i wanted to share an idea, something that existed in the mud worlds that prevents players from renting huge quantities of assets.
the deal is : you pay per day a fee to have a station store your stuffs.
if u run out of cash (extensive time away from game for example), your items are lost.
the goal is to reduce the enormous number of ships/gears laying around.
people would have to get more cash to rent their stuffs or have fewer and make choices!
2 Likes
Would this idea apply to Isk and PLEX? If people had to pay to store ships/equipment, i think people would just choose to sit on isk/plex as their asset of choice.
1 Like
This one gets suggested every once in a while, and I hate it.
- It punishes players for going on break.
- It punishes large industrialists, whoâll either need to make frequent market runs, or pay extra for keeping days or weeks worth of production materials on hand.
- It means players will have to spend more time doing logistics, because instead of pulling stuff out of their hangars, theyâll have to go to market.
- It creates more responsibilities for players (have to worry about paying a storage fee, or periodically converting your stuff to isk).
- It removes a hook for returning players (their stuff wonât be waiting for them).
- It will wreak havoc on the market and plex prices, as players look to convert large volumes of assets to plex and isk.
- AND, as far as Iâm concerned, you havenât actually fixed any problems or made anything better. I mean, why is reducing how much stuff players have in their stations a good thing? How would needed to spend more time isk grinding be a good thing (I would most certainly argue that it is not)? How would it present players with meaningful choices?
I disagree with many player ideas, but this one leaves me scratching my head. Itâs like your trying to trick us into â â â â â â â ourselves for the lulz or something. idk. I mean, itâs just such a raw deal for players that I donât know why players would suggest it.
6 Likes
well, the economy would certainly be different.
you would have to make isk to rent your stuffs, and you would lose isk fast if renting too much things, it would balance quickly and the question of plex is thus irrelevant.
renting costs could be substantially higher for finished goods and lower for materials ⌠for example the lowest on the production chain the cheaper! ⌠so it would let industrialist store goods to build and so on
less â â â â laying around is virtuous for the game, makes wars more strategical too and it would stress the production lines / bear in mind that the main problem is production is always higher than burnt ships!
main idea is to have a nice and big sinkhole for stuffs
So, i recall a podcast discussing a similar issue a while back. Basically, CCP had never intended for stations to have unlimited storage thus adding the (supply/demand for storage) gameplay element youâre hinting at.
At the end of the day, it was determined that the legacy code that Eve is built on wouldnât be able to accomplish this.
Iâd happily cite the exact podcast episode for interested persons, unfortunately, Iâve listened to far too many Eve Online podcasts, so Iâll be able to find it.
1 Like
I fail to see any tangible good this does for the game, nor can I think of anyone who would enjoy this. Hard pass.
6 Likes
This would really suck if you ever wanted a vacation.
Might trap deeply-invested veteran players, but everybody else will run away as fast as they can.
2 Likes
Or were deployed. We have a fair number of military folks who play, hard to get cable if on sea exercises.
No, this is not an idea I would support.
m
6 Likes
Yeah sorry but I vote no on this idea.
And if CCP decides to implement something like that for some ungodly reason, then I fully expect all Corporation members get the ability to store items rent free in all stations and structures within the parent Alliance.
The abandoned structure mechanic is about as far as Iâm willing to go in terms of advocating something like this. We get these kinds of requests a lot, whether itâs fees for stuff in a station, or decay on items, etc.
In the end, I donât see what the point of it really is, besides deterring people from returning to the game. At least with the abandoned structure mechanic, thereâs a benefit to existing players. This doesnât provide anything, really.
5 Likes
For what purpose? Who cares how many ships or materials someone has in a particular station. What difference does it make to anyone if I personally have 237 ships in the same station. It has no bearing on anything and you would never even know if I didnât tell youâŚ
2 Likes
deployed or away⌠who cares, the point is to redeem the value of things.
whatâs the point in having 237 ships in the station??
whatâs the point for the game when corps have more trouble finding pilots rather than Titans?
you only see the negative effect which is âi might lose cyber items!!â
but the real positive effect is to restore value to things and fight the production>destruction status.
there should be adaptation of this idea for manufacturing (as said above) and for many other situations for sure, but there must be a new sinkhole for items.
No. I among others have ships scattered around for the sole purpose of running missions to raise standings for others.
This is a bad idea cause it would hurt our operations among others as well. Leave npc station asset storage alone.
5 Likes
I mean if youâre goal is to kill player retention and push power further into the hands of large groups this is how you can do it.
4 Likes
Why is this in CSM Campaigns??
1 Like
Yeah, no idea.
1 Like
Moved from Assembly Hall to Player Features and Ideas.
1 Like
While Iâm personally neutral on this idea. Iâll answer some of these points even though Iâm not the OP.
-
It only punishes players for going on break if there isnât a âminimumâ level people are allowed. Alternatively you could have âactiveâ storage and âwarehouseâ storage, where stuff that is warehoused canât be grabbed instantly, but does allow for long term storage. Between these concepts you can balance people going on break, and also can auto warehouse stuff when people donât log in for more than a certain time to prevent too much getting drained from an unplanned break.
-
Large industrialists being pushed into player structures, which presumably would only charge if the owner sets them up to charge, is probably a good thing.
-
Players travelling to some extent is a good thing, Providing they have enough for standard day to day operations. See above around minimum levels where one doesnât get charged.
-
Eh, already dealt with above and basic book keeping shouldnât be that much of a drama for a hoarder.
-
Dealt with above.
-
Eh, people already tend to do that since items donât appreciate value except in a balance change, while Plex tends to over time anyway.
In short, the concerns are answerable, yes not everyone might be happy, but itâs doable without wrecking the game. Is it a good change at this stage in the games lifetime? Eh who knows.
1 Like
Basically, such innovations pretending to improve the game and in reality having only 1 purpose - make you pay for every shâŚt with real money or grind 24/7 and turn Eve into some Android âape push the button gameâ where you have to purchase stamina potions if you want to play more than allowed will turn even more people away from Eve and make new and veterans leave to other sandbox games such Star citizens.
If I like pvp and have 300 ships with different fittings or I produce ships with ready fittings for alliance military and gangs and donât forget eve is full-loot pvp, why should I stay in the game if such restrictions are widespread to absolute grade of retartedness
So next time before roaming I will have to purchase stamina potions for 50 jumps and licences for every ship from you
6 Likes