Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Casiella]

If this (blog post I wrote) is real, we have a large problem. 

[Louella Dougans]

Yaay, every pirate faction RP'er who thinks it's "too hard" or "unreasonable" to have +standing to the faction can sort that problem. Woo!

 

[Ken]

If this (blog post I wrote) is real, we have a large problem. 

Well, maybe, but probably not if +7.0 with your faction of choice costs the same as a cyber-monocle...

[Casiella]

If this is for real -- and I certainly am not saying that it is, until CCP confirms -- then I'm pretty well done with EVE.

[Ken]

Of all the straws to threaten the proverbial dromedary's back, why this?  Or am I missing something?

[Kybernetes Moros]

I'm doubting this is real, to be honest; from what I've been told (and granted, I've no first-hand experience with them) EVE News 24 isn't among the most reliable of sources, and the timing seems to coincide way too neatly with the backlash from pretty much everyone RE: Noble Exchange pricing. Eternal optimist, and so on.

If it is real, then CCP sure took a quick dive, IMO.

[Ghost Hunter]

Yaay, every pirate faction RP'er who thinks it's "too hard" or "unreasonable" to have +standing to the faction can sort that problem. Woo!

 

I'm fairly certain I would abstain from doing it out of principle's sake, even if 15$ would get me my last 1.0 for +10 Sansha's Nation.

:I

I'm going with this being a troll document, since CCP have said in the past they're only looking at vanity items for MT. Standings is not a vanity item.

[GoGo Yubari]

Look pretty damned legit.

This changes things, but I need to digest it a bit before I make decisions.

[Ulphus]

Given that standings are no longer visible, what does this affect?

• Refining tax for miners/mission runners melting stuff
• Access to agents (might be well worth it for research agents)
• Being shot at in your enemy's space (if you can lift your standings above -5)

I'm not seeing a huge game-breaker here. Can someone explain it to me?

[Z.Sinraali]

Can't say I approve of this idea.

[Kasuko]

I really don't give a flying fish about this until it's actually officially announced, by CCP, that they're doing it (or somesuch similar).

...'course, if it IS announced, I'm finding me a new MMO.

[Kaleigh Doyle]

Why? Kinda curious.

[Casiella]

I have more and more of a belief that it's not a hoax, but like a reasonable person I am waiting on word from CCP.

[GoGo Yubari]

I'm kinda bummed WoD went for the CCP macro-transaction model. I must say I've waited for that game with interest, but having the buying of in-game effectiveness as in-built into it as it sounds right now is not a good thing in my book.

I'm not totally opposed to micro-transactions at all and I'm not sure they will ruin Eve either (funnily enough before reading that document I was sure they wouldn't, but now I'm not so sure), but they are a thing that has to be done right. Blizzard has done a good job integrating them into their game and making tons of money out of it without ruining any of the game-play. Their pricing is just right, too. More important and scary than the idea of buying faction standings in Eve is the way in which CCP macro-transactions are discussed therein.

Anyway, maybe it turns out to not be legit, but I highly doubt it.

[Jekaterine]

The thread on Failheap discussing this is rather in depth.
In it Seleene confirms that it conforms both in name as well as style to CCP:s internal newsletter.
From the discussion it seems that it is indeed real.
Seems that there are two versions. The one on Eve news and an unedited. Though the edited one isn't substantialy different from the original that has also been released and is found in the thread.

Some former CSM members have gotten this shortly after it's release it seems. Mynxee for example confirms she got a copy the 28th of May.

Here's the thread for those interested:
http://failheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2434