Regardless, Alphas would be hit with the nerf bat as a consequence (still no T2, definitely no delusions of T3 and probably losing access to battlecruisers and battleships). Skill training of 1x. Free.
Betas would similarly need a cap on skill points and a similar set of restrictions (T2, no T3, nothing larger than battlecruisers). Skill training would probably be somewhere between 1.25x. $9.99/month.
Omegas (for simplicity) would retain all current benefits. Same skill training of 2x. $19.99/month.
In terms of gifts/rewards, being both paid subscriptions - Betas and Omegas would receive the same benefits.
…
Just for kicks, I’m going to throw out a twist on this idea: Echo players.
Echos become the former Omega, but with restrictions to sub-capitals only (T2, T3 allowed). Skill training of 1.5x - no cap on skill points. $14.99/month.
I think I would also put Beta’s skill que cap to w/e their allowable skills are. I don’t really see a point of having a paid sub have to deal with that restriction. Hmm, I’m not sure. I think I might need to ponder it a bit more.
There needs to be some incentive to upgrade to Omega (higher skill point cap, faster training time, T2/T3) and disincentive to downgrade (lower skill point cap, ship restrictions, reduced training time). Otherwise it just ends up being a revenue hit from $19.99/month to $9.99/month.
Not every Omega will necessarily fly or want to train into capitals as well.
i fixed it for you ! if you want a halfe priced omega then you need to disallow all the good stuff ! why ? because oll other pilots would just pay half price and fly the good stuff !
same problem with your echo ! so disallow T2 BS and your price is ok for this !
still no need but if you want to implement such stuff then you need to restcit it hard ! because you dont want to lose that many player who wanna fly the good stuff in this game ! and T2 BS are realy good stuff … i only said M A R A U D E R ! they only should be accesable by omegas !
Oh I agree… your Echo / Omega clone concepts have access to more ships and faster training timers. The Echo clone has access to battleships which you removed from the betas.
True, which means we potentially get more players in the game since those players will have a lower sub cost.
Ultimately it’s a numbers game, in terms of where the balance is.
It wasn’t a typo; Alphas would be restricted to cruisers (no T2/T3) and Betas would be restricted to battlecruisers (T2/T3 allowed). Echos would be restricted to sub-capitals (T2/T3 allowed).
And yes, this means that Alphas get hit heavily with the nerf bat. It means they’d probably have a tough go of it for L4 missions and events, but so be it. And no Gnosis or Praxis, either.
and then nobody play with omegas anymore xD only a few capital alts and they will reduced … you allow all the cheaper subs the best ships ingame… no ! restrict T2 BC and T2 BS to omega only ! they are extremly stong so they need to be disallowed to the lower sub classes !
Alphas can’t pull L4 missions, they can only help other people run them.
And it’s already more or less pointless for an alpha to run combat event sites. They can do them, but too many people run around in highsec with marauders, and the only way they’d manage them in lowsec is with a group, so the restrictions are mostly meaningless there.
and this doesnt matter if they can fly the strongest subcap ships ingame ! and you want wchos have the black ops BS and marauder … no ! thats not gonna be a good state … !
same with your betas and t2 BC´s and HAC´s and HIC´s … they are extremly stong and need more restriction if you want such useless stuff like “cheaper subs”
True, but also consistent. Overall this change would be fairly large dps nerf for alphas, but I think the overall population would feel better about it, because what they can fly, wouldn’t be gimped.
Not everyone of course, players who are currently flying soct ships and bs/bc probably wouldn’t like it, but im pretty sure they’d get over it, and new players coming in wouldn’t feel as bad about their choices.
I am not going to spend the same effort by answering on every sentence you wrote. The synthesis of my opinion is in my previous post.
While I see validity in some of your rebuttals, they also do not constitute more than a nuance on my own views. What remains is the main points of our difference in opinion, and since those positions are unlikely to change, for any interested reader here’s a summary:
alphas are (or are not) explorers of the game - which I did exemplify with CCP’s own published words in reference, so anything but “my concept of Alpha”. And that is the single most important point, since everything else depends on it.
inequality is (or is not) a reduction of game experience quality for everyone involved, and it certainly should not (or should) be increased via new sub models like “beta” or via alphas with more liberties or more accomplished roles.
It is not (or is) a good idea to experiment with payment models beyond what is established, given the uncertainty about the consequences for game, player experience/satisfaction, game’s economy, PLEX and sub prices.
No available data of total revenue from alpha accounts over their active lifespan (microtransactions) vs total revenue from omega accounts over their active lifespan (microtransactions + subscription)
Vague concept of “beta” status without safeties to prevent omega to beta conversions.
An extra buck from creative monetization certainly is a buck, but if that extra buck creates extra losses it was a gamble that went bad (or an attempt at achieving great business).
Casual players do not (or do) constitute the future of New Eden. Not discussed but present between the lines.
Feelings (emotional response) in the community about alpha vs omega - and by extension beta - are (or are not) important decision factors about where to focus future business.
Feelings in the community about “getting as much money from the player base as possible” are (or are not) important decision factors when aiming the future business.
Alphas should not equal omegas in any game activity (should potentially be equal to omegas in a role for purposes of “experience”).
Fewer pricing models is (or is not) better than more pricing models. Approaching the game via a pricing menu is akin to the old ccp Soundwave comments in ccp’s internal - but highly publicized - newsletter, referred to as “CCP:Greed is good ?”, mentioned in the “Down the Rabbit Hole” video.
Maybe you can produce a synopsis of things we do agree on, for later reference
I think you did a fairly decent job of the thread synopsis. I’ll make a few corrections below.
You didn’t actually demonstrate that CCP views Alphas as a trial or a demo. Both Omega and Alpha can “explore” the game, so that word usage isn’t really indicative of a lesser play style. CCP gives explanations of the differences, hidden behind clicks, and in some cases rather obscure locations (such as the steam page example.)
This can be broken into two sub sections.
8.1: Negative feelings from Omegas about Alphas (and by extension, Betas) getting “more than they deserve.”
For: Alphas demanding more than they have is annoying, they’re freeloaders, and rant about Alphas (and by extension, Betas.)
Against: As long as the Omega in question is unwilling to move from Omega status to the lower clone state, the feelings are inconsequential, and akin to a child being upset by another child playing with a toy the first child wasn’t playing with.
8.2: Alphas should feel good about the time they spend in game.
For: As long as the contentment doesn’t prevent players who would otherwise subscribe to Omega, to stay as an Alpha, Alphas should feel good about the time they spend in game. The longer they spend playing EVE, the more chances there are for the player to contribute to CCP’s revenue, directly or indirectly.
Against: Alphas feeling good about spending time in game will prevent them from upgrading to Omega status and it will be an overall loss of revenue for CCP.
I would say the primary thing, that all parties agree on, is Alpha (or any other intermediate clone state - such as a Beta Clone) should not overshadow Omega. There should be a reason each exist, and you don’t want to create a situation where existing players feel it worth their while to downgrade from Omega to one of the other options.
What we also seem to agree on is the risk to open a door for ccp where standard pricing (current omega sub) comes under (upward) pressure - whether or not for “capital class ships”, as that was an arbitrary cut-off that somehow crept into this discussion. While a price increase due to inflation and increased maintenance costs is perfectly defendable and acceptable for most customers, a price increase simply on skills or in game activities would never be acceptable. On the contrary, such an approach has no limits, one crafty but daft price setter might as well increase the real cash cost for flying an exhumer or a marauder, making players look up at an increasingly expensive game to play over time (contrary to normal expectation). That, indeed, is a Pandora’s Box. And as you know, it’s my position that beta clone status would be part of that box. Perhaps it’s yours too.
We also agree on likely increased ISK value of PLEX in certain cases (like introduction of betas), fueling more inflation.
We don’t disagree on your 8.2. Alphas should feel good about the time they spend in New Eden. As I’ve said a long time ago on these forums, part of the complaints that creep up are in part due to wrong expectations. And those are fed by “less than perfectly clear” marketing by ccp, as we both know very well, and as we both have exemplified. Add to that that it’s in their best interest not to be perfectly clear (and thus enabling feeding on two cakes: cash from subs and cash from microtransactions) and we get what we have. That is ccp’s and only ccp’s doing, not ours. And I doubt they will ever make a crystal clear statement (what is referred to as “alpha is a demo”), although common knowledge is that honesty is usually the better approach. That is not an excuse for alphas to not be aware of very common practices in the online entertainment business, where nothing is truly “free” for consumption.
This would be a hard nerf bat for the alphas, I am not sure how many alphas would be remaining after this. I also know of many alphas who use gnoses and praxes, so they won’t be too happy. Removing battleships and bc for alpha will also make it harder for them to participate in the wars between nullblocs. Removing access to pirate faction ships for alpha is more understandable. Those ships are blingy and expensive and are useful only in certain situations for an alpha. However, to compensate, CCP should make the T2 Battleship weapons available for alpha. Anyway this is deviating from the topic of this discussion
Yes, that would be an effective way of reducing skill points floating around. Hopefully CCP implements it, but they likely won’t as it will probably affect their extractor sales
