Problems in EU, as well as solutions, discussion definitely wanted.

Yes, exactly, and that's what I'm talking about. 'Play smart' yes, what do you think I do? Why do you think I have over 100 AUD, CLD, and still own quite a decent amount of small loot I need to get proper stacks to sell? Don't worry about me playing smart, always did, always will.
'CLD is a huge risk' where? I can sell it off, I can make profit with it indefinitely as long as the game itself is running fairly decent, returns have diminished over the years, showing the game isn't running well, meaning there needs something to be done, also not rocket science.
'Looter skills don't put beginners at a disadvantage' What are you talking about? A skill which actively changes the loot returns isn't putting beginners at a disadvantage? That's either dumb, or denial, I don't know which of the two it is, but that's an actual given, there is simply no base of discussion there. If someone has a higher skill he gets more, either in MU or in TT, both is a negative for one not having it, simple as that, it's not rocket science there. Formerly no such thing existed, everyone was on a level playing field, not anymore.
As for 'you can play on 20 Dollar a month', yes, you can, hunting puny and absolutely nothing else as a beginner, and if you play it like another game, as a gamer who sees it as the main hobby... well, then you're out of luck even there. I'm not talking about that, many will always loose that amount per month, and as said, that would even be ok for me without a second thought, but not if it markets itself as a game where I can win IN THE MARKET. And deeds aren't the market, they are shares of in-game assets which return their dividends, same as stocks.
EU isn't broken in the sense that bigger mobs cost more, skills in EU always opened up more options for playing and nothing more, absolutely nothing more. Looter skills changed that for the first time since existance. Good idea? I don't think so, not a level playing field anymore, even if the returns at max are 1% difference, that's a 1% non-player skill based. Is it 10% though? We don't know, that makes it a secondary risk after the risk of already hunting something which has shown to be profitable long-term.
As for 'money has always fallen into my lap' yes... it did, since I play smart, and it's the sort of player like me which Entropia tries to get with their marketing strategies, people who want to compete against others in a changing marketplace, having to stay on top of their game. Not the subscription based gamer, and also not marketing to gamblers per se, since the game isn't a casino by their own definition, right? So don't turn around words however you see fit, everyone can do that, no skill besides those of a con-man in that, and we already have enough of those in the game.

and again a wall of text full with your negativity about how you can't handle it anymore bla bla.
Even in 2008 there were such posts, saying EU is broken and sky is falling. Nothing to do with the current situation. It's always been the situation for some!

I've not read a SINGLE positive suggestion from you. Only whine about you cant make it anymore and how bad things are.
For godsake, if I read all you're writing I'm starting to get depressed.

Maybe try to make it more constructive then?

And posts like, "if MA doesnt fix it for me I stop depositing" is not being constructive.
I consider that being a whiner.

Maybe make a new CONSTRUCTIVE thread?
 
and again a wall of text full with your negativity about how you can't handle it anymore bla bla.
Even in 2008 there were such posts, saying EU is broken and sky is falling. Nothing to do with the current situation. It's always been the situation for some!

I've not read a SINGLE positive suggestion from you. Only whine about you cant make it anymore and how bad things are.
For godsake, if I read all you're writing I'm starting to get depressed.

Maybe try to make it more constructive then?

And posts like, "if MA doesnt fix it for me I stop depositing" is not being constructive.
I consider that being a whiner.

Maybe make a new CONSTRUCTIVE thread?

Read the thread again, seemingly you've been blind about the suggestions I've made, the posts of the last 3 pages were entirely arguing with you, since unless the other people at the beginning which have brought explicit examples to undermine their statements, trying to work with facts as well as possible, you've been throwing around 'oh, but I don't see it like this, and all others either' First of all who is all others? Your soc? Ok, sure, your part of it. But you're far worse in generalization then I can be. So, besides the parts about systems to change the existing problems like:

Premature implementation of 2.0 loot.
Looter professions.
UL versus L items.
Market crisis solution.
Marketing failure and the remedy of it.

Where I've given definite examples of proper solutions while being under constant attack from your part without giving any sort of productive and meaningful measurable examples instead of emotional and defensive comments (Mine are emotional as well, won't say no to that, it's a given, the other part is missing though as I've adapted my points several times during the thread).
So, could so stop saying 'owahhh, please don't whine' and instead start with 'ok, you see it as a problem, now lets get to the root of the problem you percieve as such and instead either solve it or come to a common base of which parts of it exactly aren't working.'. Nobody forces you to percieve them in the same intensity as others, but denying they exist isn't helping anyone, we can discuss about the magnitude of the problems, the venue of problems, not about the existence of problems, but we see they are there, otherwise the numbers would be different.
 
'Looter skills don't put beginners at a disadvantage' What are you talking about? A skill which actively changes the loot returns isn't putting beginners at a disadvantage?

Looter Skills i imagine do put new players at a disadvantage, how big we dont know. if its capped then it will be very little.

but that said imo looter skills are a good idea, been rewarded for skilling is a good feature. they should reward loyally and skills, much like been able to buff your hp or evade skills, you can buff your returns too. even if its like 1% or less

and im not saying it cos i have high looter skills, i don't, they are pretty low at robot 17 - animal 25
 
... we can discuss about the magnitude of the problems, the venue of problems, not about the existence of problems, but we see they are there, otherwise the numbers would be different.

I guess here we each go in our own separate directions in this discussion.

You say "we can discuss about the magnitude of the problems, the venue of problems, not about the existence of problems"

But my point is that I deny the existence of the problems so for me there's little to discuss, at least for the majority of your points.

Premature implementation of 2.0 loot. <-- why premature, I dont see why it's premature. I think no matter when or how, it would have had a great impact anyhow. But with great impact I dont perceive it as bad. I think it's one of the best changes ever! But I could understand perfectly well that you think otherwise.
So, it's extremely subjective.

Looter professions.
<-- as I've not seen any empiric data showing that this actually is an issue. time might prove me wrong but this given time there's only speculation on this part.

UL versus L items. <-- what about it? Maybe sounds dull, but things change as I mentioned many times before.
And again I fail to see the problem here.

Market crisis solution. <-- Crisis, what on earth are your rambling about??

Marketing failure and the remedy of it
. <-- yes, definately!! fully agree! MA has a marketing issue that should be resolved. Imo the focus should be shifted to marketing. Drawing in new players.

but game mechanic wise I dont see as many problems as you do.

Just to generalize some more, "what can be a problem to one, can be an opportunity for the other."


BTW, maybe you could use some "enters" in your texts. Makes reading it a lot easier and smoother! Maybe then I can read and understand your points a bit better
 
Looter Skills i imagine do put new players at a disadvantage, how big we dont know. if its capped then it will be very little.

but that said imo looter skills are a good idea, been rewarded for skilling is a good feature. they should reward loyally and skills, much like been able to buff your hp or evade skills, you can buff your returns too. even if its like 1% or less

and im not saying it cos i have high looter skills, i don't, they are pretty low at robot 17 - animal 25

The problem is that we don't know what's high or low is. Maybe it works like evade when if you match mobs L to your prof level, you are maxed. Also I don't believe it's big penalty as MA seems to follow a trend to not penalize foolish behaviors that much, like hunting unmaxed or with poor eco guns.
 
I think the debate around hunting in 2.0 is really 2 debates.

Hunt under 3 PED per kill and returns are OK. Possibly even better than 1.0

Go and kill at 5 to 10 PED per kill and it's a total dog's dinner. For me anyway.

Like for like comparison between 1.0 and 2.0, same depo, same gear, same mob. My money lasts between 1 and max 2 weeks. Before I could play all month and even invest a bit along the way.

I do not wish to go back to noob mobs to address that. I did not ask for that change. EU wasn't perfect but was a great blend between gaming and gambling.

The balance between the two has shifted in a way that took the fun out of hunting for like minded people.

1000 PED runs with no global or the odd 60 pedder is beyond boring.

I think MA cannot afford to lose players willing to burn through hundreds of dollars a month and should address this imbalance.
 
The problem is that we don't know what's high or low is. Maybe it works like evade when if you match mobs L to your prof level, you are maxed. Also I don't believe it's big penalty as MA seems to follow a trend to not penalize foolish behaviors that much, like hunting unmaxed or with poor eco guns.

i think the same, it has to be capped in some way. i dont think its level tho as no one will have over 300 in the game's life, and we have mobs with L1000+

from hunting i dont seem to be having the same luck with robots to animals, but tbh robots are hit and miss anyway. i wouldn't be surprised if the effect is .1% from 0-100. just a way to get us to skill up and feel like we are getting something
 
With the implementation of loot composition of loot 2.0 it's hard to see how much impact it has, so we don't know that's true.

