|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
Rasz Lin
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.12.12 07:08:00 -
[1]
Originally by: Arx Eladios
Even if the person running the macro never uses it for RMT/GTC trade, it still is harmful to the EVE as a whole.
EVE playerbase yes, CCP NO. More ISK means more buying power on PLEX market = more PLEX sold = more profit. More bots means more PLEX sold to fuel those bot accounts. CCP is ONLY concerned about RTM, but they leave bots alone.
|
Rasz Lin
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.12.15 10:53:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Rasz Lin on 15/12/2010 10:55:02
Originally by: Aylara It's cheaper to tolerate the bots to a certain amount than to change the game mechanics.
What do you mean "cheaper"? The bots are the ones PROVIDING INCOME for CCP. Every bot generates isk that later pays for 20-50 PLEXes per month. Bots enable people to pay for plex = they create demand for PLEX = CCP sells more PLEX.
The only thing CCP doesnt like is competition from RTMers, but CCP LOVES bots.
Last time they banned bots (unholy rage) PLEX price plummeted down as people didnt have ISK to buy plex = demand for PLEX dropped = incentive to buy PLEX from CCP in order to get ISK dropped = CCP lost money on the whole operation. They wont do it again.
|
Rasz Lin
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.12.15 11:47:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Tornan
Originally by: Rasz Lin Edited by: Rasz Lin on 15/12/2010 10:55:02
Originally by: Aylara It's cheaper to tolerate the bots to a certain amount than to change the game mechanics.
What do you mean "cheaper"? The bots are the ones PROVIDING INCOME for CCP. Every bot generates isk that later pays for 20-50 PLEXes per month. Bots enable people to pay for plex = they create demand for PLEX = CCP sells more PLEX.
The only thing CCP doesnt like is competition from RTMers, but CCP LOVES bots.
Last time they banned bots (unholy rage) PLEX price plummeted down as people didnt have ISK to buy plex = demand for PLEX dropped = incentive to buy PLEX from CCP in order to get ISK dropped = CCP lost money on the whole operation. They wont do it again.
I dont understand your logic, if I buy plex with isk they make no money off me. If they removed plex I would have to buy the regular subscription, unless your saying that ccp generates more money by sselling isk.
CCP tapped and monetized "Free to play" market with PLEX. Removing PLEX means losing huge chunk of EVE population. Remember that "Free to play + microtransaction" is becoming the norm. CCP can either somehow let those people participate in EVE (PLEX) or lose money .... or convert to microtransaction completely.
CCP doesnt sell ISK, they sell PLEX. They will sell isk if/when they convert to microtransaction model.
|
Rasz Lin
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.12.17 13:28:00 -
[4]
The problem was NEVER with detecting. Problem is of economic nature. CCP crunched the numbers after Unholy Rage, came to the conclusion they lost money and decided to focus on RTMing alts instead of macro. Read that blog again, not a word about macro being a problem. Only about RTM and how its competing with legal GTC sales.
CCP is in business of making money, macros provide ISK that is used to buy PLEX, CCP likes to sell a lot of PLEX. Its that simple.
|
Rasz Lin
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.12.19 03:54:00 -
[5]
Originally by: CCP Sreegs Hey guys, just wanted to say I'm seeing a lot of conversation here about us not caring or not doing anything about this particular subject and I wanted to affirm that it's a subject that's very near and dear to my heart. This isn't a subject that's being ignored in ANY WAY, and it's actually something I personally take umbrage with.
I understand how one can feel a certain way based on their personal perceptions, but I can also say with some degree of authority that this is no way a subject that's being ignored in the least.
Subject is RTM _and_ botting. We know you care about RTM as it is competing with PLEX revenue, we also know you do not ban bots.
|
Rasz Lin
Caldari Uitraan Diversified Holdings Incorporated
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 13:03:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Elyssa MacLeod Edited by: Elyssa MacLeod on 04/04/2011 08:04:19
Originally by: Calistai Huranu Weeks vacation over for ccp sreegs, so any news on when we get the Devblog on this?
I wonder if we arent too mean for him now lol
Id rather like to see them come together and talk TO EACH OTHER on the synergy issue and issue a statement. Theyre acting like they arent in the same company and dont have internal emails or ffs cant talk to each other in person for that matter
They dont and they cant. Read up about Agility or whatever the buzzword is for the developing method they are using. Basically its a slave labour where someone decides your goals for you, gives you few days to implement them and then you spend half that time jerking each other in the circle in the team meeting, next you fail to implement half of those goals but there is no time for delays or fixes so they are abandoned and you get NEW set of goals that you have to spend time talking about and then fail to implement. There is no time for talking to other teams as every team has to waste time in their own circle. Thats how PI happened. They had a list of goals, and they only managed 2-3 out of 10 in time but they still released cos AGILITY is all about releasing.
|
Rasz Lin
Caldari Uitraan Diversified Holdings Incorporated
|
Posted - 2011.04.06 21:00:00 -
[7]
I ignore sites that use Google captchas because its too difficult for me :( :)
|
Rasz Lin
Caldari Uitraan Diversified Holdings Incorporated
|
Posted - 2011.08.29 08:53:00 -
[8]
Arvasaras 20 randomly generated characters, eatch in CNR in 1 man corp with randomly generated name
Vellaine: 7 randomly generated characters, eatch in CNR in 1 man corp with randomly generated name
Akonoinen 12 randomly generated characters, eatch in CNR in 1 man corp with randomly generated name
Hageken: >10 randomly generated characters, eatch in CNR in 1 man corp with randomly generated name
and so on
mission running bots are not being touched by CCP.
|
|
|
|