Except that resource scarcity is intended to be a limited duration - adding new features ‘because of resource scarcity’ is designing something that will immediately become imbalanced when scarcity ends.
This is also why the NPC mining fleets are presently so frustrating.
All of those effects are intentional.
CCP has intentions about a lot of things, but we’ve learned the hard way over many years not to judge anything by their intentions, only by what they actually do.
That aside, I just don’t see barge access to alphas being something that even without the current scarcity, would cause a significant change in resources. One character login limit flying a barge isn’t all that big of a deal.
But I certainly get where you are coming from and don’t think my view is more valid. Yours is just as valid.
No the alpha pilot can easily find someone else in a mining boosting ship to fly with.
That’s the point … they have to find and interact with someone else to get fleet benefits.
No triple hulks and orca run by one alpha player. Or, run by the same alpha/ omega player for that matter. The alphas has to be “solo”.
True, I may have misused the term “solo”, in its purity, but you get the point.
The problem with this whole narrative, as interesting as it is, is that every nuance of it is an attempt to make the Alpha play state more fun / rewarding / profitable and from a business perspective CCP do not want this.
Anyone that cares about the financial success of the game does not want this.
Alpha is not supposed to be a state that anyone remains in. It is the trail of crumbs that leads to the Omega cookie. Alpha is the carrot. It’s not supposed to be a permanent state.
CCP want people to go in this direction:
Alpha ----------------> Omega
This thread talks as if Alpha is supposed to be a perpetual state of existence, as if ‘Alpha’ is supposed to be what a player is, persistently rather than temporarily on the way to Omega.
We’re not really supposed to care if Alphas are making enough ISK or have a good enough mining ship or anything like that, quite the reverse, they’re not supposed to have either, so that they think ‘well this is crap’ and become Omega. We’re supposed to be pleased they aren’t making enough ISK.
At the point you think the solution to lack of ISK and lack of barge for an Alpha is a barge and more ISK, Alpha players are supposed to think the solution is going Omega.
So we aren’t really supposed to find ways to make it better for them, because they aren’t supposed to stay ‘them’ they are supposed to become ‘us’.
As well as anyone might argue that Alphas should have it better, I can’t see how or why we should ever aim for that given the above.
We don’t know that. This includes both the royal and collective use of “we”.
CCP released a series of buffs for alpha in 2017 with publicly stated intent of improving game play. This was so alpha players need not ever decide on whether to go omega.
Some buffs were subsequently dialed back but majority stayed. Without any definitive statement to the contrary, assumption is CCP are still comfortable with having a cohort of perma-alpha players.
In that context, this thread is simply suggesting buffing alpha again - ever so slightly - might make some of those players more engaged. Suggestion is also that whatever buff(s) seem best to achieve this could be delivered on a pay-for-use basis.
This might not be ideal(?), but the idea is to improve alpha engagement, introduce broader content and deliver revenue to CCP. Ideas on how, or even if, to achieve that is what is being canvassed here.
So, in your opinion, why are those three ideas (of increased engagement, content, and revenue) bad?
I believe that.
Know it? Well, without being CCP I can’t know it for sure, but I’m fairly positive it’s their intention based on all I have seen and heard, and based on simple economics / business sense.
I don’t agree. This was merely a bigger carrot.
They want Alpha to be a more attractive proposition to begin with in order to lure in greater numbers of course, with the hope that those new players with go on to become Omega.
They have always been careful not to make Alpha a sustainable state for anyone who wants to get serious about playing EVE. They have been very clever about where they have placed the Omega wall and this is not accidental. They have stopped barges, mining drones, Planetary Industry, Level 4 missions and so on for a reason. A calculated reason.
This is why I clam to know what they want.
It’s more than apparent and quite obvious.
They want Alphas to hit the ISK / barge wall that you are trying to find a way around, and they want the solution to be Omega.
Because you can’t beat the level of engagement, content and revenue generated by becoming an Omega.
Your ideas take players in this direction:
Alpha <---------------- Omega
Which is bad.
Instead of:
Which is good.
Why do you think they offer 1 Million Free SP for signing up through a referral link with rewards for going Omega?
You can’t disagree. It is what they said. In print. Not just verbally at the preceding Vegas meeting, where the introduction of T1 battleships for alpha players was first announced.
That is undoubtedly true. Yet they also introduced alpha injectors (and charged for them) which gave a defacto boost to the sustainability (longevity) of alpha characters.
Why do you think they increased the limit of functional skillpoints for alpha from 5 M to 21.5 M ?
Ah yes, but the target demographic in this thread is the casual but potentially still permanent player. Not the professional throrobreds who might, as you say, take a more “serious” approach to it all.
The discussion is however about whether this can be done whilst also providing value to the other demographics, both “serious” players and CCP.
No argument.
Give me a scenario in which an existing omega player would give up in order to play alpha. Specifically due to the introduction of either an alpha-only skill set or the option to use a covetor (only) and limited to Barge I ?
Never seen or heard any such thing. Need proof.
Still don’t agree even if they said that at the time, they obviously want people to become Omega, it’s obvious from their clever placement of the Omega wall and in many other ways. Of course they need to package the Alpha state as an attractive proposition in order to lure more people in, but you’re falling for the PR spiel if you believe they don’t want players to become Omega. That would be very naive.
Easy.
When they mine all day in a Covetor and suddenly that’s not an Omega thing anymore.