And yes, incentive to level, that's a nice way to put it, I'm on the neurotic side of seeing things in general, very danger sensitive person here, therefore I see problems earlier then others which might become hurdles, sometimes too early, but also often things which go haywire in the future. Persons like me are perfectly placed in every position of risk management as I am very very wary of changes, but open to them at the same time.

As for UL versus L items: L items are a good thing, they keep the market fluid. UL items make it more static. A market has to be fluid in general to work, so I'm all for options to lower the impact of UL items in any way while acknowledging they have a position in the system as otherwise there might be times when the market simply runs out of solutions for doing high lvl depentand tasks like depth mining of around 1000m or hunting event mobs for reasonable amounts of time since the amount of items available for the task are just not sufficient. The impact is just too high, and many ways to remedy it have been undertaken since Entropia has come into existance, all of those with minor impact though, which I personally see still as a problem for the long-term, and the hesitance of MA in this area has proven to be a negative over the course of the last decade. This topic is ever repeating over and over, nothing new there.
But the generalization of a fluid market versus a static market is easy to take in, a fluid one offers more chances, a static one offers more security and stability. We have a lot of stability, therefore few options, that is something to be addressed as it leaves risk-taking people out of the equation right now, and the game is built upon taking risks, just not at its main selling point, that is a detriment and won't be solved by simply marketing so new players come into the game, usually the influx of new players is a self-sustaining system as soon as a playerbase is established. We don't see it here, therefore I deduct a problem somewhere, we just have to narrow it down to the points where it is coming from.

Also, if you deny the existence of those problems, well.. then instead put yourself in the thought process of the person seeing them as such, just saying 'no' won't solve a thing. The person keeps saying 'it is' and nobody comes further to an universal truth which is measurable. So, instead try to unravel what they see, then deliver facts as to why or why not it is the case.

LuisArkadov makes it quite clear from where I'm speaking from. Sure, low depositing players, or people who've been in the game for shorter periods of time might see a positive effect of play time, mostly because the punishment for playing badly have been reduced drastically, and in some cases it was extremely important. On the other hand that makes high-risk hunting now not very high-reward in many cases, therefore not enticing for people who take those risks. We can't cater to everyone, which is true, that's why we need to cater to the people who the marketing is focused at, and that's why I'm trying to speak from a position of someone getting into the game purely by the marketing driven efforts of MA, not of someone who has stumbled into it for some other reason and stayed because of something different entirely, or simply has taken a liking to the existing systems nonetheless, that's sadly not how proper market positioning works, and it was always MA's weakpoint.

So, how do we change it then explicitly?

Well, looter professions and implementations of new systems, one at a time in the future. Let the players see the impact something has, figure it out to a part, get content with it and adjust it afterwards if it's gone into a wrong direction. The other choice is to let people stumble around, take away their secure positions which they've built up with their strategy and therefore make them understandably unhappy.

Resolving the market crisis, for those not knowing meaning making it more fluid and getting away from the momentary static system, would also be doable. Introducing any sort of randomized system which offers a clear reward is a solution. One which forces people to gather materials from different planets and therefore rise and lower MU of specific items steadily. It brings in the possibility for a faster turnover of materials, and turnover of liquidity is basically the lifeline of a market, the less gets sold, the less profit can be made. This would also remedy the 'dead planet' problems we have right now, with nearly nobody on Rocktropia, Toulan or Next Island, and basically the whole playerbase on Calypso. Bad for people with CLD like me, good for the state of the game though.


Those 2 things aren't hard to do, MA is already implementing features at a snails pace, and only halfway whenever they actually do implement something, so that is definitely feasable.
The seocnd part is a lot harder, as it needs to be a system not penalizing the existing playerbase too much, and also not reward them in a manner which is too big. The maintenance of items with materials to give them a buff in efficiency short-term would be one such a solution, as well as randomized missions where items need to be brought together for a skill or item reward of some kind, especially good if it has a wide range of options to choose from in TT value, meaning someone can do a mission worth 1 PED, or up to a mission worth 1k PED, with slight adjustments so the 1k PED one is a bit more profitable then the smaller, once more incentive to go big.
 
