(17 replies, posted in General discussion)

Mouse Tiger wrote:

My trial accounts with no characters on, acrewed EP from the moment the account was created.

Interesting, because I have two that didn't.

Arga above wrote that you cannot subscribe an account without first "verifying it". Not sure what that means but it may be just "logging in" with the client.

I'm now suspecting that the EP starts to accrue neither when you create the account nor when you create the first character, but instead when you first log into that account from the client (you can log in and then log out without creating a character).

Can you confirm this would be consistent with your experience?
In other words, did you log into the account when you created it (even if you eventually did not create a character)?


(17 replies, posted in General discussion)

Arga wrote:

EP is account specific, which is why if you spend EP on character A it is not available to character B.

It's possible that the trial account does not start accruing until you actively start using it, but accounts with activated game codes most definetly acrue EP for the length of the subscription.

Did you try it or are you just guessing? Did you try to create an account and subscribe it WITHOUT ever connecting to that account from a game client and it did accrue EP?
Did it start from the moment you subscribed or from the moment the 14 day trial expired?

Another interesting test would be to reset an account and NOT create any new character for a few days. Did it still accrue EP? (no guesses, answer if you know because you did it recently).


(17 replies, posted in General discussion)

Annihilator wrote:

EP starts at account activation.

for you it should be easy to determine - check how much EP you have on your account, and when you have created your agent.

Actually I created trial accounts and left them dormant for several days. The EP started to accumulate only when the first character was created, not when the accounts were created.

Mammoth wrote:

It's all material benefit, and material benefit can be turned into NIC. I mean, that's what NIC is. A stick used to measure the value of goods and services. The stick differs in length according to how much NIC is in the game, but it's still the same thing.

Most of those things amount to a monopoly on certain production and better time efficiency, both of which are directly equivalent to currency.

Out of all the items in the list, the only non 'NIC' benefit to living in 0.0 rather than travelling to 0.0 is that it's inconvenient to move back and forth. If people want to PvP, they need to be on beta, so perhaps that's a good option. I don't think it is, but the rest amount to giving a handout to the most powerful corps in the game, which does little to increase competition over these islands.

If you define money as the unit of measure of value (that's what the stick is called technically: unit of measure) than by definition any value can be expressed in terms of your currency. Therefore yes: making living on beta more convenient means giving it more value and this may be expressed in NICs.

Even the conveniency of not needing to travel there can be expressed in terms of currency. And in fact it can even be directly translated to currency: that's called renting.

But there's a big difference between giving value and giving currency.

Tazca wrote:

Have you tried enabling "Show join/leave messages in chat" checkbox in options->gameplay? Side effect of this is of course that the public channels will clutter with join/leave messages. I presume the join/leave messages are shown in private chats as well; didn't get a chance to try it out myself.

This should be a per-channel setting, default on for convos, default off for published channels.

Mammoth wrote:

Why does beta need incentives to live there if there are no drawbacks? What are the drawbacks to living on beta if you like PvP? PvP coming to your doorstep is not sufficient incentive?

What kind of incentives are we talking about? AFK mining facilities (NIC)? More efficient production facilities (NIC)? Higher plasma drops from rats (direct NIC)?

I cannot (and most importantly do not want to) talk about what the incentives and drawbacks are in Perpetuum. Both because I'm a noob in this game and because ... the currently do not exist and I'm not a game designer for AC.

But I can tell you what some of the important ones are in EVE.

- you can manufacture stuff in 0.0 that you cannot manufacture in hisec. But the production facilities that do that are destructible and you may lose them and all the material in them if you do not defend.
- the best AFK material faucets are only accessible there. Exploiting them require you to build destructible infrastructure, maintain it and defend it. That infrastructure used to be part of the very mechanism of territorial control.
- it is inconvenient to go to the richest areas of 0.0 from hisec (and go to hisec from the richest areas of 0.0), therefore if you want to be there you'd better live there.
- faster and easier travel (thanks to destructible infrastructure) if you control the territory.
- powerful ships cannot come in hisec, can only be build in 0.0 and cannot dock.

These are some of them. NONE provides you money. In fact most of them require you to spend money. One provides material, and selling that material in hisec is one of the major ways to make the money you need for all the others.

