EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2007-12-30 08:13
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-04-07 21:09
  • Number of Posts: 9,177
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Teckos Pech

Security Status 0.1
  • Amok. Member since
  • Goonswarm Federation Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • AFK Cloaking™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mike Voidstar wrote:


    Nah. I've seen a great many times where people reshipped and came out to fight only to be blue balled until we went to bed. Most of us are willing to take a fight that comes to us, but don't care enough to make it the focus of our gameplay.

    Too bad it's not really a sandbox game.


    Maybe...but you won't Mike. You absolutely won't.

  • Rising PLEX prices in EVE Communication Center

    das licht wrote:
    Demand is strong like it was before, supply dropped – that’s why prices go north. And supply is where CCP gets its money from. OMG, EVE dies… P


    I think with the introduction of small skill injectors it might have increased the demand for PLEX. Small skill injectors are running at a price slightly higher than the large skill injectors. That premium to SP could be stimulating a demand for PLEX from SP farmers.

    Edit: And the increased demand as PLEX replaced Aurum.

  • Rising PLEX prices in EVE Communication Center

    Myn Fora Sandwich wrote:
    Work one more hour a week IRL and pay for a service you enjoy that pays the people they need to employ to provide a service you enjoy. Then you can spend 8 more hours a week doing what you enjoy in EVE instead of doing anything you consider a grind. For those that consider grinding ISK for PLEX for Omega an achievement in and of itself - the increased effort for higher ISK PLEX should feel like an increased achievement. Enjoy.

    The decision to work any number of hours in game for your Omega that is greater than working 1 more hour a week or getting a job that pays $0.25 more an hour is your own issue.

    I know, shame on CCP for not making sure every single person can play EVE for none of the real life money it costs CCP to provide the game.

    After all everything on the internet costs nothing to create and maintain it is a free natural resource like the sun. Heck, if pron can be free why not everything else?


    I know most EVE players grasp the concept of opportunity cost when it comes to "I mine my own minerals therefore they are free..." The same thing applies here. That is what the above post is saying. If your opportunity cost of grinding for that PLEX has gone up then you switch to the next best option, pay for the sub with RL money.

    If you can't afford that...well...that indicates a rather rough situation wherever you live. Good luck.

    Oh, and artificially lowering the price won't help either.

  • Rising PLEX prices in EVE Communication Center

    Ded Akara wrote:
    How many players will quit/accounts will get cancelled because of this?


    Not that many.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mercur Fighter wrote:


    It is exactly intended to remove the huge power blocs, and replace them with many and much smaller power blocs.

    To address your downsides:

    * Lots of corps that aren't big and blobby get unnecessarily punished - The exponential tax starts after a certain amount of Aggregate SP determined by CCP, whatever it may be (lets just use 1 trillion as an example). So a majority of the alliances will not be punished.


    To use some extreme numbers, how many 100 million SP characters does it take to get to 1 trillion? 10,000. How is this going to address blobbing? If you make the number so large so as to not punish groups that are not "too big" then you do not address blobbing.

    And let’s break this down a bit more. So, 10,000 pilots. Assume 5 alts per player on average so 2,000 actual players. Suppose they all single box in fleets and that they have a 20% participation rate…that is 400 guys showing up to fight. If the other side brings 400 guys…will we have TIDI? Yes. Problem of TIDI solved? No. Suppose one side brings in an ally that they have set to orange so that they can avoid the ally tax…and now we have 800 vs. 400. One side is being blobbed. And one could argue that 400 v. 400 is itself one blob vs. another blob. If we take a smaller average number of SP/pilot we can end up with an alliance with 20,000 pilots in it.

    Just not seeing the improvement here.

    Quote:
    * Playing together and having a large social network is disincentivized since it's expensive. - The exponential tax starts after a certain amount of Aggregate SP determined by CCP, whatever it may be (lets just use 1 trillion as an example). So a majority of the alliances will not be punished. 1 Trillion SP is equivalent to 1,500 characters each with 67 million SP - you must be extremely popular with a lot of friends if you think that's not big enough of a network. Now I know everyone has a varying amount of SP so the number of characters will vary, so lets not start on that.


    First off, 1,500 * 67 million is 100.5 billion. You missed a decimal place. This is 15,000 person alliance (14,925 to be more precsie). As for being friends, you don’t have to be friends with all of them. Suppose I have 10 buddies in game who in a corp. And I want to join…well because 10 buddies. And that corp has a bunch of other dudes. Depending on how this tax progresses yes, it is punishing friends playing together. I might be rejected from joining my 10 buddies because of this.

    Quote:
    Also, it is advertised as a game with massive epic fleet fights.


    Also known as blobs.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Cade Windstalker wrote:


    [snip]

    In reality the sort of choice this pushes on people is one between playing with friends, people they enjoy playing with, ect and balancing a really stupid mechanic with about a thousand loopholes in it.

    [snip]


    This is the crux of the problem, a mechanic that is punitive towards positive in game behavior is already off to a bad start. It is going to have to have a pretty solid chance of delivering some really stellar benefits, and there are already 2 ways suggested to provide at least some degree of a work around using existing in-game mechanics.

    Nobody likes TIDI and nobody likes blobs unless they are the one's doing the blobbing. However, the first provides at least some improvement given the fact that bringing a friend to the fight is almost always going to provide a reasonably significant advantage. Blobbing is the result of human nature.

    Ever since the days when Og and Zog decided they needed to deal with Bog and Nog and having Gog on their side…”blobbing” has been a Thing™. And people behave socially much like organisms do in terms of evolution. They’ll look for loopholes, ways around, over, under or through barriers and constraints. It is one of the reasons why things get better over time. And EVE players are no exception…and who knows might even be a bit better at it than the average Schmoe.

    Given this I am skeptical your suggestion will actually deliver the claimed benefits, and given the costs it is just not a good idea. And your defense has been entirely unpersuasive. This mechanic is designed to punish. You want less of something in a modern economy…tax it. Want more of it, use a negative tax—i.e. a subsidy. Taxes are there to restrain market activities and even behaviors. We put a tax on cigarettes in the US to punish and dissuade smokers. And you clearly intend this to be punitive…hence the exponential nature of the tax. To claim that it is not to punish is simply errant nonsense.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mercur Fighter wrote:

    Also in your scenario: "if a 250 man corp is going up against a 100 man corp and they each have say a 40% participation rate, you'll have 100 guys going up against 40 guys"

    Then that is their problem if they are outnumbered in this situation.


    Wut? Shocked

    Seriously, your anti-blobbing idea does not work and the implication in your reply is to blob back....

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    BTW if a 250 man corp is going up against a 100 man corp and they each have say a 40% participation rate, you'll have 100 guys going up against 40 guys. A ratio of 2.5 to 1, or blobbing. Blobbing is not dependent on absolute numbers but relative numbers. You are not solving blobbing, even if it works as intended. You are merely changing the scale of the problem.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mercur Fighter wrote:
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    Annnd yet another problem....

    Why should a HS industrial corp face a tax for having high SP members? Yes, lets make our escapist video game more like real life where we have to work to pay the SP tax.

    It is hilarious how on the one hand we have a whine thread about big corporations/alliances and on the other we've had whine threads about people going to NPC corps...which this change may very well exacerbate.


    Of course an Industrial Corp / Alliance should face the same exponential SP tax / ally tax.

    I would think it's a strategic decision that any organization / country has to make - how much to allocate to infrastructure, how much to military, how much to education. Also who do they want to establish an alliance with, instead of just making everyone an ally.



    Why are you penalizing a group of players that is not even part of the problem?

    Here is a thought experiment. Next time I get some bad news, can I take $100 form you? Seems reasonable, right? You have nothing to do with the bad news, so yes I should be allowed to take your $100.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mercur Fighter wrote:
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    Mercur Fighter wrote:


    Nobody is getting screwed over anymore than they want to get screwed over.

    The decision of who to recruit is still yours. The decision of who to blue is still yours.

    The Corporations, and Alliances, will have a strategic decision to make - who do they want to blue, and who do they want to recruit.



    Bravo Sierra. I have a 140 million plus SP. I tend to take my alts with me. I alone can boost a corps taxes signifcantly in that I can bring probably close to 300 million SP in doing so. If I did that with say a small corp of new players, say I wanted to help out a batch of new bros we'd be hit with a very large tax bill....so I tell my merry band of new bros, go rat, mission, and mine we have to pay the tax bill? Remember it is exponential so it can get large very fast. Or in joining a larger corp that already has a fair amount of SP, I might be rejected due to the tax burden.

    BTW, you did not address my point about a smaller corp having a higher tax bill due to each player having more SP than a larger corp with a lower level of SP. The smaller corp will be "blobbed" by the larger corp.


    That would depend on how the exponential function works wouldn't it? Let's say if the exponential increase starts at 1 trillion SP - then you have nothing to worry about because your newbros have nowhere close to the amount of SP.

    Yes, they can still get blobbed. You see how this system still retains the same freedoms as before? When this happens, they can Ally with another alliance - and the "Ally Tax" will be based on how much SP the other alliance has.

    The Blobbing alliance can also try to create a bigger blob - but they will also face an "Ally Tax" as well, based on aggregate SP.

    So the Ally tax is exponential after a certain amount of aggregate SP as well (determined by CCP).


    If you weaken it too much you do nothing to the "blobs".

    And what about blue lists for FCs and target callers? That might be a partial work around to this mechanic. You going deem that an exploit.

    And yes, in answer to your question about mainstream, if making Eve mainstream means turning the game into a theme park or limiting what people can do in the sandbox, I don't like it. I think that is part of the problem in terms of number of players currently online...making the game less harsh, more appealing to the mainstream. People who show up to the forums and cry about the unfairness of it all.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Yes...you guessed it, one more problem.

    Corporations and alliances are not going to pay this tax out of the kindness of their hearts. They'll look to raise the revenues from their members. Depending on what the corporation/alliance can and cannot tax, the high SP characters might have ways to avoid that tax burden leaving it to lower SP players.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Annnd yet another problem....

    Why should a HS industrial corp face a tax for having high SP members? Yes, lets make our escapist video game more like real life where we have to work to pay the SP tax.

    It is hilarious how on the one hand we have a whine thread about big corporations/alliances and on the other we've had whine threads about people going to NPC corps...which this change may very well exacerbate.

  • AFK Cloaking™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mike Voidstar wrote:
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    Greylord Kane wrote:
    OKay so that thread got locked..


    To answer your question Daichi Yamato this topic will keep going back and forth until CCP decided what they are going to do. I have been in EVE since the beginning so you know, the VERY beginning...... and it's a shame. really. This topic will go back and forth. But yes if requested by CCP I can show over 10 paid accounts from our corp alone to them because of this very problem. And I am sure there are countless more. Hunting is not when you log in at down time and keep your character on until the next downtime,,,,, and just leave for the day no matter how you try to spin it. You can define it how you will, I define it as I will.


    Actually, what they are doing is hoping you'll become complacent. There is nothing wrong with that tactic other than it is boring.

    The solution is not to **** off half of the players who use cloaks, nor to **** off the half who prefer to bear it up in NS. But to give and take something from both. Hence Fozzie's statement that until they can address local they are not going to touch cloaking. CCP has also hinted that local may very well go away with the Observation Array. That is players in NS will lose local and can get back aspects of what local gave them and some other possible types of intel including a way to find cloaked ships.

    Of course if you simply dock up when a hostile comes into system he'll hopefully go around and tear down all your OAs, or at least render them inoperable until you come out and counter-hack/put them back...at which point who knows what will be waiting for you...but then you turtled up instead of undocking and defending your Stuff™.



    And it will take a full invasion force to do so, because it won't be possible to push your magic cloak button and be immune until all the defense forces go to bed. If you send one unsupported guy he will get rolled, and the cloaky crowd will wail until the next patch gives them back their candy because suddenly cloaks are 'useless' since they are no longer overpowered.


    Not if people dock up....which is what you and Greylord will do. After all I might have a cyno and 5 billion guys waiting to drop on you, right?

    You are usually smarter than this Mike. Maybe you should go back to your confusing narrative how cloaks are like but not like stations...but really not like but really like stations. Roll

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mercur Fighter wrote:


    Nobody is getting screwed over anymore than they want to get screwed over.

    The decision of who to recruit is still yours. The decision of who to blue is still yours.

    The Corporations, and Alliances, will have a strategic decision to make - who do they want to blue, and who do they want to recruit.



    Bravo Sierra. I have a 140 million plus SP. I tend to take my alts with me. I alone can boost a corps taxes signifcantly in that I can bring probably close to 300 million SP in doing so. If I did that with say a small corp of new players, say I wanted to help out a batch of new bros we'd be hit with a very large tax bill....so I tell my merry band of new bros, go rat, mission, and mine we have to pay the tax bill? Remember it is exponential so it can get large very fast. Or in joining a larger corp that already has a fair amount of SP, I might be rejected due to the tax burden.

    BTW, you did not address my point about a smaller corp having a higher tax bill due to each player having more SP than a larger corp with a lower level of SP. The smaller corp will be "blobbed" by the larger corp.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mercur Fighter wrote:
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    Mercur Fighter wrote:
    I know "you think it's a bad idea, period".

    Well, I think "it's a good idea, period".

    You have made your point and I'm sure CCP will read it.



    Well I think you do not understand the nature and philosophy of a sandbox game. That is why I think this is a bad idea.

    Oh and before you go full bore stupid...look at my corp history. If that doesn't help you, ask and I'll explain why a "Grrrr, Goons!" response would be full bore stupid.

    Aaaand another thing, your suggestion does not just punish "big groups" it also punishes smaller groups of older players. Why would you want to do that when that, smaller groups, is precisely what you want.

    Sorry, crap idea is crap.

    -1.


    I never said PLEX prices are going up solely due to blobbing. There's no need to mix my words, just because you are for whatever reason going into rage mode, saying socialism is a **** show, and comparing my quote to Mussolini.

    I guess it's passion from players like you that keep the game living for so long, but it's also this same passion that will keep this game from ever becoming more mainstream, which I'm sure you don't want to happen.


    Look your idea is bad on many fronts. Your views on laissez-faire are largely irrelevant (by the way, according to economic historian and economist Dierdre McCloskey the average wage from 1800 to today has risen about 30 fold, or about 3,000% That did not happen because of larger and more pervasive government, but due to economic liberalization). But hey, you threw it out there....

    Do you have an answer to my objections? A corporation of 100 guys with 100,000,000 SP each will face a far, far higher tax than on a corporation with 250 guys and each one having 32,000,000 SP each...why? Why should long time players be screwed over so badly in this case?

    Oh wait, I know...you'll just modifying the formula to account for the number of players...gee, I don't see any problems with that. Roll

  • AFK Cloaking™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Greylord Kane wrote:
    OKay so that thread got locked..


    To answer your question Daichi Yamato this topic will keep going back and forth until CCP decided what they are going to do. I have been in EVE since the beginning so you know, the VERY beginning...... and it's a shame. really. This topic will go back and forth. But yes if requested by CCP I can show over 10 paid accounts from our corp alone to them because of this very problem. And I am sure there are countless more. Hunting is not when you log in at down time and keep your character on until the next downtime,,,,, and just leave for the day no matter how you try to spin it. You can define it how you will, I define it as I will.


    Actually, what they are doing is hoping you'll become complacent. There is nothing wrong with that tactic other than it is boring.

    The solution is not to **** off half of the players who use cloaks, nor to **** off the half who prefer to bear it up in NS. But to give and take something from both. Hence Fozzie's statement that until they can address local they are not going to touch cloaking. CCP has also hinted that local may very well go away with the Observation Array. That is players in NS will lose local and can get back aspects of what local gave them and some other possible types of intel including a way to find cloaked ships.

    Of course if you simply dock up when a hostile comes into system he'll hopefully go around and tear down all your OAs, or at least render them inoperable until you come out and counter-hack/put them back...at which point who knows what will be waiting for you...but then you turtled up instead of undocking and defending your Stuff™.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mercur Fighter wrote:
    I know "you think it's a bad idea, period".

    Well, I think "it's a good idea, period".

    You have made your point and I'm sure CCP will read it.



    Well I think you do not understand the nature and philosophy of a sandbox game. That is why I think this is a bad idea.

    Oh and before you go full bore stupid...look at my corp history. If that doesn't help you, ask and I'll explain why a "Grrrr, Goons!" response would be full bore stupid.

    Aaaand another thing, your suggestion does not just punish "big groups" it also punishes smaller groups of older players. Why would you want to do that when that, smaller groups, is precisely what you want.

    Sorry, crap idea is crap.

    -1.

    Edit: And it punishes smaller corps of new players using skill injectors to improve their skills relative to older players. Again, why would you want to do that?

    This idea gets worse and worse the more I think about it.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mercur Fighter wrote:
    Cade Windstalker wrote:


    In general if you want to discourage the escalation of a behavior that is otherwise desirable you need to do it with incentives, not punishments. The balance of carrot and stick here is way off and it's questionable whether or not the goal being sought after is even desirable in the first place. After all a large part of Eve's appeal is its scale and single shard universe. If you want a small scale and hard-limited fight then you're probably playing a different game.


    Apparently the appeal is not very big within the MMO gaming market, given the effects of Valkyrie and Alpha Clones on the population.

    PLEX is going up because there are not enough sellers, I guess you have your interpretation of "not enough sellers", but mine is not enough appeal to newer players. And the people who are buying up the PLEX are old players in general, whether they are wealthy from moon empires, rental empires, or just industry/trade.

    And what I proposed does not discourage working together. It just "encourages" working together in smaller groups. Yes, it punishes you for working together in too large of a group, but that goes back to the control I was talking about.

    There might be workarounds / exploits - we're no strangers to exploits just like Rick Astley is no stranger to love. It eventually gets worked out by CCP like all the other exploits in the past. But I think you are "assuming" that there will be a devastating exploit that cannot be worked out - just like I was "assuming" things.


    First off your proposed solution for blobbing will do nothing for PLEX, or at least you have provided precisely zero connection between your proposal and PLEX prices. You'd be on much better footing if you literally said, "Magic."

    Using in game mechanics as they were designed is not an exploit. Using in game mechanics in ways that they were not designed or even intended in a sandbox game is not an exploit. And do we really want to start an arms race in terms of exploits and work arounds for what is basically human nature: forming social groups to accomplish goals and objectives? Why would you want to do that in a sandbox game.

  • An idea for wealth redistribution, and control blobbing in Eve in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Mercur Fighter wrote:
    I think Eve has a few issues:

    1. PLEX keeps going up because not enough people are selling them (specifically, the newer players who need to sell them). Valkyrie and Alpha Clones did not achieve their goal of retaining a massive amount of new players.

    2. A majority of the PLEX is purchased by a few (because a majority of the wealth is controlled by a few). Because the rental empires are controlled by a few. The moon empires were controlled by a few, but now that's being addressed.

    3. Eve is a blob fest.


    1. PLEX does redistribute wealth. Players who buy ISK in game and use them for game time, dual training, etc. (i.e. where PLEX leave the game) are moving ISK from those who have it to those who do not. Further, my guess is the recent run up in PLEX is at least partly related to small skill injectors.
    2. First off what evidence do you have of this? Second so what? I buy PLEX and I use them (i.e. they leave the game). I also buy PLEX as an investment, which takes my ISK and puts it in the hands of those who feel they do not have enough (which likely correlates with low wealth players). Your second sentence is a non-sequitur, I could just as easily note that on a few men have landed on the moon and it would be about as useless. Similarly your third sentence. Moons are typically alliance level assets. That is to take and hold a moon you will need the resources only found at the alliance level. Yes, the largest and most well organized alliances will tend to hold the most moons. My guess this will be true after the patch for moon mining as well, although the groups holding various moons might change. The idea of a small group holding a moon probably will not happen.

    Quote:
    This is not unexpected for a game with a Laissez-faire policy, but none of the existing successful countries in the world have a Laissez-faire policy. Most countries that have adopted Laissez-faire have repealed it because it turned to ****.


    You suggest a false dichotomy of laissez-faire at one end and….IDK at the other. In fact, the reality is a continuum and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that a more market based economy is going to have a higher growth and improving standards not just for a few, but for everyone. And an additional point of fact, socialism is every a complete and utter **** show. Look at places like Venezuela, our newest and current failed state where socialism was tried…and failed. The human misery is appalling and was totally avoidable.

    Quote:
    The phrase "everything in moderation" applies to everything in the universe even to the atomic level. The hard question is how much control to give to the Players.


    That is a nice variation of Benito Mussolini’s viewpoint on freedom. “We were the first to assert that the more complicated the forms of civilization, the more restrict the freedoms of the individual must become.”

    Quote:
    - Implement an exponentially increasing Corp / Alliance tax, based on the "Aggregate SP" of the players that a Corp / Alliance has. (I am not a technology wiz, but I assume if this is too troublesome to calculate in real time, it would be possible to calculate once per day at downtime).

    - Implement an exponentially increasing "Ally Tax" based on the "Aggregate SP" of the Alliances that you are setting Blue. (if someone wants a story behind this for role playing purposes, you could even say in Real Life it costs money and resources to maintain allies. Just look at how much America's foreign policies cost the country).


    What I would like is an explanation of why this will accomplish a reduction blobbling. Yes, I see the “obvious” explanation, an alliance with more SP will be taxed more and thus will face pressure to break up. Similarly with the allies. But players have proven to be rather adroit at finding ways to solve such problems. For example, using personal blue lists by FCs and target callers might accomplish a work-around.

    Seriously, I wish the technocrats and social engineers in the world would kindly **** off and let the rest of us get on with things.

  • AFK Cloaking™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Johnny Blueyes wrote:
    Goon response as expected. "You're dumb". And tell me then, this afk cloaker that comes back once per day at a random time, in his cloaky bomber, comes right next to a mining ship, decloaks, drops cyno, ships bridge in, pop the ship, warp out, that guy didn't provide a benefit? Sitting there all day not doing anything or even playing the game. Gets on for two seconds and provides a completely un-counterable benefit.


    Well, nobody was AFK there were they now. Next trivial question with an obvious answer?

    Quote:
    See, if you could read, I said that I don't have a problem with cloakies scouting around looking for targets. I have a problem with the AFK cloaker sitting in a system all day. You have no idea when they are going to be active, and therefore cannot organize a defense at all. There is no counter, it's 100% safe for the attackers. Good job you cowards, you dropped on a mining barge. LOL.


    An AFK cloaked ship has never ever destroyed another ship nor ever lit a cyno. Ever.

    Quote:
    Whatever, done with this conversation. Too many goons in here with awful attitudes. Anybody that dissents is personally attacked and the ISDs are too busy locking harmless threads to correct their buddies.


    No, too many people not engaging their brains and realizing they are talking about nerfing cloaks in general then writing, "I said that I don't have a problem with cloakies scouting around looking for targets."

Forum Signature

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online