Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
786
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 03:27:00 -
[31] - Quote
My biggest objection to any sort of attempt to implement a loan system in-game is that it's either going to be so burdened down with rules and restrictions that no one will really want to use it, or it will have enough holes in it that it will become one heck of a scamming tool (which means no one will really want to use it.)
That applies double if we're talking about NPCs giving out loans, too. At least RawringDragon's idea is simply facilitating player to player loans. Mynnna for CSM 8 |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
95
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 03:50:00 -
[32] - Quote
mynnna wrote:My biggest objection to any sort of attempt to implement a loan system in-game is that it's either going to be so burdened down with rules and restrictions that no one will really want to use it, or it will have enough holes in it that it will become one heck of a scamming tool (which means no one will really want to use it.)
That applies double if we're talking about NPCs giving out loans, too. At least RawringDragon's idea is simply facilitating player to player loans.
One thing that might be really EPIC would be if a 200%+ securitized loan system was added, adjusted by standing. So npc loan contracts would demand security and base loan size on the value. Maybe limiting it to very high volume traded items, to avoid manipulation. Or just adjust the loan size further by volume traded on valuation of value of security.
This might pull out a lot of oversocked items or redistribute them.
When default the contract would be made public at the buy back value plus interest accumulated on the loan.
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
786
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 04:21:00 -
[33] - Quote
Caleb Ayrania wrote:Maybe limiting it to very high volume traded items, to avoid manipulation. Or just adjust the loan size further by volume traded on valuation of value of security.[/b]
This, at least, wouldn't be necessary. Every killmail I've seen from ships with bounties or that yielded an LP payout for FW has that "Pend Insurance Estimate" value that differs considerably from the actual value of the ship, and it's that value used to calculate payout. Obvious conclusion is that CCP inserted some tweaks into the payout calculation to prevent the sort of manipulation we did for FW Forex, which would be exactly what you'd do to abuse a loan system too. Mynnna for CSM 8 |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations Paper Tiger Coalition
938
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 09:00:00 -
[34] - Quote
Making loans safer ? HELL NO
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Kirjava
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1554
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 10:42:00 -
[35] - Quote
I would have to say the ability to trade shares like bookmarks for purposes of a trade window would be useful so as to facilitate a level of trust when dealing.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. Cardinal Kirjava - Redeclaring the Crusade in the name of the Goddess since 2012. |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
96
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 10:58:00 -
[36] - Quote
Kirjava wrote:I would have to say the ability to trade shares like bookmarks for purposes of a trade window would be useful so as to facilitate a level of trust when dealing.
I think you mean the detachable shares concept. Where you can actually trade them as physical items and even put them in contracts. This idea have been suggested for years, and would really help a lot of issues with use of shares.
The complication arises when you look further in functionality, but if it needed to be "injected" back into the wallet to recieve voting rights and dividends it should work.
This would also create bearer bonds in a way similar to historical variant, and thus could create a new line of alternative currencies to. ofc mininum creation cost would need to be 1 isk to avoid removing the isk monopoly.
Bearer_bond
As mentioned another important aspect to having shares work better as a feature is to have reset/forced buyback and voting on that decision.
|
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
168
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 14:09:00 -
[37] - Quote
To be honest, a few of the ideas seem less about MD and more about S&I, but perhaps Caleb means "ideas of interest to people who hang out in MD" rather than "ideas related to MD". I don't suppose it really matters either way, but I'm a bit pedantic and feel a little better getting that off my chest.
Concept: alter "reprocessing" to have many of the aspects of manufacturing (reprocessing is essentially reverse manufacturing). I hear the objections now. "Wait just a darn minute -- that's an S&I idea you hypocrite!" I agree with you to a point, but I believe it would have some significant MD-related impacts. But first, allow me to more fully flesh out my idea.
Reprocessing would no longer be an instant event. It would be an event much like manufacturing. There would be NPC reprocessing lines instituted. Those lines would have fees (ISK sink). Those lines would have queues. The fees and queues would need to be weighed against selling surplus inventory, thus possibly driving more trade (such as looted modules). Skills would be created to control the number of reprocessing jobs a character can control (skillbook ISK sink). Skills created to affect the time for a reprocessing job (another skillbook ISK sink), e.g. base reprocessing time is 25% of the BPO manufacturing time, skill reduces that by 3 points per level.