There are a lot of reasons for this to be very very bad.
I'll just list a few.

- It make it possible to trade on the market at a value that is not the current market value. In other words the market will not work as a market but like a contract system.
- No matter how much the market develops (forget the fact that this very mechanic may prevent it from developing), it will make it possible to use it to launder money (and for that reason you'll never be able to let trials operate on the market).
- No trader with more than two active neurons will provide liquidity to a contract system: you need a real market where at any given moment in time the call and put valuations are known. There's no way to assess risk of providing liquidity and leveraging a spread if the spread is not certain.
- There is no way to place blocking orders.

Note that this impacts not only the market, but also the other things that depend on the existence of a solid market. Like production and the economy in general.

Jack Jombardo wrote:

And with this will never suport any brainless sugestion like "more NIC for Betas". You have enough, manage to survive with it or die yarr.

Where did you see anyone asking for more NIC for betas? If anything the main problem in Perpetuum is that PvPers living in Betas are in self-sufficient corps that have nearly no use for the *** of NIC the make (not to mention all those that they do not make but could if they wanted).

I'm a noob in Perpetuum, therefore I may be wrong. But I've got the idea that the problems in Perpetuum (at least in terms of economy) are:

- there's nothing you can do in beta that you cannot do in alfa except pew-pew another player (good reason to go there, but not sufficient to live there as you can go there even if you live in alfa) and mine one single resource (again something you could do by going there, no need to live there). As a consequence living in beta is not a necessity. It may be a convenience because of the NIC income and better outpost facilities. But if you do not NEED the extra NIC income nor the extra industrial efficiency, there's no point in living there. It may be an advantage. But it seems it's currently neither a necessity nor a sufficiently strong advantage.

- there is no need and not even sufficient incentive (advantage) for those living in betas to sell and buy (that is trade) outside their corp. That implies no strong need for NIC. Nothing they NEED is best done on alfas in a way that is inconvenient for them to do. The only thing they "miss" is ONE resource. And they do not really miss it as they can just come mine it in on alfas.

I do not think anyone is asking for more NIC on betas. No one. They are asking for reasons to live on betas. Not for NIC. As NIC is both plentiful and nearly useless for those living on betas.

Jack Jombardo wrote:
Pak wrote:

I have 6 active accounts with a total of 14 characters, in EvE.

Exceptions define the normality. Or would you say 6 active accounts are "normal"?

That depends. If you speak of someone that has just started and is low on money or that play only one facet of the game, then no. In that case one or two accounts are the norm.

But if you speak of someone that, over many years, have played pretty much all the facets of such a complex game and still engages in more than one play-style, multiple accounts are the norm.

Jack Jombardo wrote:

And as you use just 2 of your 14 chars for PvP this lead to 12 chars you use for PvE.

Here someone could say, you are a hobby PvPer but mainly PvE wink 2v12 chars.
Even when you see Jita-scaming as PvP too, it's still 3v11 towards PvE.

Re-read my post. I have two characters that do the pew-pew PvP, one character that does nullsec PvP support, one that does the market PvP and one that is an industrialist (that is more PvP than PvE, even if, like marketing, does not directly involve pew-pew). That is 5 characters involved in 4 different kinds of PvP, two of which are pew-pew related and the other two are not pew-pew related. I do not do jita scamming, but I may try it sometimes as it's one of the few things I haven't yet done in EvE (the other main missing thing being wormholes).
Edit: actually there are two other things that someone would consider major and I didn't do: incursions and lvl 4 missions.

Jack Jombardo wrote:

And when you need 11(12) chars to suport your PvP ... your PvP can't be realy great yarr. Either you lose much more then you kill, or your corp/ally scams you as they get all the money and you just feed them (which is the fact for most komunist corps as the members have absolut no control, what the CEO do with the money (RMT anyone?)).

Again, I only play 5 characters regularly, and have another one that I'm just training on the sixth account. I do no PvE at all. And yet in CCP statistics I look like living mostly in hisec. My point was: numbers in hisec is not related to numbers not involved in PvP.

