PDA

View Full Version : Medical clones go free; inserting implants gets a fee



Mike deVoid
October 27 2011, 11:36:11 PM
New and better idea. But what am I trying to 'fix' here?

As Marlona pointed out:

You do realize that having an expensive clone causes a few problems.

- Some players may opt out of small ship and go for a much larger ship (overkill) in order to have a decreased chance to being podded.
- Some may not bother to undock at all to go solo/small roam due to clone cost and only X up for the large alliance/coalition sanctioned ops because of the clone upgrade. So that means less pew pew overall, which is a bad thing, imo ofc.
- Far less small ship pew pew for veteran players. "Why hop in a frigate when your clone cost more than the ship and modules combined?"
- Encourages older players to bring larger ships and maybe that is not the right tool for the job.
- Skill points to max out a small ship is far less than the larger ships. If more veterans are flying [smaller] ships, the gap between younger players and vetrans closes a lot. "I don't give a shit about your battleship, capital level 5. All that skill points don't help you in your frigate do they? Yarr!!!"

Remove all medical clone costs, but add in a fee for inserting an implant. Fee scales up on (benefit of implant) * (current SP).

I think this achieves the goal of negating the above-quoted behaviours neatly.

Pattern
October 27 2011, 11:56:27 PM
I'm not sure why implants need an additional cost to use? Or is this just some "must have isk sinks" pseudo economic bullshit?

Alain Colcer
October 28 2011, 12:13:44 AM
well in the other thread where i mentioned switching from clone insurance to implant insurance, i was suggesting an ISK charge not to "plug it in", but to avoid Skillpoint loss when podded WHEN using hardwirings and implants (ie: the more isk you put in your head, greater the risk that it can adversily affect you if you loose it).

Marlona Sky
October 28 2011, 12:36:29 AM
I think your over complicating it.

Mike deVoid
October 28 2011, 12:50:43 AM
I'm not sure why implants need an additional cost to use? Or is this just some "must have isk sinks" pseudo economic bullshit?

Insertion fee RP: delicate procedure and intricate hardware.

Justification? Partially offsets the loss of isk sink from the current system. But I guess not required.

Mike deVoid
October 28 2011, 12:52:42 AM
well in the other thread where i mentioned switching from clone insurance to implant insurance, i was suggesting an ISK charge not to "plug it in", but to avoid Skillpoint loss when podded WHEN using hardwirings and implants (ie: the more isk you put in your head, greater the risk that it can adversily affect you if you loose it).

Still leaves you with a 'pay to remove risk of SP loss' fee each time you die.

Cue1*
October 28 2011, 07:58:01 AM
There is an inherit risk of losing SP when podded that currently exists and with the new system would no longer exist. I don't know of a fix for this in a no-medclone-cost world, but I think there needs to be one. Something like every 60 days or something you need to update your clone, weather you got podded 10 minutes ago or never. That update costs a certain ISK(relative to your SP) and lasts for the next 60 days. This keeps the isk sink alive while removing the don't-want-to-fly-cheapshit-due-to-high-SP effect.

Alain Colcer
October 28 2011, 10:45:13 AM
well in the other thread where i mentioned switching from clone insurance to implant insurance, i was suggesting an ISK charge not to "plug it in", but to avoid Skillpoint loss when podded WHEN using hardwirings and implants (ie: the more isk you put in your head, greater the risk that it can adversily affect you if you loose it).

Still leaves you with a 'pay to remove risk of SP loss' fee each time you die.

if and only if you implants/hardwirings....

I still want to grief someone when podding him/her you know?

Mike deVoid
October 28 2011, 11:40:15 AM
well in the other thread where i mentioned switching from clone insurance to implant insurance, i was suggesting an ISK charge not to "plug it in", but to avoid Skillpoint loss when podded WHEN using hardwirings and implants (ie: the more isk you put in your head, greater the risk that it can adversily affect you if you loose it).

Still leaves you with a 'pay to remove risk of SP loss' fee each time you die.

if and only if you implants/hardwirings....

I still want to grief someone when podding him/her you know?

Arguably you already grief them because of the implant they (may) lose. Just like when they lose their ship.

Optional implant insurance is a more complicated version of what we currently have - rather than one fee per death, you have to remember to pay the implant insurance after each insertion. And does it expire too?

Marlona Sky
October 28 2011, 04:08:36 PM
So when I go to a restaurant and order a sandwich they charge me. Cool. Now when I go to eat the sandwich, they charge me to eat it? The fuck?!

Mike deVoid
October 28 2011, 05:26:05 PM
Food doesn't come with an installation fee. But intricate technology that you insert into your head does! Traders don't peg this fee, only the end user.

Not sure how this would work when not in a station.

Then again I'm not married to the idea.

Cavalira
October 28 2011, 06:14:09 PM
You should lose your clone and the implants. And automaticly get new up-to-date clone imo. The fee should be very small imo.

Pattern
October 28 2011, 07:21:11 PM
Did I miss something or did implants suddenly become free?

Grarr Dexx
October 28 2011, 08:04:50 PM
Nope. Updating your medical clone adds a nice risk factor to this game. You just know you're going to fuck up, which makes it great.

Marlona Sky
October 28 2011, 08:59:01 PM
Nope. Updating your medical clone adds a nice risk factor to this game. You just know you're going to fuck up, which makes it great.

It's a stupid risk that no one, but the person who forgot to update their clone will know about. I know some of you are delusion enough to think that every person you pod did not have an updated clone, but the fact is that all this mechanic does is encourage older players to either bring a larger ship to increase their odds of not being podded or worse; simply stay docked and only join the blob fleets to maximize pod safety.

Skill point loss on T3s is even dumb, but that is somewhat of another topic.

Mashie Saldana
October 28 2011, 11:04:35 PM
Maybe we can get a super clone for AUR that never will expire regardless of how many times we get podded?

whispous
October 29 2011, 07:26:28 AM
remove clones, yes

charge a fee for plugging in implants

no

Durzel
October 29 2011, 11:41:36 AM
Just remove clone costs completely. It's a dumb mechanic that seems to have made some sense back in the day before people were ratting in supercapitals, etc. As said already all it really does now is disincentivise veterens from flying anything they're likely to get podded in.

Cortess
October 29 2011, 01:07:19 PM
So when I go to a restaurant and order a sandwich they charge me. Cool. Now when I go to eat the sandwich, they charge me to eat it? The fuck?!

The right comparsion would be buying a sandwich, then going to pay a surgeon to directly implant it in your stoomach.

Anyway ... dumb clone-mechanic is dumb.

Monthly fee (maybe make it dependent on high (cheap), low (middle) and null (expensive) and/or sp ) or implant-use-costs ... remove current mechanics.

Make t1-cruisers/frigs worth flying again.

noobcake
October 29 2011, 01:47:17 PM
move all medical clone costs, but add in a fee for inserting an implant. Fee scales up on (benefit of implant) * (current SP).

I think this achieves the goal of negating the above-quoted behaviours neatly.

Knowing CCP, they would most likely fuck this up to make the cost of inserting a full set of implants cost more than the old clone to cover your skill point amount.

I don't see how this would work, really. You need to present a pricing structure for us to properly weigh in on the proposed change.


Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

Mike deVoid
October 29 2011, 07:27:06 PM
Nah, exact pricings are fine tuning and easy to change. All that is required here is to evaluate the general concept. If you have a view on how the fine tuning should work, certainly say so.

Gix Tyrionn
October 29 2011, 11:27:11 PM
Nah, exact pricings are fine tuning and easy to change. All that is required here is to evaluate the general concept. If you have a view on how the fine tuning should work, certainly say so.

The idea broken from the start as new players need the implants more and thus have to pay more where in the current system older players pay more because in theory they should have learned to make money by the time their clone gets expensive.

OFC the whole concept of a penalty lag=clone costs and implants gone is pretty bad.

Cue1*
October 30 2011, 12:11:54 AM
I mentioned this somewhere, unsure of where though. The easiest answer to this would be a monthly or bimonthly surcharge for keeping your clone up to date instead of cost per clone. It can scale with SP but would still promote veterans(read high SP) to fly small stuff.

RoemySchneider
October 30 2011, 03:00:39 AM
not sure if i like the plugging fee;
if i were to pick a cheap throw-away PPH-0 (~1mil) imp to go with my shiny probing-vigil; i'd have to pay 2% of 100mil SP..?

and then there's the stupid warp speed imp... a HY-2.5 would cost 18% of my SP in isk [even though i'd never pay 200mil for such an imp to begin with :lolStaticLPcosts:]?

Mike deVoid
October 30 2011, 09:51:15 AM
I think that it appears that just a simple removal of medical clone costs would be the best option. The current system is the *most simple* way to charge veterans more isk for losing clones, however you end up with the perverse situation that encourages flying ships and gangs that reduce the risk of losing your pod - even if it became extremely simple to jump clone (no 24hr jump timer) to an empty clone.

Any other system you use to try to continue to charge high SP players more ends up more complex, with the only 'benefit' of having such a system that there is not the complete removal of a (minor) isk sink.