Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
731
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 06:42:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP doesn't want people creating multiple characters simply to farm the passive SP, so they limited it to only one character per account. The PlayStation 3 however allows you to create up to 16 accounts on one console. So if someone really wanted to, they could have 16 Dust 514 characters accruing passive SP at once. Considering if you made these accounts at the beginning of the open beta you'd have a bit over 4.5 million skill points, someone who did this would be able to skill into a wide assortment of skills with minimal effort required.
Yes I know you can do this in EVE, but that would require paying for a subscription for each one so it is a bit different.
So my question is what are your thoughts on this? Personally I do not do this, but I am sure there are many people out there that do. Is it a valid strategy, or should something be done to prevent it? My stance in on the latter, but feel free to disagree. Given my stance, here are some things I think an be done,
1. Check all Dust 514 character and any that have X amount of skill points with under Y amount of war points or Z amount of play time should get wiped.
2. If a Dust 514 character has been inactive (less than A amount of war points in B amount of time) turn off passive skill points.
3. Perhaps a way to limit how many times the Dust 514 license can be given out per PlayStation 3 console, perhaps making it 2 or 3 since we don't want to discount the fact that some people do share their console with family and friends.
So there's my thoughts, again feel free to disagree if you do. |
Karazantor
Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation
105
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 06:47:00 -
[2] - Quote
Since I left EVE mid 2011, I understand they have implemented skill gain on more than 1 character per account, for a fee.
Well I would actually be happy to pay a certain amount of AUR for passive gain on an extra character per account. It would be very handy. |
Sarducar Kahn
xCosmic Voidx The Superpowers
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 06:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
Well I like 2, it would force players to use all the accounts they are farming, which I am sure would really burn. |
Xero The Mishima
Vherokior Combat Logistics Minmatar Republic
240
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 06:56:00 -
[4] - Quote
Don't really have alts. I have one but as soon as item trading comes out I will delete him. I don't really believe in having to result in meta gaming or spying or any of that weak stuff. I only need one character and feel others might be wasting time with alts. This again is MY OPINION on the matter as I have friends and corp mates that use alts and it works for them. It's just not my thing. |
The Robot Devil
BetaMax. CRONOS.
758
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 07:05:00 -
[5] - Quote
Xero The Mishima wrote:Don't really have alts. I have one but as soon as item trading comes out I will delete him. I don't really believe in having to result in meta gaming or spying or any of that weak stuff. I only need one character and feel others might be wasting time with alts. This again is MY OPINION on the matter as I have friends and corp mates that use alts and it works for them. It's just not my thing.
+1 |
Poplo Furuya
Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation
447
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 07:20:00 -
[6] - Quote
Do you hate variety? If yes don't run multiple accounts.
I think CCP should just jump the gun and activate passive in all slots. If players can more freely switch up their game it keeps things fresher for them, makes for a less stale experience and a not so discontent player.
They still need the same core skills for each character and get locked into their specialty for the round.
Would also be a bone thrown to vehicle users. Pilots get zero crossover from their skills into other playstyles whereas infantry specs give some aptitude outside of their primary through their core and module skills. Letting them have an infantry character to make more stable ISK gains or just to take a break from vehicles would be great.
I mean, we can already do this. Why not make it more convenient, more legit? I'd say it helps all players and doesn't have any harmful ramifications at all. Maybe one could spec a character that's been left idle into a current FotM but that's it. It ain't even that big of a deal.
|
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
731
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 07:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
Poplo Furuya wrote:Do you hate variety? If yes don't run multiple accounts.
I think CCP should just jump the gun and activate passive in all slots. If players can more freely switch up their game it keeps things fresher for them, makes for a less stale experience and a not so discontent player.
They still need the same core skills for each character and get locked into their specialty for the round.
Would also be a bone thrown to vehicle users. Pilots get zero crossover from their skills into other playstyles whereas infantry specs give some aptitude outside of their primary through their core and module skills. Letting them have an infantry character to make more stable ISK gains or just to take a break from vehicles would be great.
I mean, we can already do this. Why not make it more convenient, more legit? I'd say it helps all players and doesn't have any harmful ramifications at all. Maybe one could spec a character that's been left idle into a current FotM but that's it. It ain't even that big of a deal.