I use 1 character to "support" PvP in nullsec. Doing cyno and hauling. Arguably I use some of the money from my trader to support PvP and my industrialist also heavily relies on my trader. However I use those money because I have them. Most nullsec players make some money with ratting. I do not need to do that, my trader makes more than I'll ever need. Also most industrialists either also become traders or use the services of a trader. As I already play both ways it just makes sense for me to synergize with myself.

There's no corp scam and no matter the kill/loss ratio you'll always spend isk if you PvP. You may kill more than you lose, but you are not going to loot more than you lose. Corp/ally provides refunds for most of the expenses, but not all. Instead of covering the rest with ratting I cover the rest with my trader. Because I have it.

Jack Jombardo wrote:

Anyway, with 6 active accounts, you don't represent the majority as CCP again published numbers, where the average player had around 1,xx acc. So the Majority had between 1 and 3 accounts.

I have no idea what the average is. But here is one interesting thing for you: I have 6 accounts, but in CCP statistics I will appear as 6 players with one account. Ponder a minute about the implications in terms of the real average number of accounts.

Jack Jombardo wrote:

I know, how hard PvP want everyone to love/like/do PvP. But sorry guys, most players just want to relax and do some NPC-pewpew and do some coop-gaming.

I've met hundreds of PvE players and noobs that never went outside hisec. Hundreds. And 100% of those that accepted to try and come for a four hours "class" that explained them how to do things and then took them to 0.0 for a roam in a well organized fleet ended up saying it was the most fun they ever had in EvE. All of them.

I had seen it first in Agony's PvP Basic classes and then did some similar stuff with my corp for people we knew (through our national ingame channel) that could not speak English and therefore would not be able to join an Agony class.

Jack Jombardo wrote:

For me PvP died long time ago when people started to e-peen with killboards

This I agree. Mitix probably did the worst thing possible for PvP in Perpetuum. On the other hand this is what people want. Therefore, in this sense, he did the best thing he could ever do for Perpetuum PvPers.

Jack Jombardo wrote:

That was the point, when FAIR PLAY and RESPECT died .....

This I do not agree. Fair play is for sport, not for PvP. Respect is for a good fighter, not for a fair fighter.

Jack Jombardo wrote:

But as you PvP guys like to mention it that often: it is sandbox, people are free to do what THEY want.
-> if people do not want to PvP they should be free, to NOT have to do it.
If they do not want to be FORCED into PvP ... sandbox has to allow them to avoid PvP by 100% and still be competetive!

Agreed. That's why EvE provides multiple competitive play styles that do not require you to undock. The only glitch in terms of forced PvP there is in EVE is a wrong label in the neocom. They really should re-lable "undock" into "enter PvP".

Jack Jombardo wrote:

My numbers aren't accurate but it was like:
- 0.05% wormholes
- 1% lowsec
- 5% nullsec (and this includes all the mining/ratting bots!!)
- 93.95% highsec

What does this numbers tell us?
The absolut majority of players do NOT want to PvP!

It's interesting how you interpret things the way you like.
It's not clear wether the CCP numbers are for active accounts only or fot all accounts. If they are for all accounts, than those numbers show a surprisingly low number of people in hisec. So I assume they are for active accounts only.

I know what many 0.0 and PvP players do, but I'll only speak for myself.

I have 6 active accounts with a total of 14 characters, in EvE.
- one character lives in 0.0 and spends 95% of the time in nullsec, the rest in low or hi.
- one character supports 0.0 life as a cyno and as a hauler, he lives 90% in hisec and 10% in lowsec.
- one character is a hisec pirate, he PvPs in hisec
- one character is a trader that has never left his hisec station in years, I play it only a few minutes a week, he does market PvP and earns a truckload of isks I spend in PvP with the other characters
- one character is an industrialist, he spends 99% of the time in hisec and the rest traveling to low and null moons/towers for logistics (but mostly rents logistic services from others). I also play it rarely more than a hour a week. He makes a lot of stuff I either use or sell (with the trader alt).
- the remaining 10 characters I never play them. They are in hisec. Many of them just never skilled. I sometimes use them to troll on the forums, when I do not feel like posting with the main.

In other words I'm a PvPer, mostly in nullsec but also in hisec, and if you look at the statistics of my characters about 7% of my characters will be in nullsec on average. And if I happened to fill the 4 empty character slots I have for some reason (I may fill one this summer to test the new tutorial experience, for example) that rate would go down to 5.5 percent.

I also know people with a lot of characters, all 99% of the time in hisec, that still are PvP only players (sometimes they roam nullsec or lowsec, but mostly PvP in hisec).

Not to mention the truckload of market PvPers and scam PvPers that live in hisec with all their characters. And not to mention the fact that 95% of the players I ever met in EvE, after 5 or 6 years of being there only play a few months each year and, for obvious reasons, park all their characters in hisec with +5 implants when they do not play.

There's a majority of players that do not PvP. And a majority of players that do not play beyond an year or two. But there are much more PvPers than you think.

Also there are very few that played 3+ years and did not get into PvP. PvErs play for a while and then leave. PvPers play for years, even if not continuously. That's why dumbing down EvE as they are doing now is a good short term strategy, but a bad long term one.

And the monocles are irrelevant. The pay to win specter is the problem.

This is the first time ever that I realize a windows only game actually has a feature missing ... which is not missing if you play it on a mac.

Mouse Tiger wrote:

Asintec to Tellesis takes a good 15 min, Asintec to ICS is fast

I stand corrected. I just confused Tellesis with ICS.

But Tellesis is not part of the triangle, therefore I'm now wondering why Hugh was talking about Tellesis to begin with.

Snowman wrote:

The best present would be more players..

So for those who couldnt make such a party, maybe a week free reactivation for inactive accounts?

but such a gift would be meaningless unless the account holders were TOLD...  so a newsletter or some notification to those players.


You mean sending an e-mail to all registered accounts whose subscription has expired a while ago and have not resubscribed offering them 5 days of free gametime and a 60 day heavily discounted reactivation?

That's exactly what CCP did yesterday. They do it regularly about 6 weeks before an expansion and a few weeks after it. Also if all the characters on the account are noobish and have very few skills, they offer a small set of free skillbooks.

BigPoint also does it regularly (Battlestar Galactica Online, Seafight, Darkorbit and other games).

I guess AC will eventually do it too.

AeonThePiglet wrote:

Eve has a lock back feature. You can disable it. If it's a menu option, it doesn't matter.

What's that got to do with it? I was not talking of lock back. I was talking of selecting the primary among targets you have already locked. EvE does it, but it's inconsequential to PvP in EvE because EvE lets you fire to different targets and the overview in eve visualizes your module activation not your primaring.

Edit: just to clarify, I'm not saying that the mechanic cannot be changed in a way that enhances PvE without damaging PvP. However if done the way the PvE people asked for, it would effectively damage PvP. And to do it without damaging PvP it would need to change the way PvP works right now. Therefore it's a valid example to counter your earlier statement.

Hugh Ruka wrote:

10 minutes per cycle ? how do you people do that ? I tried to get from Asintec to Tellesis terminal and it took me good 15 minutes (ok it was the firs time for me to jump islands and use teleports after the rookie missions) but the terrain is quite varied usualy. so I doubt the 10 minutes per cycle a realistic. btw I ran with a naked arkhe so I guess a sequer can be faster.

Asintec to Tellesis is the faster leg. TM is what takes a little longer. The travel time between Asintec and Tellesis is nothing. It's doable in nearly the time of the molecular instability countdowns (it depends heavily on where you undock, actually).

AeonThePiglet wrote:

Wut? How on earth would changing anything in pve change anything in pvp? You don't need to touch the mods or the bots when you can just mess with the rats, add missions and make mining less awful

Simple example from recent discussions. PvE players want targeting computer to auto-primary the next targeted enemy when the current target explodes. They see no reason not to do it. It will help PvE and you cannot get any similar effect by messing with the rats.


(41 replies, posted in Services and Discussion)

BugSplat wrote:

In a free market, such as the US, a vendor is only allowed to change their prices once per day.

That is not for the market. It's for shops. It's done because you cannot see the price of all sellers at once and find out which is the smaller. It also is limited to sales, but does not affect purchases (which rarely happen in shops anyway).

On a market you know what the best price is. Actually on a market you should only be allowed to buy from the lowest sell offer and sell to the highest buy offer (this is currently a broken mechanic in Perpetuum).

Norrdec wrote:

I would vote for one possible change at 0 to 30 mins from posting, then one every 24h from that point.

The economy and the market are broken and being a trader is not really worth as a profession (it's doable, but barely so). But if you want a well developed market driven economy, prices should be free to fluctuate several times a day. And for high volume items with small margins actually they shall fluctuate several times an hour.

No trader would ever leverage a small margin and provide liquidity to that market if there's no leeway to adjust for fluctuation. The higher the volume and the smaller the margin, the faster you need to be able to adjust.

If the delay is reasonable (say between 1 and 5 minutes), a trader would simply split his orders into multiple orders and stagger them so that he can redefine his position in real time. Alternatively, if there are very small broker fees he'll create and delete orders (this is what happens in some real life intraday trading, like currency, where you only pay a fee if the transaction happens). If it's longer, especially with high volume low differential items, than providing liquidity to that item is not worth doing, therefore the market will simply never fully develop.

Alexander wrote:

It is profitable to make 10 trial accounts, macro (Legally according to a GM) all the accounts to respond to the same control input. Finish the 10 stage tutorial with around 1 million NIC+ of assets in less than an hour, transfer the NIC to a paid character and repeate.

The more trial accounts you make the more NIC you made.

Stop thinking so small scale. It's not hard to get 10 accounts tied into one input. People are known to do this with mining.

Liquid NIC should not be transferable. Ever.

Assets valued 1 million NIC should be transferable through the market as long as the buyer(s) pays them 1 million NIC.

Where exactly is the problems?

Also I can make 2 or 3 million NIC an hour on a subscribed account that is 18 days old, without multiboxing. And I'm very noob in Perpetuum. I'm sure someone with real skills (and I do mean player skills, not extensions) may be able to make more.

Xira Indy Production wrote:
DEV Calvin wrote:

If a trail account can sell items, he can sell an ammo for 100 million NIC. From this point on, no money from exploits, RMT or any other unwanted activity can be traced.

Funny, WoW does it just fine. In fact they shut down RMT traders whiten seconds and often take the money they just mailed away from the recipient.

You aren't WoW devs, you aren't that good, but you should at least try.

Actually WoW does a very bad job with RMT. They only get the scammers. Those that intentionally do it the "easy" way because they do not care if the customer is caught: they already got his money. Nor they care of the trial account, of course. There's much much more "serious" RMT in WoW than in any other game.

Note: money laundering (and how it can help RMT) is the problem. Not someone creating a trial and using it to send NIC to someone else. That's easily traceable. But not a scheme where you create hundreds of accounts and rapidly make thousands of small transactions on the market, with a reasonable percentage of them involving innocent people (yes: a sizable percentage of RMT virtual currency is basically "donated" to unsuspecting innocent people by buying their items from the market, as a way to make tracing the real transactions difficult) but end up eventually "converging" several money flows (maybe after several trades). These schemes are very very hard to trace. And they generally involve hundreds of unsuspecting regular players that act as intermediaries by simply doing their regular business.

In WoW this is (at least was, as things may have changes since I last played it) actually very easy because you could see all the names of people associated with orders on the auction house. And even get the data with the client interface API (the same used by things like auctioneer). You could actually automate the search for complex schemes of transactions for money laundering.

Norrdec wrote:

so it's either the person makes a bot for a certain price or just sells it for the lowest price (it worked that way before, you couldn't choose the order you wanted to use/fill).

Good way to get a nic farmer his moneys.

I totally do not get what you are saying here.

The markets should be the engines of the economy. You should only be able to effectively access the lowest sell order and highest buy order, per item per market (if there are separate markets). Ideally you should not even be able to SEE the other orders.

Direct selection of a specific trade offer for specific items should be a separate mechanic and not part of the market (and be inaccessible by trials).

It is possible (desirable, even, but not necessary) to severely restrict the ability to place market orders and otherwise operate on the market. But only if there is a delegation mechanic in place (if you do that, you basically make the market broker a player profession).

Norrdec wrote:

Making the tutorial longer - not really, unless it's changed in many different ways.

Sure. It can be changed in a lot of different ways. And it should teach you a lot more things about the game. But I'm sure that will come later on when the game matures.

Norrdec wrote:

We had people frack with everything they can to make more nic for free, why do you think this would be different? There are things they can do to help the trailies, but the options to sell is just ***. They will be able to see the market, that should be enough for them to see what's it's state.

The real point is that making a lot of trial accounts should not be exploitable. The time needed to complete the tutorial is already (even if unchanged) more than enough to limit the number of small robots you can create. If selling that robot must happen at the current market value (no access to "contract" like mechanics and no way to sell to an order you choose), there's no serious impact to the economy.

In other words if it takes you 20 minutes to do the tutorial and earn your light bot, then a regular player shall be able to earn much more than the value of a light bot in those same 20 minutes (therefore grinding trials for the bots becomes not worth doing).

Note that being able to buy stuff or transfer NIC out of the account, is more dangerous. But if it happens at market valuation in a developed economy and market, this is also not a problem. Only direct NIC transfers would always be a problem (because of money laundering and RMT).

Norrdec wrote:

Before Plex, I had a few people who were just using the trail accounts and only trading the stuff a bit before the account expired (don't know if it's still like that, back then it was 30 days trail with no limitation). Don't think that's fair to the Dev's, do you?

Not sure what you mean. No limitation in direct NIC/ISK transfers are a problem because of RMT and money laundering. The interaction you can do with the game in such a limited time and with nearly no skills is not going to be a problem for the economy. The amount of faucets you can rely upon at low skill levels and in such a short time is very limited. If all you do is trading, then you are economically neutral (actually you act as a small deflationary force because of taxes and market fees). You are also somewhat inefficient.

What you can do in economy neutral terms (like trading) is never going to be a problem. In 14 days on a market like the one EVE has today, you can maybe earn a couple hundred millions ISKs if you are very very good and also pretty lucky. Even with the extended 21 days trials from the buddy program it's very very hard to be able to earn a PLEX value within the trial time. That's part of the reasons they were experimenting with the "plex for buddy": if the free month for the inviter can become a plex, sold, and isk transferred to the new account, you could basically invite someone and give him 51 days of gametime for free. In 51 days and without trial limitations a good trader could create a trading alt capable of earning well north of the value of a plex before running out of time.

Norrdec wrote:

1. Get trail account
2. run tutorial mission
3. sell arkhe mk2 and faction bot for 2 nic each.
4. profit from them on another account

You don't even have to put x. ??? in the middle.

1. Make the tutorial longer, which is actually Good™
2. Fix the broken mechanic that let you select from which market order you want to buy/sell, which you'll have to do anyway or the market will never work as an economy driving market.
3. Accept that noobbots and lights are worth peanuts, which is what will emerge anyway when the economy and market will develop and mature.

In fact, once you fix point 2, the only reason to keep the limitation on buying stuff is that the economy and the market are not yet well developed. When they manage to balance not only the combat abilities of the items and bots but also the economical forces (which are totally broken at the moment) thus enabling a self regulating market driven economy to develop, that restriction will also become moot.

Snowcrash wrote:

I was able to do a 3h triangle session without a single ctd. Normally the client crashed 2-4 times during such a session.
So far for me you did a great job in optimizing the client.


So the triangle now actually works? Good. Gotta go give it a try tongue

Snowman wrote:

why not?

Whats the difference between an account thats paid for using stolen credit card details to an account that has not made a payment?

The difference is that there is a limit to the number of accounts you can activate with a stolen credit card (also it's illegal IRL and you end up being traced if you keep using it).

Unsubbed trial accounts are unlimited. You could easily create thousands of them in a very short time with a script.

DEV Calvin wrote:

If a trail account can sell items, he can sell an ammo for 100 million NIC. From this point on, no money from exploits, RMT or any other unwanted activity can be traced.

Except those 100 million NIC will be trapped in the trial account as long as he cannot BUY something. They cannot be given to someone else until the account is activated by a subscription.

I do not see the problem. If the account is later activated, the fact that the trade happened before it did is irrelevant. If the trial expires and the account goes dormant forever, it has effectively acted as a 100 mil NIC sink. Trials acting as an economy deflation force? Yes please.

You want to prevent NIC from leaving that account, there's no problem with NIC reaching the account or stuff leaving it.

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

takes a *** to know a *** & since winter is a women that leaves just you as the *** smile

See? She's so valiant that they call her "a women".