EVE Information Portal

After reviewing the dev blog 3 times I think this isn't so bad like people make it out as.
In worst case CCP could always remove this change and go back to the old model?

Correct, notice that all the doom and gloomers are using examples that are very extreme (100 alt accounts to try and cash in on SP trading, 20 accounts of T1 logi, etc.). Basically, they have nothing serious so they are going for the bullshit and lots of it hoping something will stick. They might find something, but so far I don't see it.

All they had to do was reduce the sub amount to like half of what it is today, and introduce multiple character simultaneously training on the same account at a scalable level on top of a standard sub.

So say you have a standard sub at about 8 bucks, adding another training queue to that sub cost another say 6 bucks more giving them a sub of 14 bucks and so on so on.

For example:
Let's say that 1st account character training subscription gets its costs reduced to 8 bucks, adding additional character skill training to the existing subscription costs 6 more bucks.
Bringing the total subscription fee too 14 bucks for 2x per client, it's still below it's current price and that of single PLEX price but also leaving room for one more character training.
Adding another 6 bucks giving them a commitment of 20 bucks per client, and scale it by the length of the commitment plan 1 month 3x month 6x month and year, compounding discounts.

By expanding the choice of payment and giving that choice greater value. I feel would add much more value to the current payment and boost sales.

Keeping the above suggested idea of scale and value and bring it across the board of price per longer commitment like 3 month 6 month and yearly pricing and you've got an EVE everyone would be happy with.

PLEX features/pricing stay the same and still work well as it is for the casual and situational clients.

The price I just use as an example it could be any figure, my point is it's scales well. 

Also claims of mineral prices crashing are highly over wrought as well. Sure it might happen, but considering that mineral prices and the economy were fine back when we had a peak of 50,000 players logged in, I doubt this is going to suddenly change. It might, but those predicting this have absolutely no evidence and are just resorting to absurd claims.

One of the key aspects of this is how many new players will there be as a result of this? 25,000 logged in? Great, we'll go back to where we were about 2-3 years ago. Will this mean economic catastrophe? Don't be so fecking absurd. Back in 2013 the average PCU was 48,000. The average PCU now? 20,000. So all the hystronics about T1 production, minerals and the like are just simply bullshit. Literally bullshit. Lies spewed by people who are ignorant and do not know what they are talking about.

With more players there will also be an increased demand for T1 modules and ships. Therefore, there will also be more demand for minerals. There will also likely be more ships destroyed meaning which is also good for ship, module and mineral demand.

Anyone who thinks more players in game is bad is a complete blinkered moron. The claims of catastrophe are also wildly exaggerated claims based on outlers and non-standard behavior as if it were the norm. Now, could this be bad? Sure it could. But I have yet to see a claim that is not based on histrionics and nonsense.

So, ummm ... defensive FW Plexing alt army? What happened to consequences in highsec? Throwaway gank Thoraxes? Free Venture mining ops 24/7 everywhere?

I foresee problems here boys.

Question: Can these clones trade / jetisson stuff?

Also....

Many of these concerns can be solved by simply limiting this F2P option or putting more limitatins on F2P. Put the Alpha clones to green or yellow for safety...fine (although I prefer yellow to give them some PvP options in HS). Limit the number of logins? Fine. Limit the number of logins with Omegas and Alphas? Fine. Make sure they can't get in certain faction ships via loopholes, fine. These are details, IMO and nothing game breaking.

People who want to "stop this" need to come up with a game breaking problem. And a problem based on $3,000 initial outlay is not reasonable. Sure it might happen, and some players with stupid amounts of ISK could do something weird like having 100 accounts to generate a pathetic amount of ISK after 12 months...whatever.

Come up with something truly game breaking that isn't breath-takingly stupid right out of the box. That is what would be helpful.

Just gave you one: FW DPlexing.

Biomassing because of negative sec status is kinda frowned upon, IIRC.

BTW, has anyone in this thread looked at this graph?

Link

Hopefully that link works...

If not, just go here and look at the data since about 2011.

To keep it simple : your goal is to bring new players, the result will be old player exploiting your system to kill the game, or new players with the new spirit of take it and trash it. I came back to EVE because it wasnt a free to play game, because the community of players is matur and to avoid craps like these. Take this way and I will just go look elsewhere. You did a nice work thinking about this new system, but think again and see how bad it is.