, I'm on the neurotic side of seeing things in general, very danger sensitive person here, therefore I see problems earlier then others which might become hurdles, sometimes too early, but also often things which go haywire in the future. Persons like me are perfectly placed in every position of risk management as I am very very wary of changes, but open to them at the same time.

Sorry for getting personal now, but you drew this one upon yourself with the text above.


And that calls me arrogant??
Wow!

So you see problems much clearer, faster and better than most others?
Again, just wow!

You know, I simply call those people who see problems in everything just as "azijn zeikers!" That's dutch for vinegar pissers.
You start to see problems in everything! And if influential enough creating the self fulfilling prophecies which might eventually lead to the problems you foresee.
You're far from being rational and objective. Clearly acting and reaction by emotion as you mentioned yourself.

So in my company I would want you far away from any influential position were you could do more harm then good.


Also, if you deny the existence of those problems, well.. then instead put yourself in the thought process of the person seeing them as such, just saying 'no' won't solve a thing. The person keeps saying 'it is' and nobody comes further to an universal truth which is measurable. So, instead try to unravel what they see, then deliver facts as to why or why not it is the case.

So, who's right and who's wrong here.
The fact is that I and perhaps others as well dont see the things you see as problems.
Do we deny the problems?
How can I deny a problem if it doesnt exist in my world?

I have a problem with the fact that you're not allowed to drive faster than 130k/h on our highways.
Now, is that a problem, or is it just MY problem since I have troubles accepting it?
For most this would not be seen as a problem.

But for me it feels like a problem and I struggle against it everyday. Speeding to work, having to watch for speed camera's all the time.
Damn, I want that fixed and changed!
Is it reasonable that I want that? Nah, I guess not, so I'll just have to adept.

It might sound strange, but this is how I interpret most of YOUR problems.

It feels you want to fix things which aren't broken.
Making more drama, doing more harm then good.


If you've followed the update history of entropia, you must know that every change/update brought discussion. Some felt it was good, others felt is was bad.
MA simply cant make every wish come true and make everybody happy.
MA is walking a balancing act, each adjustment will hurt somebody.


Even though you put up some suggestions, but about those suggestions, I can give you a 100% guarantee that if MA would implement/adjust anything you suggest, you will get other shit storms here on the forum about those adjustments.

One which forces people to gather materials from different planets and therefore rise and lower MU of specific items steadily.

Nice and all, but I foresee all the whine threads about how pirates shot down all those cargo haulers.
Sure, lets change space PVP then, pissing over the pirates.
and so and so on


ok, an idea to resolve this and to shut me (or perhaps you) down for good.
Maybe make a poll to determine if the things you state are widely seen as problems?
Then at least we will not have the discussion about things that dont or do need to be solved.


To add, i think there would be one thing that could solve most of entropia's "challenges".
And it has been mentioned by you and me alike.
Entropia could use more players.
More players means less dead planets. more bustling market.
More players aren't realized by any of the suggestions you made. Changing game mechanics doesnt alter player influx (though it might change player retention), so making changes wont solve any problems.

Marketing, do more freaking marketing! draw people to entropia!
I never see adds, or anything else from entropia.

The main focus should be on that imo. :wise:
 
Sorry for getting personal now, but you drew this one upon yourself with the text above.


And that calls me arrogant??
Wow!

So you see problems much clearer, faster and better than most others?
Again, just wow!

You know, I simply call those people who see problems in everything just as "azijn zeikers!" That's dutch for vinegar pissers.
You start to see problems in everything! And if influential enough creating the self fulfilling prophecies which might eventually lead to the problems you foresee.
You're far from being rational and objective. Clearly acting and reaction by emotion as you mentioned yourself.

So in my company I would want you far away from any influential position were you could do more harm then good.




So, who's right and who's wrong here.
The fact is that I and perhaps others as well dont see the things you see as problems.
Do we deny the problems?
How can I deny a problem if it doesnt exist in my world?

I have a problem with the fact that you're not allowed to drive faster than 130k/h on our highways.
Now, is that a problem, or is it just MY problem since I have troubles accepting it?
For most this would not be seen as a problem.

But for me it feels like a problem and I struggle against it everyday. Speeding to work, having to watch for speed camera's all the time.
Damn, I want that fixed and changed!
Is it reasonable that I want that? Nah, I guess not, so I'll just have to adept.

It might sound strange, but this is how I interpret most of YOUR problems.

It feels you want to fix things which aren't broken.
Making more drama, doing more harm then good.


If you've followed the update history of entropia, you must know that every change/update brought discussion. Some felt it was good, others felt is was bad.
MA simply cant make every wish come true and make everybody happy.
MA is walking a balancing act, each adjustment will hurt somebody.


Even though you put up some suggestions, but about those suggestions, I can give you a 100% guarantee that if MA would implement/adjust anything you suggest, you will get other shit storms here on the forum about those adjustments.



Nice and all, but I foresee all the whine threads about how pirates shot down all those cargo haulers.
Sure, lets change space PVP then, pissing over the pirates.
and so and so on


ok, an idea to resolve this and to shut me (or perhaps you) down for good.
Maybe make a poll to determine if the things you state are widely seen as problems?
Then at least we will not have the discussion about things that dont or do need to be solved.


To add, i think there would be one thing that could solve most of entropia's "challenges".
And it has been mentioned by you and me alike.
Entropia could use more players.
More players means less dead planets. more bustling market.
More players aren't realized by any of the suggestions you made. Changing game mechanics doesnt alter player influx (though it might change player retention), so making changes wont solve any problems.

Marketing, do more freaking marketing! draw people to entropia!
I never see adds, or anything else from entropia.

The main focus should be on that imo. :wise:

Umh.. yes, that's called self-reflection, or do you think I'm better in every situation then someone else? Everyone has a specific field of specialization, as well as specific genetic setup, it's just common knowledge. One person can run faster, one can interact with people better, one is more intelligent, one is more danger sensitive. Does it make any of those better? No, doesn't, just skills and genetic, no more. If you got a problem with that then argue with evolution, not with me, that's wasting everyones time only. Or to take it into consideration: I'm not very conscious, especially on the side of industriousness, so that's for instance one of my downsides, would be nice for you not to jump on every little thing you see and instead focus on the tasks at hand, and my personality isn't the task at hand and definitely not your field of expertise.

The 130 km/h example is actually quite a good one. Want it fixed? Why not? See? Now we have to come up with reasons for and against it to come to a proper solution which is sensible, not deny it isn't a problem for anyone. Someone just might see problems you aren't even aware of since they are outside of your field of perspective, as it is the other way around, you might tell someone something which is outside of their perspective.

And if you're coming from the 'discussion' page, well, more people are unhappy with MA then happy with MA, does it make them a good or bad problem solver in their field? Many unhappy people left, fever came to fill the void created from those. Just because you can't hear the people anymore doesn't mean they're out of existance, and once more the topic is something entirely different since you pull it into another direction, stay in topic, ok?

Game mechanics changes alter player influx, happy players bring in more players. Would I want my friends to play this game? Yes, why won't they come? Well, it's a clusterfuck, so the mechanics drive them away, they got the money, they are often high risk takers, some of them gamers, so why not here? Narrow minded view to say the major part that defines a game - which is its mechanics - has no correlation with player influx. Where is the evidence for any of that? I can at least give examples that it's just the other way around with well named titles.

marketing isn't only ads, that's a bit old fashioned, hearsay through social networks - real social networks, not facebook and other stuff, though there as well - has a far higher influence on this then paying for ads. Ads are good to establish a playerbase, after that the quality of the product decides if it's running well or not.

As for the space pirate problem: Yes, space needs to be revamped, there is warp, so no problem at all there, people are already shipping materials from one planet to another without any sort of risk, so there isn't a problem correlated with my suggestion at the moment, only if it is changed, which can come after one system is fully established. Your example there was extremely bad placed.

I have to say, more marketing itself, but in the right places would do well, at the moment it'll only have a bad effect on the game though, given neither is the implementation of long-standing systems finished, nor is the support up to the task, nor is the market in a functioning state, nor is the social part of the game - channels, meeting places - up to par. Those have to be adressed first. Or are you bringing in customers to a restaurant despite the restaurant only able to serve frozen food from a microwave as the infrastructure for the other parts is broken or not existing? No, you fix that first.
 