Don't get me wrong, I would love it if the 3 characters we have per account could all have passive SP, but then you open up the door for all the alternate ID passive farmers to have a whopping 48 - FORTY-EIGHT - characters with passive SP. That's a bit ridiculous. Honestly I wish there was a way to allow us to have passive SP for the 3 characters on our account while not allowing this alternate ID farming. |
Rusty Shallows
Black Jackals
174
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 07:56:00 -
[8] - Quote
Picked up a second PSN account for an alt back in the days of capping out and not being able to stand getting ultra crappy skill point awards. As you suggest it does open a different play-style that is completely different from my main. All pub game play, none of that includes espionage. CCP even made money off the alt with a merc pack.
Everyone wins... |
Cosgar
ParagonX
3060
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 08:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
So you basically want to add a DRM policy to a F2P game? |
Orenji Jiji
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
221
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 09:08:00 -
[10] - Quote
Aero Yassavi wrote:CCP doesn't want people creating multiple characters simply to farm the passive SP, so they limited it to only one character per account. The PlayStation 3 however allows you to create up to 16 accounts on one console. So if someone really wanted to, they could have 16 Dust 514 characters accruing passive SP at once. Considering if you made these accounts at the beginning of the open beta you'd have a bit over 4.5 million skill points, someone who did this would be able to skill into a wide assortment of skills with minimal effort required.
Yes I know you can do this in EVE, but that would require paying for a subscription for each one so it is a bit different.
So my question is what are your thoughts on this? Personally I do not do this, but I am sure there are many people out there that do. Is it a valid strategy, or should something be done to prevent it? My stance in on the latter, but feel free to disagree. Given my stance, here are some things I think an be done,
1. Check all Dust 514 character and any that have X amount of skill points with under Y amount of war points or Z amount of play time should get wiped.
2. If a Dust 514 character has been inactive (less than A amount of war points in B amount of time) turn off passive skill points.
3. Perhaps a way to limit how many times the Dust 514 license can be given out per PlayStation 3 console, perhaps making it 2 or 3 since we don't want to discount the fact that some people do share their console with family and friends.
So there's my thoughts, again feel free to disagree if you do. So you want CCP to punish people for using a CCP provided game mechanic?
Why do you propose taking passive SP gain away from anybody? Are you angry that people get free SP, while you grind your life away? Why do you want to add ****** limitations to a game that already struggles with keeping playerbase? Are you not very smart or trolling?
So yeah, my thoughts are: I hope your intertial damper fails. |
|
Stupid Blueberry
Nova Corps Marines Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
29
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 09:15:00 -
[11] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:So you basically want to add a DRM policy to a F2P game?
Had to log in to say I lol'd
+1 |
THE TRAINSPOTTER
ROMANIA Renegades C0VEN
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 09:38:00 -
[12] - Quote
Yeah because in EVE you cant have multiple accounts or in any other games on that matter , oh wait... |
Lance 2ballzStrong
SyNergy Gaming EoN.
2982
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 09:44:00 -
[13] - Quote
Hands down, one of the worst threads I've ever read here |
Vavilia Lysenko
Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire
185
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 09:46:00 -
[14] - Quote
Aero Yassavi wrote:CCP doesn't want people creating multiple characters simply to farm the passive SP
What exactly is wrong with having an account that is gaining passive SP?
I do not understand the problem.
|
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
732
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 11:04:00 -
[15] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:So you basically want to add a DRM policy to a F2P game? I see what you mean but that's not what I meant. All I'm saying is it is a bit ridiculous that people are able to create a dozen alternate accounts to get passive skill points and have everything unlocked for them. I don't want there to be anything blocking someone from playing, but think of all the negatives something like this adds
1. Some skills become pointless, like the Corporations skills. Why spend your skill points on it when you can make a dummy account to accrue all the points for corporations? 2. Vehicles, why skill into them? Why not just have an alt accrue skill points to get them and call them in for everyone in your corp? With the 4.5 million skill points you could of gained from passive alone you can already make some pretty good vehicle fits. 3. Corporations could easily revert to having everyone create a bunch of dummy accounts to fill whatever roles they need that they don't have anyone filling. We don't need a factor in corporation matches being who has the most dummy accounts.