Reprocessing POS modules and reprocessing outpost upgrades might be needed. The reprocessing fees would go to the controlling corporation or alliance, similar to manufacturing lines' fees.
MDD |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
99
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 14:28:00 -
[38] - Quote
MailDeadDrop wrote:To be honest, a few of the ideas seem less about MD and more about S&I, but perhaps Caleb means "ideas of interest to people who hang out in MD" rather than "ideas related to MD". I don't suppose it really matters either way, but I'm a bit pedantic and feel a little better getting that off my chest.
Concept: alter "reprocessing" to have many of the aspects of manufacturing (reprocessing is essentially reverse manufacturing). I hear the objections now. "Wait just a darn minute -- that's an S&I idea you hypocrite!" I agree with you to a point, but I believe it would have some significant MD-related impacts. But first, allow me to more fully flesh out my idea.
Reprocessing would no longer be an instant event. It would be an event much like manufacturing. There would be NPC reprocessing lines instituted. Those lines would have fees (ISK sink). Those lines would have queues. The fees and queues would need to be weighed against selling surplus inventory, thus possibly driving more trade (such as looted modules). Skills would be created to control the number of reprocessing jobs a character can control (skillbook ISK sink). Skills created to affect the time for a reprocessing job (another skillbook ISK sink), e.g. base reprocessing time is 25% of the BPO manufacturing time, skill reduces that by 3 points per level.
Reprocessing POS modules and reprocessing outpost upgrades might be needed. The reprocessing fees would go to the controlling corporation or alliance, similar to manufacturing lines' fees.
MDD
I was actually discussing this with my industry expert friend, that have been doing industry for something like 10 years now.
Recycling and Refining should be integrated into what I call the POS-STATION integration scheme. So Stations would be directly depending on slots "rented" to it by players. So you would increase the stations efficiency depending on how many slots it had rented to it by players.
SLOTS would increase the speed of processing recycling and refining. So refine would have a time sink element. The volumes per minute bonus would be based on type of refinery and these would be tiered and consume fuel accordingly.
There would be no more LOSS, but a TAKE and a FEE. TAKE would be adjusted dynamic pricing, so as the refining activity at a station goes up the take goes up. FEE would be based on Standings so between slot owner and stations and between refiner and station. Speed of refining would also be modified by factors like security of system, there would litterally or RP wise be interbus moving the ORE and items from Station to POS and back again. When these got shot effeciency drop and random ORE or mineral would drop.
This way Null and low sec would become interesting when population and activity drives prices up.
In null sec SOV holder install drones/interbus and these can also be shot down in null to incapacitate.
This would be similar to random spawned convoys on principle like RATs. Around station and at the edge of POS.
The same slot rental system would be active for Research, Invention and Production.
When Operating in POS without station all the takes, fees etc of is removed. Thus granting a clear benefit and distinction between owners and renters, corp and alliance.
|
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
99
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 14:48:00 -
[39] - Quote
We also had a little talk about PI. This started from a basic argument I would really hope Mynnna will take up with CCP.
NO Stationary entities need limited storage. Instead put the limitations on moving capacities. This is similar to the above mentioned capacity of production over time, just like moving goods in ships have a time limitation by hauler size and speeds.
This ties into a rather simple solution idea to many of the PI woes.
Make all the storages infinite except for the Launch Pad (25.000 m3)
Then let all the pipes be limited in volume moved per time. Capacity would be depending on pipeline upgrades and thus CPU / POWER and ISK sink.
When you move materials the speed of flow can be helped by using buffer methods. So you could set extractors to exctract until you have a buffer to keep things running. This would highly reduce the feeling of clicking, even though it would be fairly similar in the end.
With an optional Express movement manually activated but at isk cost.
Another optional would be using the "over heat" mechanics is a variation Over Worked Laborers. You would then ship in Slaves, Scientist, Workers, Marines etc to "buff" and remove debuffs.