Umh.. yes, that's called self-reflection, or do you think I'm better in every situation then someone else? Everyone has a specific field of specialization, as well as specific genetic setup, it's just common knowledge. One person can run faster, one can interact with people better, one is more intelligent, one is more danger sensitive. Does it make any of those better? No, doesn't, just skills and genetic, no more. If you got a problem with that then argue with evolution, not with me,

Brilliant!

I want that in my signature! :D

The 130 km/h example is actually quite a good one. Want it fixed? Why not? See? Now we have to come up with reasons for and against it to come to a proper solution which is sensible, not deny it isn't a problem for anyone. Someone just might see problems you aren't even aware of since they are outside of your field of perspective, as it is the other way around, you might tell someone something which is outside of their perspective.

NO NO NO!!
It's not a problem, it's MY problem. Fixing that would only do more harm than good. That was my whole point.
Even this you would like to fix. Dont! Keep your hands off and dont see it as a problem just because I see it as a problem.

And if you're coming from the 'discussion' page, well, more people are unhappy with MA then happy with MA, does it make them a good or bad problem solver in their field? Many unhappy people left, fever came to fill the void created from those. Just because you can't hear the people anymore doesn't mean they're out of existance, and once more the topic is something entirely different since you pull it into another direction, stay in topic, ok?

just 1 remark about this, yes, you've made the right observation, but a meaningless one nevertheless.
The reason you read more unhappy than happy posts, is because people just are more easily posting bad things than good things.
If it all goes well, you dont see them on the forum.
If' it's not going well, they start to spill their guts here.
Thats all.


Game mechanics changes alter player influx, happy players bring in more players. Would I want my friends to play this game? Yes, why won't they come? Well, it's a clusterfuck, so the mechanics drive them away, they got the money, they are often high risk takers, some of them gamers, so why not here? Narrow minded view to say the major part that defines a game - which is its mechanics - has no correlation with player influx. Where is the evidence for any of that? I can at least give examples that it's just the other way around with well named titles.

Well, to be honest, I only ever invited 1 friend cuz this game sucks, but it has sucked from when I started in 2005. So that has nothing to do with all the points you mentioned. Thats just the core of this game.
I cant help being crazy enough to like this game and stick around.


marketing isn't only ads, that's a bit old fashioned, hearsay through social networks - real social networks, not facebook and other stuff, though there as well - has a far higher influence on this then paying for ads. Ads are good to establish a playerbase, after that the quality of the product decides if it's running well or not.
correct. Adds are just an example. But as youo say, there's far more.



I have to say, more marketing itself, but in the right places would do well, at the moment it'll only have a bad effect on the game though, given neither is the implementation of long-standing systems finished, nor is the support up to the task, nor is the market in a functioning state, nor is the social part of the game - channels, meeting places - up to par. Those have to be adressed first. Or are you bringing in customers to a restaurant despite the restaurant only able to serve frozen food from a microwave as the infrastructure for the other parts is broken or not existing? No, you fix that first.

And here I disagree again.
You say the food tastes horrible in our entropian restaurant. I say the food is just my taste.
Just a matter of perspective ;)
 
NO NO NO!!
It's not a problem, it's MY problem. Fixing that would only do more harm than good. That was my whole point.
Even this you would like to fix. Dont! Keep your hands off and dont see it as a problem just because I see it as a problem.

just 1 remark about this, yes, you've made the right observation, but a meaningless one nevertheless.
The reason you read more unhappy than happy posts, is because people just are more easily posting bad things than good things.
If it all goes well, you dont see them on the forum.
If' it's not going well, they start to spill their guts here.
Thats all.

Actually in my country they are discussing the speed limit at the moment, if the maximum one shouldn't be raised or lowered right now, so there is a base for discussion. What you're doing is just taking the base away, saying there is no discussion because of 'reason A' without adhering to 'reason B' from someone else. That's a classical egocentric worldview. 'It's just as it is, and shouldn't be changed' hasn't helped to solve anything in the history of mankind. Yes, we need to keep it exactly the way it is, unless we find a better option, therefore we need discussion.

And yes, there are more negative to positive remarks, ratio 1 to 10 if it's a common occurence. Here it's a rough ratio of 1 to 50 though, therefore out of the norm, therefore a problem.
 
Back
Top