Vavilia Lysenko wrote:Aero Yassavi wrote:CCP doesn't want people creating multiple characters simply to farm the passive SP What exactly is wrong with having an account that is gaining passive SP? I do not understand the problem. CCP believes there is a problem with having multiple accounts accruing passive skill points. I could search done the post one of them made about not wanting Dust players creating accounts early with no intent of using them until further down the line, but all you have to do is look at the removal of passive skill points for the other two characters on your account to see that that is their view. |
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
732
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 11:06:00 -
[16] - Quote
THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Yeah because in EVE you cant have multiple accounts or in any other games on that matter , oh wait... 1. I have an idea for you, how about you read the thread? I already discussed EVE in this. 2. Most other games don't give you passive skill points. |
Brasidas Kriegen
The Southern Legion
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 11:20:00 -
[17] - Quote
AURUM option for extra character training in the same section as boosters, instead of 1.5x passive you get 1x passive on an alt character. Or to make up for it buff skill point gain, but the gain based on WP. So say you get 3 sp per WP or something like that, so it doesnt just benefit AFKers. Of course an improvement to matchmaking would be a help that so people don't just proto stomp for bonus SP. |
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN.
1628
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 11:43:00 -
[18] - Quote
Lance 2ballzStrong wrote:Hands down, one of the worst threads I've ever read here
I was going to post something similar.....instead I'll quote yours. |
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
737
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 11:48:00 -
[19] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Lance 2ballzStrong wrote:Hands down, one of the worst threads I've ever read here I was going to post something similar.....instead I'll quote yours. May I ask how many alts you have, and how frequently you play them?
I'm just curious if you guys have legit uses for this or are just trying to take advantage of the system. I'm all ears for any arguments you may have. |
Guinevere Bravo
SVER True Blood
266
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 13:30:00 -
[20] - Quote
This will become a non-factor when the PS4 hits. You will be required to pay the PSN+ subscription to play multiplayer games thus i dont foresee anyone willing to pay for 16 accounts. I wouldnt pay for two accounts just for DUST.
PS anyone who didnt start at least 1 more account when it reset is looking a lil silly right now.
EDIT: I DOnT SpelL 2 GD |
|
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
739
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 13:34:00 -
[21] - Quote
Guinevere Bravo wrote:This will become a non-factor when the PS4 hits. You will be required to pay the PSN+ subscription to play multiplayer games thus i dont foresee anyone willing to pay for 16 accounts. I wouldnt pay for two accounts just for DUST.
PS anyone who didnt start at least 1 more account when it reset is looking a lil silly right now.
EDIT: I DOnT SpelL 2 GD Sony has confirmed that they will make exceptions on the PS+ requirement for online play in the case of free to play games. They have already stated games like DCUO, Planet Side 2, and Warframe will not require PS+ to play online on PS4. |
Operative 1171 Aajli
Bragian Order Amarr Empire
89
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 13:44:00 -
[22] - Quote
I do this. You can only log on to one character at a time. It's not like you can multibox on DUST esp. if you have different skill sets.
A player should be able to enjoy all the facets of the game. It takes longer to skill a particular character though.
Money isn't really a problem since you'd make the same on one character as several. |
THE TRAINSPOTTER
ROMANIA Renegades C0VEN
23
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 13:59:00 -
[23] - Quote
Aero Yassavi wrote:THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Yeah because in EVE you cant have multiple accounts or in any other games on that matter , oh wait... 1. I have an idea for you, how about you read the thread? I already discussed EVE in this. 2. Most other games don't give you passive skill points.
So my brother cant have his character with active SP on his account because?
|
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
740
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 14:02:00 -
[24] - Quote
THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Aero Yassavi wrote:THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Yeah because in EVE you cant have multiple accounts or in any other games on that matter , oh wait... 1. I have an idea for you, how about you read the thread? I already discussed EVE in this. 2. Most other games don't give you passive skill points. So my brother cant have his character with active SP on his account because? See point 3 on my original post which you must of not read. |
THE TRAINSPOTTER
ROMANIA Renegades C0VEN
23
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 14:09:00 -
[25] - Quote
Aero Yassavi wrote:THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Aero Yassavi wrote:THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Yeah because in EVE you cant have multiple accounts or in any other games on that matter , oh wait... 1. I have an idea for you, how about you read the thread? I already discussed EVE in this. 2. Most other games don't give you passive skill points. So my brother cant have his character with active SP on his account because? See point 3 on my original post which you must of not read.
what is the point of this thread ?
what do you want?
how are you affected by ppl having multiple accounts?
how am i affected by ppl having multiple accounts?
|
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
742
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 14:12:00 -
[26] - Quote
THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Aero Yassavi wrote:THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Aero Yassavi wrote:THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Yeah because in EVE you cant have multiple accounts or in any other games on that matter , oh wait... 1. I have an idea for you, how about you read the thread? I already discussed EVE in this. 2. Most other games don't give you passive skill points. So my brother cant have his character with active SP on his account because? See point 3 on my original post which you must of not read. what is the point of this thread ? what do you want? how are you affected by ppl having multiple accounts? how am i affected by ppl having multiple accounts? Already discussed in this thread. It'd help if you read before posting. |
THE TRAINSPOTTER
ROMANIA Renegades C0VEN
23
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 14:14:00 -
[27] - Quote
what is the point of this thread ?
what do you want?
how are you affected by ppl having multiple accounts?
how am i affected by ppl having multiple accounts?
|
Muud Kipz
Elevated Technologies
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 14:23:00 -
[28] - Quote
I can't believe that, with all the other pressing issues affecting this game, you choose ALTS as the one to complain on the forums about and thereby bring CCP's attention to. While your points about it *potentially* (correct me if any real corps are abusing this) creating an annoying side of the corp metagame are true, this simply does not matter in comparison to persistent aim/hit mechanics issues and horrific game balance problems (in part caused by the far-from-complete content). Let CCP focus on the real issues for now and come back if/when alt abuse becomes a genuine issue. |
Poplo Furuya
Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation
448
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 14:23:00 -
[29] - Quote
Aero Yassavi wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Lance 2ballzStrong wrote:Hands down, one of the worst threads I've ever read here I was going to post something similar.....instead I'll quote yours. May I ask how many alts you have, and how frequently you play them? I'm just curious if you guys have legit uses for this or are just trying to take advantage of the system. I'm all ears for any arguments you may have. Taking advantage of the system (to try things out) isn't a legit use? In the absence of a trial system or a VR training room it's a great way of trying out niche playstyles outside of your norm.
In regards to one guy having potentially 48 high-SP alts... so? He can't field them all at once or actually switch mid-combat. A person with a hundred high-SP characters doesn't necessarily have any higher combat effectiveness than another person with just one high-SP merc.
Oh no, alts will be used to pay for corporation management skills. That one's a real gamebreaker, gonna lose sleep over that one. Why, it's not like it wasn't just an arbitrary SP sink in the first place or anything.
As for the question, though it wasn't directly levelled at me, 3. A Laser Rifle operator, a Dropship tester and a Nova Knifer that's in hibernation 'til it has the 6 mil SP or so to achieve a massive increase in viability. |
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
746
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 14:29:00 -
[30] - Quote
Muud Kipz wrote:I can't believe that, with all the other pressing issues affecting this game, you choose ALTS as the one to complain on the forums about and thereby bring CCP's attention to. While your points about it *potentially* (correct me if any real corps are abusing this) creating an annoying side of the corp metagame are true, this simply does not matter in comparison to persistent aim/hit mechanics issues and horrific game balance problems (in part caused by the far-from-complete content). Let CCP focus on the real issues for now and come back if/when alt abuse becomes a genuine issue. I'm not choosing to complain about one thing over another, I'm simply pointing out something I believe to be an issue. It's not like we can only choose one thing to discuss, and it doesn't matter how many issues there are and how big an issue they are - every issue should be discussed even if it is not near the top of the priority list of things to fix. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |