Removed a bunch of off topic posts. Keep it civil and on topic. Thank you.
@ISD_Dorrim_Barstorlode Good catch!
Not sure what you are referring to. You suggested dropping the restriction on a single alpha account being logged in:
Then finished with it being better to say it before CCP think of it. CCP did think of it (and their thoughts are in the devblog linked). Specifically this:
There are two reasons to make this kind of restriction. The first and most obvious reason is the potential for abuse and exploitation. The second, which the CSM focused on heavily, is that we don’t want to create a situation where normal players feel obligated to run Alpha alts. It would be unfortunate if every player has to choose between running an alt (which isn’t necessarily fun) or feeling disadvantaged against players who do. We’ve been deliberately trying to remove this kind of system (see off grid links) and certainly don’t want to add a giant new version of it with Clone States.
Those same considerations and potential for abuse still exist now, as they did in 2016. The reason for the restriction hasn’t changed.
I suggested a lot of things you overlooked.
Nothing was overlooked. The net outcome of the suggestion, irrespective of any skillpoint levels and times at those skillpoint levels, would be a removal of the restriction.
Everything else would be managed to not be affected by those suggestions, and the reason for the restriction are still valid.
Lots were overlooked.
One point among many you overlooked.
Not if changes are made that change the reasons the reasons were valid.
CCP’s motivation is less of an issue compared with the fact that such a “micro-transactional” payment scheme already exists. And so it could be leveraged for other purposes.
Those mentioned by myself and the OP.
Even one specific example from everything the OP has discussed that wouldn’t allow multiboxing alphas and/or alpha-omega to be exploited or abused. Or anything that wouldn’t have some people feeling that multiboxing would become mandatory in order not to be at a disadvantage.
Even one specific example from your posts that would have the same outcome as the above?
Not diverting, just a specific example from posts in this thread.
I said I was open to correction, just not sure this is it. (An observation, not a criticism.)
Venture flies at 5 AU with 4 sec align. Whereas a covetor does 3 AU and 15 sec align? So, in terms of a solo miner, flitting back and forward to dump out ore, there is much more incentive for a covetor pilot to fleet with a hauler/ orca to avoid travel. And by definition an alpha pilot has to be solo - no multiboxing.
So, you are saying the added risk from ganking is not enough to justify the extra reward from a covetor (which would also be limited to Barge 1)? That might be correct and would be a good argument against, if so.
Regarding AFK, remember the covetor hold will be full in 6 min. Sub 4 if they pick up a boost? That’s not that conducive to AFK mining, in any sector of space, in an expensive 2-catalyst-gank ship.
if… IF… alphas were to get another mining ship, i would suggest the ultimate tanked ship, which no doubt newbro miners would fit for yield and not tank, and thats the procurer.
if you are suggesting alpha only skills, then they should only apply to alpha only ships… say a mining ship called adventure… a step down from the venture, and is has a snowflake SKIN and can only be flown by alphas… Omegas will not have access to it. Restrict the Adventure ship so you cannot fit mods for yield and only tank, and is 3% slower than the venture…
No argument on either point. Altho, on that first point, would the dynamic change if the value in having an alpha alt had to be paid for?
Second point was specifically why all proposed “thought starters” were initially based on leveraging existing alpha limitations. Not removing them. Limitations such as no multiboxing.
The obvious exception to above would be removing (reducing) limitation on a mining barge. But. that’s not alpha-only skill anyway and it is the potential for exclusivity that I’m more interested in investigating.
I like this post. It adds creative ideas. Such as … IF … there was merit in identifying alpha pilots, then get them to fit a mandatory skin. Never thought of that.
And just how exactly are you going to make it so that alpha multiboxing can’t be exploited? If alpha accounts are crippled to the point that they can’t be multiboxed successfully then nobody is ever going to use an alpha account and they might as well not exist at all.
There is no more incentive than for a Venture pilot. In both cases, the incentive is the same for all pilots to participate in mining fleets: safety in numbers, access to boosts, and potentially hauler support (which is by no means assured).
Yes, that is what I am saying. Covetor is insufficient added risk for the added reward.
ATK =/= AFK. Don’t edit quotes and change their meaning.
My bad. Never seen ATK before - what does it mean?
At The Keyboard.
Thanks for that.
OK, inadvertently you still make one of my other points. Because any high sec covetor pilot is at less risk because they are at the keyboard, this means they are also being more active and paying attention.
True, by getting alpha pilots more active I actually meant them playing more. But either outcome has to be a good thing, surely?
Not sure tho that I agree with your scenario that A T K is all that great in reducing risk. In a mining barge with 15 sec align and 10 k EHP vs 50 M isk fitted price? But, we’ll let that go, as you don’t believe that it is enough of a risk to justify giving an alpha a 2.5x increase in mining rate anyway.
So, what would be a good balance in your mind between extra reward and risk? Just theoretically.