Archonious

Another thing about comparison. EVE and DU / PLEX and DAC.
 
EVE allow player buy ship instantly, so PLEX could be easy named as "Pay to Win".
DU allow sell DAC for "ingame money", then buy resources and modules (if there are enough on market). Then player need to create ship from blueprint (which will take ??? time).
 
Yes, it looks like small difference, but how many resources you need to create ship, how many modules, how many rare parts, how many basic resources for armour? Player need to know, player need to buy, player need to carry (under question). How long it will take time to create big ship? I don't think few minutes.
 
So I won't call DAC Pay-to-Win. DAC is Pay-For-Time / Pay-to-Skip (save time, no grind). Same as players want to pay for "Jobs", difference is payment method only.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Why to buy DAC and have a risk to lose it, when you can buy gold on black market. Cheaper and safer.
 
Do not support game! - slogan of steal supporters =)
Shame on you!

In my opinion the best compromise I have read so far (somewhere) is to make DAC bind on pick up ish.
 
Player A buys DAC from NQ.
Player A sells DAC to player B.
Player B can only use DAC for game time.
Player B will not be able to resell it.
 
This solves everything as far as I can tell. Player A gets his in game currency.
Player B gets his game time. And DAC will be used for what its intended. To pay for game time.
 
Everybody wins.

There is big wall of text =)
1. I am against lootable DACs. This will force to upset players, who may leave. Stealing DACs from trade increase chance somebody who need it, won't get it - as result player leave the game.
If I would be basic player, without time for grinding, and somebody will steal DAC, game woukd get negative feedback very quickly. Wasting real money, it is too offensive. Reputation of game going down. Players amount (who ready to pay extra money) going down. Players amount (who can not pay for subscribe) going down. Income of company going down. I don't see anything positive for game.
 
Words about "If DAC would lootable, we would get much more players", sound as funny stories. I have never met players who joined game because of lootable DAC (or similar system). But negative effect of players loss still actual.
 
2. My view.
DAC is option to pay for game time for those who has problems with subscribe (but have time to grind). So player 1 employ player 2 and pay him for job. DAC do not give any extra advantage, that can not be gained without real money payment. So P2W stories are too cool. Sorry.
With same thing, we can remove organisations, because it not fair to those who play solo. Org teams have much higher range of finances and abilities.
 
But I agree, unlootable DAC could be abused on markets. So IMO, DAC must be unlootable, but also could be trade only once.
 
That mean, owner (paid $) can freely sell DAC to any player without risk (if you want to put risk for game supporters, that mean you don't care about supporters). But as soon DAC was sold by owner, it become binded to player, that mean item can not be traded again.
 
Result: Supporter/owner get money without any risk (reward for support). Player who bought DAC from owner, will have option to use it to get 30 days of playing.
 
Pirates can steal resources, money and use it for buying DACs, if it so necessary to them.
 
3. Result:
-Supporter always will get what he paid for (real $)
-Grinder have risk while gathering and selling resources
-Pirates can steal resources and later use money to get DAC
-Prices for DAC can not be abused by large organisations, who can buy all DACs and make price x2 (some players time can run out)
-Perfect balance, when 1 player work for another (money do not come from air, like in typical P2W)
-Market balance. You can not sell 1000 DACs instantly, if there is no enough of demand
 
My opinion, not lootable or First-Trade-Bind.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

There is big wall of text =)
1. I am against lootable DACs. This will force to upset players, who may leave. Stealing DACs from trade increase chance somebody who need it, won't get it - as result player leave the game.
If I would be basic player, without time for grinding, and somebody will steal DAC, game woukd get negative feedback very quickly. Wasting real money, it is too offensive. Reputation of game going down. Players amount (who ready to pay extra money) going down. Players amount (who can not pay for subscribe) going down. Income of company going down. I don't see anything positive for game.
 
Words about "If DAC would lootable, we would get much more players", sound as funny stories. I have never met players who joined game because of lootable DAC (or similar system). But negative effect of players loss still actual.
 
2. My view.
DAC is option to pay for game time for those who has problems with subscribe (but have time to grind). So player 1 employ player 2 and pay him for job. DAC do not give any extra advantage, that can not be gained without real money payment. So P2W stories are too cool. Sorry.
With same thing, we can remove organisations, because it not fair to those who play solo. Org teams have much higher range of finances and abilities.
 
But I agree, unlootable DAC could be abused on markets. So IMO, DAC must be unlootable, but also could be trade only once.
 
That mean, owner (paid $) can freely sell DAC to any player without risk (if you want to put risk for game supporters, that mean you don't care about supporters). But as soon DAC was sold by owner, it become binded to player, that mean item can not be traded again.
 
Result: Supporter/owner get money without any risk (reward for support). Player who bought DAC from owner, will have option to use it to get 30 days of playing.
 
Pirates can steal resources, money and use it for buying DACs, if it so necessary to them.
 
3. Result:
-Supporter always will get what he paid for (real $)
-Grinder have risk while gathering and selling resources
-Pirates can steal resources and later use money to get DAC
-Prices for DAC can not be abused by large organisations, who can buy all DACs and make price x2 (some players time can run out)
-Perfect balance, when 1 player work for another (money do not come from air, like in typical P2W)
-Market balance. You can not sell 1000 DACs instantly, if there is no enough of demand
 
My opinion, not lootable or First-Trade-Bind.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

There is big wall of text =)
1. I am against lootable DACs. This will force to upset players, who may leave. Stealing DACs from trade increase chance somebody who need it, won't get it - as result player leave the game.
If I would be basic player, without time for grinding, and somebody will steal DAC, game woukd get negative feedback very quickly. Wasting real money, it is too offensive. Reputation of game going down. Players amount (who ready to pay extra money) going down. Players amount (who can not pay for subscribe) going down. Income of company going down. I don't see anything positive for game.
 
Words about "If DAC would lootable, we would get much more players", sound as funny stories. I have never met players who joined game because of lootable DAC (or similar system). But negative effect of players loss still actual.
 
2. My view.
DAC is option to pay for game time for those who has problems with subscribe (but have time to grind). So player 1 employ player 2 and pay him for job. DAC do not give any extra advantage, that can not be gained without real money payment. So P2W stories are too cool. Sorry.
With same thing, we can remove organisations, because it not fair to those who play solo. Org teams have much higher range of finances and abilities.
 
But I agree, unlootable DAC could be abused on markets. So IMO, DAC must be unlootable, but also could be trade only once.
 
That mean, owner (paid $) can freely sell DAC to any player without risk (if you want to put risk for game supporters, that mean you don't care about supporters). But as soon DAC was sold by owner, it become binded to player, that mean item can not be traded again.
 
Result: Supporter/owner get money without any risk (reward for support). Player who bought DAC from owner, will have option to use it to get 30 days of playing.
 
Pirates can steal resources, money and use it for buying DACs, if it so necessary to them.
 
3. Result:
-Supporter always will get what he paid for (real $)
-Grinder have risk while gathering and selling resources
-Pirates can steal resources and later use money to get DAC
-Prices for DAC can not be abused by large organisations, who can buy all DACs and make price x2 (some players time can run out)
-Perfect balance, when 1 player work for another (money do not come from air, like in typical P2W)
-Market balance. You can not sell 1000 DACs instantly, if there is no enough of demand
 
My opinion, not lootable or First-Trade-Bind.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Not sure about colour, because this forum allow to use any colour to everyone. So it is just a question of choice

Pinky, I think this reply is more for you, as you asked to PM NQ.
 
Thanks,Archonious

I said before, that I would agree with "Lootable DAC after 1 hour after the trade between players". Your example forced to change my mind. Choice A as before.
 
To stop "Resell" DAC must be bindable after the 1st trade. So if the player (buyer for game cash) gets DAC from another player (buyer for $$$), he has no option to sell it one more time. So as result DAC is what it need to be ONLY! Not lootable, not resellable.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Make DAC not resellable, and all your plan failed...
DAC must be sold by owner only (who spend $$$).
 
So if you bought DAC from owner, you can use it only, not sell to somebody else. Simple and not abusseable

Hi,
 
Would be very nice to have an ability to upload the logo of the organisation. So Every organisation can mark their ships with Organisation Logo.
Make this option for organisations only (founder). So all responsibility will be on leader/founder. If the logo is offensive - leader/founder get warning with the possible temporary ban in future.
Also, Logos can be checked before usage by Moderators. It is much longer way, but it is much more controllable.
 
P.S: Of course, logos could be created with voxels help, but this could be very hard process for some organisations (colours, hard texture, a lot of time to make and other).
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Make DAC not resellable, and all your plan failed...
DAC must be sold by owner only (who spend $$$).
 
So if you bought DAC from owner, you can use it only, not sell to somebody else. Simple and not abusseable

Also, a great deal of these market manipulation aruments are under the assumption that players with DAC will simply try to play the market with them, or will trade DAC for in-game currency as a middle man to get some other service with in-game currency.
 
Anyone that works in business understands that since each trader is attempting to profit, the more steps involved in trading for your material, the less profitable it will be unless you intend to travel (which will be risky as soon as the DAC's will be offloaded in a DAC unlootable economy).
 
The smartest players will create contracts to trade DAC's for either finished goods, refined materials, or whatever service they actually want. Players that need subscriptions to keep playing will produce what is needed to fulfill the contract, and the DAC's will be in and out of the system free of price manipulation. Orgs do this internally to keep their lower rank players playing in their org: a highschooler spending 3 hours mining iron for a DAC is a fantastic deal for them, since they get another month to do whatever. Someone who works full time trading a DAC for 3 hours of in game work that they don't enjoy is a steal, since they make more at their job than that DAC is worth.
 
The only people who should be actually worried about unlooyable DAC's are people who want the satesfaction of literally robbing players. Be it a roleplay choice not to work for an org, or because the player just wants another way to be a jerk on the internet, that is what it boils down to.

I said before, that I would agree with "Lootable DAC after 1 hour after the trade between players". Your example forced to change my mind. Choice A as before.
 
To stop "Resell" DAC must be bindable after the 1st trade. So if the player (buyer for game cash) gets DAC from another player (buyer for $$$), he has no option to sell it one more time. So as result DAC is what it need to be ONLY! Not lootable, not resellable.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

the problem with this is, Player X buys the DAC from NQ, and puts it on the market to make in game credits.  Player Y buys it off the market and can use it to add a month of game time to their account.
 
The problem with allowing it to be looted is, if you force them to make it an object, then they have to travel to the market to retrieve it.  where they could possibly be attacked as soon as they do so, therefore loosing their month of game time.  There will be players that try to sucker in players to their area to do this exact thing.
Also, what if Player Y wants to hold onto it, cause he bought it so cheap (under market value) and has 3 weeks of game time left on his current account.  Now he has to worry about losing the DAC if he holds onto it till his time is up (maybe he is in the Military, and is about to go on a 6 month deployment, so it would be a waste to use it NOW)
 
No one is going to go buy a DAC from NQ to then use for game time, when its cheaper to have a subscription.  

I thought we were discussing ideas presented in the poll, not what was already planned.
 
I don't like B.  C is not a compromise at all.  So A is what I would choose from the options provided.  However since we're throwing ideas around, I'd rather they be safe until a person actually decides to spend them - willingly. And I'm sure a fair amount of folks will do just that.  I am confident that there will be plenty of loot available for everyone to steal. 
 
Unless of course, it's the real money some people really want?  See, I don't think this thread is about the game economy at all.  I think it's about talking people into thinking it's OK to steal people's real money.  And I don't care how anyone wants to spin it, I am against it.
 
And I really don't care what your nefarious future goals to doom the economy are either.  If you want to sit around and horde DACs to cash them in all at one time and crash the economy, then that's your prerogative, I suppose.  But I doubt you will be able to destroy the game faster than the negative media the game gets from people getting their money stolen will though.  
 
Now I'll let you guys continue to sort out what is theft, how a DAC really works and all that.  My peace has been said.  But while you're doing that, some evil MF is hoping that you do talk the devs into them being all lootable all the time so that he can get his black market plans set up and ready to go by the time Alpha launches. 

Here is the error in your argument.  you are assuming that I cannot horde them safely to perform this market crash plan.  I can do this exact plan now in game even if the DAC are loot able.  So therefore there is another reason for you to want them to be loot able.
 
So now that we have cleared up the fact that your entire argument relies on scare tactics and fantasy, care to tell us why you really want them as loot able?

I voted option A all DAC are safe because many will enter the game without reading any warnings a will this get robbed. This would produce thousands of appeals to NQ for refunds and probably more that one lawsuit. If you want to be robbed sell a DAC in game load up with valuable cargo and go get robbed.
Everyone knows that this whole debate is driven by the pirate players that know that they can't earn DAC playing pirate only. They will need to find a fence to make a DAC earning profit and any civilisation would hunt down both the fence and the pirate. Any civilisation would hunt down or ostracise known DAC thieves. This is a game, yes but this is also a civilisation building game. Civilisations eliminate pirates or make them navy officers. Historically most European pirates were just navy officers who had come home to discover their king or queen dead. That's why Blackbeards ship was called Queen Ann's Revenge. Most muslim pirates are essentially just navy for some islamic state. Piracy was never anarchy or liberty. 

No need to write walls of colourful text. Idea must be simple and understandable.
 
If to choose from A, B and C, I choose A. And no doubt. If there would be clear point (option D): "DAC become lootable 1 hour after first trade operation between players", then I would choose D.
 
I don't know any PLEXes and not interested in. If I see "lootable DAC", that mean DAC could be stolen after player spend $/€.
Thanks,
Archonious

I find these "We need to steal real money from other people" saying too much... DAC is not the main part of the game... They say about no risk in the game, but players still have chances to lose ships, bases and other. Stop LIE and pull everything on your side. Your EGO is too high!
If you see that as "P2W" - "Bye Bye, go play your EVE and steal money there!", same as you "say" to those who will be upset and will leave after real money lose
 
P/S: I don't really like to say what to do, but some overEGO start cross the line.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Lootable DACs will hurt reputation of company and force some players to leave. As result income of company drops down. Strongly against any loot of DACs.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Hunter I am glad you were one of the members to not be attacked.  I have however seen it time and again.  I look at defending the non loot able DAC system the same way the majority of us have defended the Pay to Play method in all of the Free to Play posts.  Nobody wants to hear it, nobody cares about that persons views.  I get it, NQ laid down the law on what pay method they are using and we get tired of hearing it.  This is the 2nd thread already dealing with DAC's being non loot able.
 
The DACs are not emergent, that is my point in saying wanting emergent gameplay to loot them is meaningless.  They are there for 2 very good reason.  They let the broke players continue to play, and they put a serious hurting on the Chinese gold farming spam sites. we all know, you either have DAC's or Gold farmers, spaming us all the time.
 
If you can't loot my credits, why should you be able to loot my DACs?  Credits are digital so hey that at least makes game play sense.....well so are DACs!

I find these "We need to steal real money from other people" saying too much... DAC is not the main part of the game... They say about no risk in the game, but players still have chances to lose ships, bases and other. Stop LIE and pull everything on your side. Your EGO is too high!
If you see that as "P2W" - "Bye Bye, go play your EVE and steal money there!", same as you "say" to those who will be upset and will leave after real money lose
 
P/S: I don't really like to say what to do, but some overEGO start cross the line.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

I find these "We need to steal real money from other people" saying too much... DAC is not the main part of the game... They say about no risk in the game, but players still have chances to lose ships, bases and other. Stop LIE and pull everything on your side. Your EGO is too high!
If you see that as "P2W" - "Bye Bye, go play your EVE and steal money there!", same as you "say" to those who will be upset and will leave after real money lose
 
P/S: I don't really like to say what to do, but some overEGO start cross the line.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Steal DAC = force people to leave the game. If NQ will allow that, that will say they don't care about the population of the game. Since this is real money, not just gold or something it will be accepted too offensive from these noobs.
 
This would be a really stupid step from NQ. I don't know much about EVE, but I'm sure, it secure everything (or almost everything) while player offline. And no need to tell about "Territory Security Beacons" and safe zones.
As from marketing side, this will be a big mistake, which will hurt the reputation of the company (reviews and negative posts on websites).
 
Thanks,
Archonious