Regardless, thats not the problem. The problem is keeping Alphas in the Alpha state longer by giving them a Mining barge. That is not wanted by anyone except Alphas who want to get around Omega, and that is not wanted by CCP. You can’t have a barge as an Alpha for a reason. Again, this is not accidental or coincidental, it’s deliberate, and you’re trying to pretend it isn’t. The very fact that it isn’t accidental or coincidental is how we determine CCPs actual motives. Because they made that decision, for a reason.
That’s how we know things that you claim we can’t know.
That’s why I disagree with things you say I can’t disagree with.
It’s very transparent.
Goal post moved. Take a hike.
What exactly do you mean by “exploited”?
I prefer the term VMAK which means “very much at keyboard”. Since an F can be mistaken for a T very easily, or ATK be seen as a typo meaning AFK, VMAK is a much better acronym.
That said, knee jerk contrarianism is sure to follow from the resident geniuses who NEVER get confused by anything…which explains why they got bored running EVE and retired from it to post their genius quotes here.
Easy money making for free with little to no effort that can be multi-boxed has always been considered a way of exploiting the Alpha state.
This is considered bad for the economy and bad for the health of the game. This is why Alphas can’t do things like PI or mine in Barges. It’s why they have a strict limit on PD samples per day. It’s why they can’t do Level 4 missions.
It’s not an ‘exploit’ in classic terms as in finding a way to glitch through a wall to get to a boss if the word is triggering visions of things like that. Different useage of the word exploit.
‘Take advantage of / abuse with benefits to the player disproportionate to the benefits to CCP and the health of the game’ is what is meant here, I believe.
Don’t quote me though, the other guy can correct me if I am wrong.
(shrug) OK. You win that. Even tho the omega player would have to buy or extract the 5 M sp points to set up their alpha in the first place. Or, spend the 7 months grinding it out instead. (As the proposal here is that any alpha-only or significantly buffed skill could only happen after the current free training limit of 5 M points is reached.)
As posted earlier in thread:
Clone States - The next steps | EVE Online
Agreed. No argument.
Except. Its not. Is there sufficient value to CCP and the broader player base (potentially = same thing) that would allow the introduction of an alpha barge on a pay-for-use basis? You say no. I say, I dont know.
EDIT: and remembering that my greater interest is (probably) an alpha-only skill rather than a barge
It seems you haven’t read this thread and let it sink in, or see the broader picture. As usual, the length of the thread is inversely proportional to its quality. The arguments and reasons were given. Repeating that you want something badly, without addressing legitimate concerns, doesn’t make it a better idea.
As I thought, they didn’t quite say what you said they said.
The closest they came was this:
“Of course, more Omegas is fantastic but we think many of the players who leave might be willing to stay around if subscription didn’t feel like a requirement”
Their real aim is transparent however when they go on to say:
“We hope that with a stronger free experience, we see more players staying around to play as Alphas even if they can’t subscribe right away.”
Even … if … they … can’t … subscribe … right … away.
You can’t really argue that they aren’t simply trying to lure people in with Alpha breadcrumbs that lead to the Omega cookie. The likelihood of them subscribing is clearly key.
This is just basic business. You offer free coffee on Tuesday because you hope they’ll either a) buy a cake while they’re there or b) come back for more coffee on Wednesday when it’s not free.
You’re not trying to run a free coffee shop.
I mean, if they were to make more $ from Alphas who pay for a barge than they currently make from Alphas who perma-stay Alpha or quit, then business wise this would be a smart decision, as long as they don’t accidentally lose potential subscribers who otherwise would have gone Omega to get that barge.
There’s a bit of a risky unknown variable in there.
How many who take up your offer won’t take up Omega as a result? That’s a potential thing. A potential bad thing.
They’re in a difficult position because they want / need subscribers but no matter how much they offer Alphas as a lure (and that 2017 update was colossal, I was there) new players still moan about the Omega pay wall and seem incredibly resistant to parting with any cash for CCPs product.
I can hear them moaning about ‘only a Covetor’ already … lol
Still who knows, maybe there’s something of merit here.
It’s good to think outside of the box sometimes.
o7
This is all about the broader picture.
I am not, nor do I own an alpha character. That aside, what evidence are you using for your assertion that I want something (whatever you believe that to be) “badly”?
Arguments and reasons that have been given, include … “we” don’t want alphas getting something for free, alphas are freeloaders and have too much already, asking for something for alphas is a sign of entitlement, boosting alphas will encourage people not to sign for omega (maybe?) or even cause omegas to switch to alpha (maybe not?)?
Those aside, list the legitimate concerns that have not been addressed, irrespective of whether you liked any reply or not, or have not been acknowledged as being legitimate, even possibly deal-breakers?
Yes there is. That is why it is proposed as an “idea”. One that may, or may not, have merit. End of.
Here’s an example: multiboxed alpha gank fleets. Remove the limit on multiboxing alpha accounts (and the threat of a permanent ban for evading the limit) and every ganker will have multiboxed alpha accounts up to the hardware limit of what their PC is capable of running. This is not something CCP or any sane player wants to happen.
“Aside from all of the flaws in my idea that I’m just going to handwave away, what concerns do you have?”
Stop arguing with this person, the idea is so unrealistic it will never get attention.
Just let them have the last word (because that makes them right, lol) and let the thread die.