jaydub
Old Alpha
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2008
- Posts
- 721
- Location
- Calypso
- Society
- Guess Who
- Avatar Name
- Victor 'Brick' Vonn
My questions is one I first queried myself with when I first started buying CLD. Would MA actively undermine the CLD return in a way that minimizes their hurt but maximizes the reduction in payout they have to pay CLD holders thereby actively working against those who have invested avidly in the game. Are we essentially the frogs in the pot of boiling water...temperature rising. Is MA slowly converting current decay mechanisms on Calypso and other planets into non or minimal decay mechanisms slowly downsizing CLD payouts at the same time activity on planet is increasing? Now I'm sure all the CLD naysayers and poopooers will come running to dis CLDs on a thread like this but the real concern I have relates to the following issues:
1) The recent curtain raising on the affect shrapnel has on PP income as it doesn't seem to count towards decay or towards revenue. Thus all loot that would have normally been returned to the loot pool through the TT etc is now a percentage just turned into 'free' ammo and used up.
2) The introduction of low cost FAPs, i.e. resto chips etc that also tend to reduce decay and PP income.
3) ???
4) ???
Brick
1) The recent curtain raising on the affect shrapnel has on PP income as it doesn't seem to count towards decay or towards revenue. Thus all loot that would have normally been returned to the loot pool through the TT etc is now a percentage just turned into 'free' ammo and used up.
2) The introduction of low cost FAPs, i.e. resto chips etc that also tend to reduce decay and PP income.
3) ???
4) ???
Brick