The Control towers would have different modifiers fitting the race. SO Gal would have better CPU, Caldari would have Better Transportation, Amarr would have access to cheaper laborers (to remove over worked) and Minnies would have better extractors. More detail can be tweaked.
Letting storage be infinite would also mean a lot more potential for future functionality and new types of installments on planets. These would ofc fit well into the DUST visuals and its Narrative and gameplay.
|
Modulated stripminer
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 16:51:00 -
[40] - Quote
Priority-5 Remove shares from the game and end the stupid dream of players that eve can ever have a working stockmarket. |
|
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
178
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 17:48:00 -
[41] - Quote
Modulated stripminer wrote:end the stupid dream of players that eve can ever have a working stockmarket. EVE can have a working stockmarket and CCP don't really need to do anything to allow that to happen (although they could make it easier by providing better infrastructure).
The primary issue that prevents us having a working stockmarket is that the players have not created a great many entities that anyone would want to own shares in. It doesn't matter that the market for trading them is primitive when the item itself barely exists.
I can think of maybe a dozen currently trade-worthy shares in EVE and those are already traded perfectly well with the current infrastructure.
Maybe some better infrastructure would spur more people to build public businesses, but I personally think it's up to community members to put more work in to making this happen.
If you want it, build it. It makes a lot more sense than sitting around waiting for CCP to hand you a packaged product for your nieche gamestyle. |
Diesel Phumes
State Protectorate Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 18:22:00 -
[42] - Quote
How about some of the in game corporations go public with bond offerings. This debt issuance would be used to finance the mission rewards, facilities upkeep and etc. Bond purchase and bond buyback would be available at representative corporation NPCs. The bond would be physically manifested via some type of official document-looking graphic.
I suggest manifesting the bond so that it's price cab be driven up or down in the contract exchange. The corporations would never concern themselves with the price of the bond beyond an initially set purchase and buyback price. What these corporations would concern themselves with, however, would be with monthly dividends paid out to the owners of their stock. If CCP can't track who bonds the stock for purpose of dividend imbursement, enable bond owners to claim dividends by having the bond present in their inventory when visiting the corp NPC.
The dividend amount paid would be adjusted using a comparative algorithm. The dynamic variable inputs you would use to create this algorithm extend beyond the scope of my eve knowledge, but they would certainly factor historical and present performance of some variable(s) for each corporation and also among the corporations.
Maybe the variable(s) described above could be represented by how many missions were completed, within some time period, for that corporation versus a baseline number of missions completed, within same time period, for all corporations. This would assign that corporation a percentage of game-wide missions completed. How much better (or worse) that corporation fares against this baseline percentage would determine how much better or worse that corporation's dividend would be, against a standard dividend.
Set the baseline dividend to (bond price) / (2 years / N periods) or something comparable. Make it so that NPCs are unwilling to repurchase the bonds for 2 years or whatever is used in the equation similar to one stated above.
Also ensure that the algorithm is set to make total dividend payouts no greater than zero sum gain + 12% per annum. This money, although being created from nothing, would be offset by the fact that the total purchase price of the bonds would be absent from the economy until the bond had completed.
Maybe this is a bad idea. I don't care. Bad ideas are often used as platforms for really great ideas, because they allow leaps of logic and leaps in thinking that would have never been made otherwise.
Cheers |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
100
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 06:37:00 -
[43] - Quote
Diesel those are not bad ideas.. Just rough ideas..
That is the only way we can collect the information needed to suggest something realistic.
In order for CCP to see why its a good idea to consider putting manhours into creating things like loan contracts and a true stockmarket, and shares features we need to have the facts and come up with a system that wont end up as a dead-end functionality.
The key word is consequences for defaulting. EVE is known to see scamming as a viable game options and I agree fully with this. So I believe we need something with enough "holes" to not make scams and defaulting impossible, but where there are methods of acting on these criminal offences.
That is why I think we need to consider corp standings and bounty and kill rights features before we look at the details in the MD features.
Also to even begin to work on these things I believe player to player billing is the most VITAL feature for MD activity.
After PLAYER BILLING we need to consider a simple ingame way to have calculations of estimated NAV (net asset value) of ALL a player or a corps assets. This would be shown as categories in a wallet feature with export option. API already have this option, since many 3rd party services can do these calls, but to make it a valid mechanic the ingame client should have a simple version of it. We can not expect players to experiment with using shares and financial reporting casually if it demands a full RL exam or experience and the equivalent to an mba.
With NAV REPORT in the game the client could easily update this number to corp information, much like you can see info on npc corps shares number etc. Thus we would have a really rough way of showing value of shares.
The next feature needed would be buyback vote SHARE RESET. So suggesting a vote to force buyback shares would give the owners an idea whether to vote for or against the action, based on looking at reported shares value.
Last would be an option to unplug shares to trade in contracts. I think this is a bit of a tough one, but there might be a mechanic work around. If corp got the equivalent of a BPO with an ID that would be transfered onto BPC then we would have a physical item to trade. So these would ofc be stackable and would need to be plugged into something equivalent to building slots. In the functions of industry it would be possible to create to equivalent of a public stock market in current client-server mechanics. Building slots can be viewed remotely, so having 3 different states to plug the shares into would work as holding, selling or buying. The visibility would be like a remote link to a contract and when you either sell or buy the stack would increase or decrease.
If we accepted something like this, that basically reused some of the existing UI and functionality we could get a working system without demanding a full team dedicated to this single feature. It would be possible to have it as a work in progress project, where players would be informed that this was a beta feature. With the inventive nature of EVE players as things progresed players would figure out work arounds and 3rd party features that would help developers integrate the needed features in fixes and small updates.
Is this an optimal solution? HELL NO, but since this feature have been shelved for 9 years, the only realistic solution is accepting a beta version. If Shares grow into a huge phenomenon it will naturally pull more developer time, but if not its a good way to not risk wasting effort.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8472
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 09:27:00 -
[44] - Quote
Arronicus wrote: 3 pt: Facilitation for loans and banks in game. Would take some fleshing out, but means of having secure loans, where one party could not simply 'run off with' the goods. Including perhaps functionality for collateral, that wasn't returned till the loan was paid in full?
(more to come)
How do you get around the problem of people taking out loans on alts, transferring the ISK or assets to their main and then biomassing, selling or simply abandoning the alt?
Please vote for me for CSM8-áhere
My recommended voting list |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8472
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 09:28:00 -
[45] - Quote
Bad Bobby wrote:Modulated stripminer wrote:end the stupid dream of players that eve can ever have a working stockmarket. EVE can have a working stockmarket and CCP don't really need to do anything to allow that to happen (although they could make it easier by providing better infrastructure). The primary issue that prevents us having a working stockmarket is that the players have not created a great many entities that anyone would want to own shares in. It doesn't matter that the market for trading them is primitive when the item itself barely exists. I can think of maybe a dozen currently trade-worthy shares in EVE and those are already traded perfectly well with the current infrastructure. Maybe some better infrastructure would spur more people to build public businesses, but I personally think it's up to community members to put more work in to making this happen. If you want it, build it. It makes a lot more sense than sitting around waiting for CCP to hand you a packaged product for your nieche gamestyle.
EVE can't have a working stockmarket until people like you can be put in prison. Please vote for me for CSM8-áhere
My recommended voting list |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
100
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 09:40:00 -
[46] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Arronicus wrote: 3 pt: Facilitation for loans and banks in game. Would take some fleshing out, but means of having secure loans, where one party could not simply 'run off with' the goods. Including perhaps functionality for collateral, that wasn't returned till the loan was paid in full?
(more to come)
How do you get around the problem of people taking out loans on alts, transferring the ISK or assets to their main and then biomassing, selling or simply abandoning the alt?
As mentioned above if loans needed 200%+ assets as collateral this problem is irrelevant.
Player to player collateral loan contracts are supposed to have exactly that type of option, since scamming is promoted in EVE. If you accept a loan contract to someone with low collateral or stupid interests you should get burned..
Working as intended would be the reply!
On these contracts a warning splash would ofc be needed that players could ignore and dismiss at their own peril!
|
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
100
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 09:45:00 -
[47] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:[
EVE can't have a working stockmarket until people like you can be put in prison. (at Bad Booby)
A consequence mechanic with bounty and killrights would be EVE equivalent to that.
Also a personal oriented Vendetta system might be useful. A bit like wardecs but on a personal level. When a Vendetta is issued the corp level is given the option to "defend" join the miniwar so to speak. So individuals could declare war on corporations and alliances without needing to spread it to own corp or alliance. This would bring new activity into war decs and kick the beehives of corporations and alliances.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8472
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 09:50:00 -
[48] - Quote
Caleb Ayrania wrote:Malcanis wrote:Arronicus wrote: 3 pt: Facilitation for loans and banks in game. Would take some fleshing out, but means of having secure loans, where one party could not simply 'run off with' the goods. Including perhaps functionality for collateral, that wasn't returned till the loan was paid in full?
(more to come)
How do you get around the problem of people taking out loans on alts, transferring the ISK or assets to their main and then biomassing, selling or simply abandoning the alt? As mentioned above if loans needed 200%+ assets as collateral this problem is irrelevant. Player to player collateral loan contracts are supposed to have exactly that type of option, since scamming is promoted in EVE. If you accept a loan contract to someone with low collateral or stupid interests you should get burned.. Working as intended would be the reply! On these contracts a warning splash would ofc be needed that players could ignore and dismiss at their own peril!
Almost all items in EVE are fungible and transportable; if I need 10 billion ISK, and I have 20 billion ISk worth of such assets available (ie: not being used), why would I need a loan? Why not just liquidate 10 billion worth of assets, use the capital for whatever, then buy the items back when I have a need for them.
Conversely, if I lend you 10 billion ISK and you collateralisae them with 20 billion worth of assets, then thanks for the 10 bill instant profit bro. Feel free to put as much bounty as you like on my teller alt that never leaves stattion. Please vote for me for CSM8-áhere
My recommended voting list |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8472
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 09:54:00 -
[49] - Quote
Caleb Ayrania wrote:Malcanis wrote:[
EVE can't have a working stockmarket until people like you can be put in prison. (at Bad Booby) A consequence mechanic with bounty and killrights would be EVE equivalent to that. Also a personal oriented Vendetta system might be useful. A bit like wardecs but on a personal level. When a Vendetta is issued the corp level is given the option to "defend" join the miniwar so to speak. So individuals could declare war on corporations and alliances without needing to spread it to own corp or alliance. This would bring new activity into war decs and kick the beehives of corporations and alliances.
What would be the qualification for declaring a "vendetta"? Can you declare one on anyone you like? If so, then it's a made-to-order griefing tool. If it's limited by game mechanics, then it runs into the alt problem. If it needs GM approval then it's very labour intensive (maybe CCP could charge 1 PLEX for the service?) Please vote for me for CSM8-áhere
My recommended voting list |
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
179
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 09:59:00 -
[50] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:EVE can't have a working stockmarket until people like you can be put in prison. I'd like to know how you expect prison terms to help, assuming they were possible to implement. |
|
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
179
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 10:05:00 -
[51] - Quote
Caleb Ayrania wrote:(at Bad Booby)
A consequence mechanic with bounty and killrights would be EVE equivalent to that.
Also a personal oriented Vendetta system might be useful. A bit like wardecs but on a personal level. When a Vendetta is issued the corp level is given the option to "defend" join the miniwar so to speak. So individuals could declare war on corporations and alliances without needing to spread it to own corp or alliance. This would bring new activity into war decs and kick the beehives of corporations and alliances. I'd like to point out that you can already put a bounty on me, you can already war dec me and you can already kill my main freely in any location (since I'm -10) so the issue currently isn't that those particular consequences are not available.
Personally, I think this isn't about the lack of consequences because punishing fraudsters after they have already defrauded you is akin to shutting the gate after the horse has bolted. |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
100
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 10:44:00 -
[52] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Caleb Ayrania wrote:Malcanis wrote:Arronicus wrote: 3 pt: Facilitation for loans and banks in game. Would take some fleshing out, but means of having secure loans, where one party could not simply 'run off with' the goods. Including perhaps functionality for collateral, that wasn't returned till the loan was paid in full?
(more to come)
How do you get around the problem of people taking out loans on alts, transferring the ISK or assets to their main and then biomassing, selling or simply abandoning the alt? As mentioned above if loans needed 200%+ assets as collateral this problem is irrelevant. Player to player collateral loan contracts are supposed to have exactly that type of option, since scamming is promoted in EVE. If you accept a loan contract to someone with low collateral or stupid interests you should get burned.. Working as intended would be the reply! On these contracts a warning splash would ofc be needed that players could ignore and dismiss at their own peril! Almost all items in EVE are fungible and transportable; if I need 10 billion ISK, and I have 20 billion ISk worth of such assets available (ie: not being used), why would I need a loan? Why not just liquidate 10 billion worth of assets, use the capital for whatever, then buy the items back when I have a need for them. Conversely, if I lend you 10 billion ISK and you collateralisae them with 20 billion worth of assets, then thanks for the 10 bill instant profit bro. Feel free to put as much bounty as you like on my teller alt that never leaves stattion.
On loan contracts you could not get the collateral as long as client is not defaulting. I thought that part would be obvious?
Also not all assets can be sold everywhere.. especially regarding null this would be of value. Also ofc if we ever get mechanics made things like repairs time sink only and not isk sinks.
Repair should be a rental service and capacity/time to finish should be based on POS units installed into station. Pay more for more slots to speed it up.
Most of these mechanics ideas are all linked to the fact that CCP has made some aspects too much easy mode, and others way too hard.
|
Andrea Griffin
325
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 16:09:00 -
[53] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Why not just liquidate 10 billion worth of assets, use the capital for whatever, then buy the items back when I have a need for them. This works if it's easy to liquidate assets. For me (and I imagine for a lot of people), stuff is spread out all over the place. Selling a chunk of it would take a lot of time on my part transporting it to where I could get a half decent price.
Also, I'm not sure that we need a punishment system for people like Bad Bobby. Confidence games, being able to swindle people, is part of Eve's charm. And, much like real life, the public response to someone who was conned is "You dummy, you should have known better."
By the way, anyone want to buy some shares of Titans4U? CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer. |
Alex Grison
Grison Interstellar
270
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 16:16:00 -
[54] - Quote
Category X - 500 Points - Force Recon Lockdown Category
ISK -> jellybeans conversion |
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
183
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 18:19:00 -
[55] - Quote
5 points: CCP should sell more things for PLEX, like laptops. |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations Paper Tiger Coalition
939
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 18:43:00 -
[56] - Quote
Bad Bobby wrote:5 points: CCP should sell more things for PLEX, like laptops.
Ow yes please , and big huge tv's ... i could do with a playstation or xbox too ...
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
101
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 18:44:00 -
[57] - Quote
Bad Bobby wrote:5 points: CCP should sell more things for PLEX, like laptops.
I agree. Also I would like them to use their brains a bit.. Aside from the fanboy clothing. Buy batches of cool clothes and make the models for the ingame version. Sell both get Real life rich. Virtual clothing for Aurum and real life version for PLEX. Talk about taking the middleman scam to the max, while clients like you for it..
ALL the FanFest Tshirts should exist ingame and outgame. But limited ofc..
We need real life clothing with EVE ship camouflage..
Those LEGO things need to develop further, and we need a team from WhiteWolf to design the Pen and Paper game for EVE, especially now that we have DUST Puppies too. have gamesworkshop create the DUST suit miniatures..
SELL EVERYTHING FOR PLEX..
|
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
101
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 18:55:00 -
[58] - Quote
flakeys wrote:Bad Bobby wrote:5 points: CCP should sell more things for PLEX, like laptops. Ow yes please , and big huge tv's ... i could do with a playstation or xbox too ...
Playstation 4 for PLEX..
That is the most epic DUST, EVE SONY EVENT EVAR!!!
Talk about free promo for all products..
Bet CCP could get a deal to not risk liquidity..
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
479
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 21:38:00 -
[59] - Quote
The number 1 wish of mines for CSM8 is some one with Market/industry understanding gets voted in. |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
102
|
Posted - 2013.04.06 07:32:00 -
[60] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:The number 1 wish of mines for CSM8 is some one with Market/industry understanding gets voted in.
We already know that Mynnna will get in, so we do have at least one with some eye on IND and MD.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |