure depending on the plex staying at its current price, there is still the extractor to be attached to that . Doing it this way you either pay CCP directly a set figure per packet or a set aurum price, one off sets the other i.e. if the ingame one becomes to expensive via plex you have the out of game alternative. None of it will impact the game like the TSP could financially.

Any item that has the Tempus Fugit mechanic should be made available to anyone unfettered, The TSP will be a coveted Holy Grail item or at best force individuals to create there own mini farms to boost a main / Find a corp - alliance that offers them, all counter productive to stimulating the player base and getting those numbers rising of actual players.

I'm only viewing it as presented and further not considering use over 50m SP "erroneous". There is also the issue of disagreeing on the concept of need. I don't think anyone needs it, which is why I'm fine with people deciding they don't want it for whatever reason. But since reallocation was a stated point in the op, I can say fully denying it to anyone negates a CCP stated goal.

Regarding the compulsion to sub, for inactives I imagine this will ease it, especially for those who find isk easy to come by and either have diverse or low SP characters they are still building. Reason being they would have no specific reason to be missing out since they could gain reasonably via TSP. If I'm right, and who knows if I am as that's the way speculation goes till it can be seen, that could also have a downward PLEX influence as fewer rich players may be PLEXing acounts through inactive downtimes for SP.

Also no, as explained 300mill is an estimate based on the expectation that the price will be around the PLEX equivalent price for the time, which as established needn't be true because we have potential producers that don't need to pay PLEX from it. If it could be established that the majority of supply would come from additional PLEX usage maybe that would hold, but we've yet to really determine that. If not, and we're fueling from training idle accounts that were already PLEXing or subbing as well as a low extractor cost we're looking at a minimal PLEX impact.

Further I'm not sure Tempus Fugit applies here since it implied idleness, like the current SP system, not activity and invested time like TSP.

Indeed, a saying sometimes coupled with the concept of wasting time. But apparently here that's not the desired interpretation, so what is and how does it apply?

I'd suggest reading that again and it's stated intent for SP respecs. No where is it stated that remapping is an erroneous feature, just one made intentionally inefficient. If your desire was to point that out not, consider it debunked on the fact that the diminishing returns were created in part to address and add cost to that feature as the selected quote states.

That seems like a strong overstatement of the relationship between PLEX and isk and a resulting false equivalency between isk and time. PLEX does work as a gold standard, though does so because of it's value across all uses, not it's representation of time specifically.

Thus there is no isk to time relationship to maintain since sub time is only one of the factors of PLEX cost and SP still only one factor of that sub time.

More importantly these ideas of PLEX giving a variable of base cost assume everyone is in a position of considering the sub cost to be equal to the SP count accumulated in that time. For any account that has no use of additional SP worth is actually 0. At that point any value is profitable and there is no compulsion to seek a PLEX equivalent point specifically. Rather, above a PLEX equivalent point you're just getting into the territory where doing it yourself is cheaper, reducing public demand making those prices unmaintainable if enough buyers figure it out.

Time flies - as in accelerated time i was referring, Never have i ever heard or just even googled it about it being wasted time lol, Most obvious being time flies when your having fun - You must of led a boring life.

How is it in anyway inefficient with that minuscule loss upto 50 mill skill points. If i remember correctly you also stated the figures were off for that also.

Found a similar interpretation pretty quickly, guess my google fu is stronger.

We'll have to disagree on the concept on miniscule since 20% to me is significant, though too lenient @ 50m SP. 90% is crushing to the point I wouldn't entertain it but for the most certain of functions I'd never again use (And I don't have 500k in any such functions).

And I've never stated that the function was erroneous, just that it needed returns adjusted because the 80% return range (5m-50m) is too wide IMHO. That's a far cry from saying it should be unusable at 50m+.

I did at one point support a cap, but don't anymore for the reasons stated.

I did, and addressed that. In the context of the conversation though you were stating the idea was erroneous due to the blog professing inefficiencies. You hadn't changed that position so far as I could tell so I thought you were still arguing for it and using my past disagreement with the numbers to support the idea that I also thought the scaling wasn't making it inefficient enough.

But if you just wanted my thoughts on efficiency, it's there.

That correlation of isk to time based on earnings is only personally meaningful. Things don't get cheaper because a subset of players can't afford them if the remaining subset can consume them at their current prices so I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Is it related to something specific we've discussed thus far?

Regarding monetary inflation, that's simple. Isk faucets, since monetary inflation is at it's base just an increase in money supply.

Oh, well there's a simple solution for that, just read what I wrote and don't inject nonsensical bits, cause you didn't get this path of selling characters in bits via TSP first then selling the depleted character to the very people you just made that character useless to from me.

That's not a position shift, it's you trying to come up with any scenario to invalidate someone.

Edit: You've got the chance to prove otherwise though, just point to where you claim I stated that the player diverted from the Bazaar for TSP for some reason comes back to that same Bazaar.

Just wanted to say I strongly support this change. As soon as possible, please.