Wow Tech Support

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Thursday, 3 May 2012

Expansion suggestion: multi-character client

Posted on 22:00 by Unknown
This idea has been bugging me for some time, so I just introduce it. I know some CSMs are lurking around, I hope they find it worthy to show it to CCP. It's something that serves both players and CCP

What would the multi-character client do? Simply after you logged in the game you could select your characters to enter the game. This one client would handle all your characters and for this reasons accounts in the hand of one person would be merged. The client would support logging in with multiple characters concurrently, assuming your subscription method supports that. Instead of Alt-tabbing between clients, you would get a bar that shows the other characters face and most important data: shield, armor and hull HP, what he does (warping, approaching, shooting/mining, being docked, idling in space). You could switch to the char with one click.

That's alone handy but here comes the real stuff: multiboxing support. If your pilots are in the same system, you could link them to one of your pilots, they would orbit that pilot and the master pilot would get extra buttons/hotkeys: order supporters to lock that target (available on overview and selected item too), open fire on that target (assuming it's locked), fire at will (shoot whatever is red, practically aggressive drone mode), heal that target (use repping modules on the target if locked). Obviously it wouldn't be as effective as having individual players behind each pilot, they would be just glorified drones, but still it would allow much better multiboxing. Also with one click you can switch to the other pilot to micro-manage.

The client could also support "perfect multibox" which is available if the ships are the same type and fit. This case everything the leader pilot does is mimiced by the supporters.

The concurrent login handling is convenient. The multiboxing support would get some customers to buy more accounts. However it seems to affect only a small playerbase that doesn't really justify the developer resources. So here come the big deals.

Only one client can run on a computer. Since the client would handle all your characters, it's pointless to run more than one client. However banning to do so would be a serious hit on account sharing, illegal account selling and illegal ISK selling. Why? If I have two accounts, I can let some buddy play with one while I play with the other. If all my characters are on one account, I can't give him one, just all at once. Also, he can't play his own account while he is playing on mine as the client either runs my account or his. If you have an illegal pilot (botter, exploiter or whatever) on the same account as other (legal or not) pilots, being caught and banned would mean losing them all. Having the illegal pilot on a different account wouldn't help alone, as playing that account would make it impossible to play other accounts on the same computer. This would significantly increase the costs of botting and other illegal activities as every pilot would need a separate computer to avoid the risk of more than one being banned at once.

Finally this client would allow much more customized payment methods which would allow CCP to make offers that more players would accept, increasing both customer satisfaction and CCP income. Currently if you buy an extra account you get one pilot who learns skills, two who don't and one more concurrent logins. This is the offer, take it or leave it. Many choose to leave it. For example if you are a trader with your main in Jita, the two alts are on Rens and Amarr, you won't pay a full subscription to have one more pilot in Dodixie. With this client CCP could sell the following separately:
  • Concurrent logins
  • Pilots learning skills
  • Pilots not learning skills
When you activate a PLEX, you get 300 "time points" on your account. Every day a concurrent login would take 4 pt, a learning pilot 4, a non-learning 1. I just made the numbers randomly with only caring that if you use the current account you get exactly 4+4+1+1= 10/day= 300/month. The player could make changes in the client which take effect at server downtime, so can't be changed more often than daily. With this client the above trader could create his Dodixie alt (happy), while paying 1pt/day = E1.5/month to CCP, which is profit they wouldn't get otherwise.

This client would remove the all-or-nothing bar from buying another account, luring customers into it step by step. For example the above trader first just buy his passive Dodixie alt. Then he is unsatisfied by training speed (as only 1 out of 4 pilots can learn skills), so he buys one more training pilot spots. Soon he'll have enough skill points to train one more alt to freighters and to have two freighters in space he'll buy one more concurrent login. Also, the client would make the account management simpler: you just buy time points from money or activating PLEX and you do the micro-management within the client.

I'm sure that the above system would significantly increase the amount of players who use more than one PLEX for playing time (paid by themselves or by the guy who sold a PLEX on the market), even if most of them would only pay 1/3-2/3 PLEX more. However if just 1/3 of the players would choose to spend 2E/month more, that's 2.9M E/year income to CCP while actually making all players happier or at worst neutral.


EVE Business report: Friday morning 18.2B (2 PLEX behind for second account, 0.3B spent on Titan project). The reason of the drop is that I bought myself a 650M ship and also decided that my trading alts have much more to learn, like PI and manufacturing, so the first one got Cybernetics 4 and 3 +4 implants. The remaining 2 will come from the gift. Remember that you can participate in our EVE conversations on the "goblinworks" channel (60-80 people on peak time) and your UI suggestions are welcomed.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in Random | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Suffer mortals, as your pathetic password betrays you!
    One of the things we often don't put much thought into is password selection. Usually it is a loved-one's name or an easily remembe...
  • (I'm not) defining lowsec
    This is a rather short post, will be one more today, about my very first PvP action. Sugar reminded me of a problem that I read about a l...
  • The big EVE trick
    What is an easy game: where everyone can achieve what he wants easily. What is a hard game: where you can only advance by becoming better an...
  • You must station trade what you haul
    Well, actually you don't if you are fine with hauling for buy orders. This case you lose serious profit. If you are the station trader o...
  • The (total lack of) balance of trade of highsec
    The fact that you can be much more rich in highsec than in the competitive areas of EVE (low, null, WH) is one of my main messages. It can b...
  • Thinking about highsec POCOs
    In the next EVE patch, Rubicon, highsec customs offices will be capturable by players (actually you destroy and build your own, but it's...
  • What would happen if people could trade?
    The question of mirror-ability of strategies often comes up when I post my trading strategy. The 0.01 strategy is clearly mirror-able. If th...
  • October ganking report
    October was a great month for my corporation , We Gank Because We Care. You can see the results on the killboard but since October was 31 d...
  • The proper profit metric
    Live moron of the weekend post . Did they spent the last month under a rock? People having trouble making ISK with trading. Some rather go m...
  • ur a kid!
    The title is a troll comment I get often. It doesn't make much sense. It's clearly not an argument. While we know that socials don...

Categories

  • account
  • account theft
  • adobe
  • alpha
  • arena tournament
  • authenticator
  • authenticators
  • battle.net
  • beta
  • blizzard
  • brute force
  • cataclysm
  • diablo 3 phishing scam
  • dictionary attack
  • drive-by
  • email
  • fake
  • flash
  • game
  • Gold
  • guild
  • gumblar
  • hacked
  • hacking
  • hacks
  • Ideas
  • ISK
  • keylogger
  • march
  • mmo-champion
  • New
  • password
  • password stealing
  • patching
  • phishing
  • raiding
  • Random
  • ranks
  • remote auction house
  • scam
  • scams
  • security
  • security checklist
  • soccer
  • strong password
  • trojan
  • vulnerability
  • warcraft
  • wow
  • wowarmory
  • wowmatrix

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (242)
    • ►  November (15)
    • ►  October (25)
    • ►  September (24)
    • ►  August (21)
    • ►  July (24)
    • ►  June (22)
    • ►  May (22)
    • ►  April (22)
    • ►  March (20)
    • ►  February (21)
    • ►  January (26)
  • ▼  2012 (261)
    • ►  December (24)
    • ►  November (21)
    • ►  October (24)
    • ►  September (21)
    • ►  August (26)
    • ►  July (25)
    • ►  June (20)
    • ▼  May (25)
      • Something MUST be done about non-wardeccable corps
      • May business report
      • You can barely find battles in EVE
      • Cosmos agents: money for fighters, standing for tr...
      • The smaller hubs
      • Would I welcome the IMMORTAL module?
      • A market I won't miss
      • Hey guys come and play with me!
      • Blizzard Confirms a Rise in Diablo 3 Hacks
      • The Diablo 3 "game over" issue
      • Implants and remaps
      • Diablo 3 market is "37"
      • Why socials can never be rich?
      • Dealing with game server overloads
      • You must station trade what you haul
      • Blogging my profit away
      • Miners, manufacturers, refine!
      • The caveman bias and the IQ of EVE vs WoW players
      • Fails are fails
      • The secret EVE and Diablo 3 power item shop
      • The One Empire: structure, culture and drama
      • Comparative advantage and highsec PI
      • Expansion suggestion: multi-character client
      • Spreading information is never in vain!
      • Planetary interaction for beginners
    • ►  April (23)
    • ►  March (23)
    • ►  February (23)
    • ►  January (6)
  • ►  2011 (4)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2010 (17)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ►  2009 (4)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  July (1)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile