A player market


(Whitehound) #1

Suggestion: Allow for players to become tradeable over a dedicated player market.

Synopsis:
It’s a suggestion to add more fun to recruitment and corp management, to add an alternative to just leaving a corporation or kicking players, to treat players as an asset with an actual ISK value, to build better corporations through a real market driven by demand and offer, and for players to gain a better self-worth when choosing skill sets and professions.

The options we currently have to build and shape corporations are somewhat limited and don’t offer too much fun. Recruiters need to run around and post ads in local to advertise their corporation, while they could also be skimming through an actual player market, make bids on players and buy directly the skill sets, which their corporation requires the most.

Corporations could decide to reshape their composition, i.e. when a new industrial corporation realizes that they cannot live without PvP pilots, or for a corporation to buy an expensive but often needed logistic pilot or a fleet booster for their ops. A market would add a realistic overview for corporations on what is available, what the cost for it is, and allow them to plan their growth more strategically rather than randomly and with a lot of questioning.

CEOs can decide to get rid of internal drama not by kicking a player, which is often seen as the bigger drama, but to place players onto the market for bidding and to allow others to buy them. While this may not end a drama, does it add a new twist to it. Imagine for a second when instead you’re being told “Shut up or I’ll kick you.” you get to hear “Shut up or I’ll sell you for cheap.” - it creates a whole new outlook on one’s self-worth and also removes a bit of the drama and toxicity from within corporations that may not be visible to all, but exists and can lead a player to leave or even quit the game entirely.

Players would be able to not only go knocking on doors, where they are often mistrusted as spies or simply are knocking at the wrong time. Instead, they would gain the option to place themselves onto a market without knowing where it takes them. Rather than skimming through an endless list of corporations and trying to find a reason why “unknown corp A” might be a better choice than “unknown corp B” could one make it into a self-chosen adventure, and leave it entirely up to chance without knowing where the journey takes one next, because the current option is not far from being a random chance itself. Players could leave corporations without leaving too much of a hole behind, and for their old corporation to make a financial profit and so giving both parties something they want.

Players can see with the help of a player market, which is the more valuable skill set to have at any given time. It would help in avoiding some of the fallacies, i.e. “I think miners are always useful”, which often happen not because a player is dumb, but because they have no means for making an informed decision in the first place. It will help players to position themselves better against the competition and add to their moral, when they know they’ve been chosen for their specific skill set and that somebody paid for them.

I believe a player market would overall lead to a better EVE, where players not only see each other as theoretical assets, but as valued assets, … and who knows if it couldn’t also improve how players see each other as people.

Should this find wide support may it also open the chance for a removal of the leave and kick option itself, as well as to more drastic changes, i.e. the removal of NPC corporations. I know that some people wish for it, but before this can ever become even remotely a possibility does it first require new options before anything old can be changed or removed.

One note though. For this to become a true alternative option with the ability to change EVE is it necessary that players get as few multiple choice options in the trade as possible. Besides the choice of a player’s timezone and language, shall it NOT have options to select for instance the space the player wishes to be in. A player who places himself onto the market or otherwise consents to being tradeable may NOT be allowed such options in order not to skew the market prices or to water down the mechanic by making it harder to be tradeable after consenting to it.

Some further details:

  • Consent is not assumed, but it has to be give by a player.
  • Players have the option to leave the player market at any time in order to stay where they are.
  • As a player moves from corp A to corp B will corp B pay ISKs to corp A.
  • A player’s corporation history may list the ISK value in a corp change.
  • Payments never go to the player, unless perhaps it’s added as a bonus option at a later time.
  • Players should have a minimum value of i.e. 1m ISKs to avoid player trades with values of zero ISKs.
  • Players in NPC corporations should be allowed to place themselves onto the market, but only for the minimum price. Bidding may drive the price higher though. The payment will go to the NPC corp and so end in an ISK sink.
  • Players who quit a corp within a month of a trade will have to pay their corporation the trade cost or not be allowed to leave before the month has run out.

PS: Please give a :heart: when you support the suggestion.


What is the most expensive thing in game
Looking for support for a new, additional way of recruitment in game - a player market
(Nora Maldoran) #2

I see one problem: Humans have free will.

Secondary thoughts

Why would I, as a player like to be tradeable? I didn’t join my corp/alliance to be sold off to the other end of New Eden because my CEO was in need of some PLEX.
I joined because I looked for similar minded people to do something and have fun with.

Also: How do you put a price tag on activity? A pilot with 150 million skillpoints wont give you any benefit if he does not login anymore because he doesn’t like where he was “sold” to.
How do you do pricing on experience?
What is worth my knowledge of the game?
How would you like to measure that?

Have you really thought this through? Example: What if my CEO and all the Directors won EVE and quit the game. There is nobodoy there anymore who could “put me on the market” then. Am I stuck forever now in this (dead) Corp? Doomed a solo pilot, or having to deal with, what’s left?

If I, as a player would be tradable, with

you basically have enslaved me.
You take away the option from the player to decide what it is he likes to do in the game because the entitiy that “buys” does so because they expect the player to use the skills he has in the way they like.

But what if the player disagrees with that? Will he be just sold off again? And again. And again until he finally doesn’t login anymore?

I don’t think this version of a player market would work well.


(Whitehound) #3

Of course I would have. Or try to leave the school system as a kid. Same problem. Nor can a soldier decide which war he wants to fight in once signed up. But it’s little different with professional sports players, too. Yet it’s being applied all around us already.

There are certainly many downsides, but I did not list them and on purpose. Some things will simply add to the harshness of EVE. I don’t believe that the majority of players would want it any other way.

This is already a problem and then again it really isn’t one at all. There are no guarantees for what will happen after you’ve bought a player. There were never any to begin with so why should there suddenly be any? It will simply reflect in the prices how much this is worth to you.


(Alopex-Lagopus) #4

Obviously won’t be good.

You are right.
I already dislike that I have to join either an NPC corp or a Player corp.
Why can I not be a freeman?
Why am I stuck belonging to a corp as is?
Less choice?
If as the OP suggests, I’ll quit playing as soon as that mechanic is implemented and I have no doubt that hundreds more will as well from my alliance as well.

CCP would not want to make that bad of a business decision.


(Nora Maldoran) #5

I believe poeple still would like to decide for themself what corp/alliance they want to fly with, fight and die for.

But I could imagine as a dedicated mercenary market the idea could work.


(Whitehound) #6

Firstly do you not need to consent to being a tradeable player when you don’t want to. But even in the worst case, say you didn’t have a choice nor an NPC corporation, could you still make your own corporation.

To think you’re not a freeman when you’re in a corporation is however your problem. I don’t think neither I or CCP can help you with it.

Are you a free man when you own a passport and are a citizen of a country?


(Whitehound) #7

They already don’t have the sole choice in it. It is decided by the recruiter of a corporation and not by the player.

But I agree with you that it should have a means for friends to stay together and that you should be able to leave the player market.


(Alopex-Lagopus) #8

(Whitehound) #9

It’s irrelevant to EVE. You do have the option to make your own corporation, to leave the player market and to go back to an NPC corp.

That some players want to see NPC corporations removed is however not new. It only isn’t the topic. This is a suggestion to add a new way to how we do things in EVE to the already existing ways.


(mkint) #10

First, the OP was far too long, so this is mostly a reply to the replies.

The recruitment system in EVE is terrible. This is worse.

However… The recruitment system is so bad in EVE, maybe it’s not fixable. Maybe the idea of finding a way to get people involved in recruitment who would otherwise not be, a sort of crowdsourcing, would be the only way to make it worthwhile. (What would be fascinating is if CCP could come up with a recruitment feature so good that they could license it out to the real world.)


(Whitehound) #11

Sorry to hear this. Did you miss the synopsis somehow?


(Nora Maldoran) #12

I begin to think this could be an actuall option for mercenarys finding work.
Imagine if you apply this idea not to sole players but to whole corporations. An alliance in need of pvp willing pilots joining their fleets would bolster their ranks this way.
At the same time the group of players can stay together and keep working as a unit.


(Whitehound) #13

I had already thought about it and decided for myself that this is not something I want. I only want for players to become tradeable and so the suggestion is only about individual players. I do recognize that there is a certain value to the lack of transparency that we have without a market. It does make things a bit more complicated, which on the corporation and alliance level adds to the conflicts and I don’t see this as too bad. Only I don’t see much value of it for the individual player.

I’m also not discarding your suggestion. We do already allow for allies in wars for example. So it’s not even new actually.


(Daichi Yamato) #14

Players putting themselves on the market could work. Being put on the market by someone else never will.


(Lady Ayeipsia) #15

So basically, I could trade you a spy in my corp for two newbs and your worst FC?

I just don’t see this working well. The idea is nice. And if there were no other options or CCP said you have to do this much like the way major sports leagues do, it could work in theory. However, with the way EVE is and has been, there would be major resistance and things would not work out well.


(Whitehound) #16

It can both work.

Let’s say your CEO wants to get rid of you. Right now can he just kick you, but what if he gave you the chance for you to decide: kick or sale.

Would you be the player who says no, takes the kick?

Or would you be cool enough to play along, accept that you’re going to leave one way or the other, and now you’re setting the terms and keep your dignity?


(mkint) #17

now has warning that you’re going to be kicked anyway so you might as well sabotage the crap out of your corp any way you can?

Have you played EVE?


(Whitehound) #18

You think that’s bad? That’s nothing. Imagine you get a spy into your corporation who works himself up to get into the position where he can sell members to other corporations.

As I said, there is certainly a harshness to it, but this is also not life but a game. It’s EVE. It’s also meant to be an option.

Imagine yourself looking for a corporation and you don’t like the current application process. How would it be for you when you’re being set up on the market and a corporation contacts you, and ask:

“We are looking for a player with your skills and could use you. We would like to buy you out of your current corp. Are you interested?”

Seems to me that when somebody chooses to put themselves up for trade then they are “game”. And anyone who is willing to pay the price is, too. To me is this better than a player who goes knocking on doors or recruiters spamming local any time of the day.


(Whitehound) #19

What makes you think that you, mkint, would even get the option or have a value to your name, and not just get kicked by your CEO?

Nobody says that you must be sold, but when one doesn’t see a value in oneself, so will others.


(Nora Maldoran) #20

Sounds now like LinkedIn for EVE players - instead of voluntary slavery, which was the opening post.

This question, adressed to player and current corp, is the difference that can make it work.