Armor Deterioration Changes - Page 49

thoreau · 10-24-2007, 21:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marco|MindArk

I am still gathering info about the foot guards and before I know more I will refrain from comments. I hope to comment tomorrow. I hope you understand.

Talk about being out of the loop.

Slapnuts · 10-25-2007, 11:12

Hi Marco,

Seriously this is getting a bit embarrassing/comical now. I have asked to understand the distribution method for foot guards in this thread 4 times now but to no avail and have sent a support asking the same / similar question:

16 Oct 2007 You wrote: ......

The change in the 2pec charge has caused a lot of uncertainty about whether the foot guards issue will also be changed.

People don't know whether to spend 1000s of ped buying them now or wait and see if this gets changed. Can Marco or someone make a statement on the forum to at least say whether foot guards are 'under review' or not. If they are definitely staying and have to be bought this will allow people to trade them. But if you are even considering changing this too (like the idea of splitting shins) then please please say so we know where we stand.

19 Oct 2007 Entropia Support:
Hi,
Thank you for your message. All changes have been made with a thorough contemplation over their value, function and technical status. As MindArk strive to upgrade Entropia, along with general technical progression of hardware and software, these changes are inevitable.
Please refere to http://www.entropiaforum.com/forums/...72#post1016872.
Kind Regards,
Entropia Support

Aside from their first paragraph meaning absolutely nothing whatsoever the link they have provided takes me to the very page in this thread where I asked this question in the first place! They answered my question with my own question. eh?

People invest in entropia and when investing in anything you like to know that there are sound judgements being made which can affect that investment. I simply want to understand why the footguard distribution method:
a) needs to penalise everyone in terms of buying footguards when there are perfectly logical alternatives that make MA money (i.e. split shins at zero tt).
b) specifically why you used a distribution method that you knew would penalise the more heavily invested players the most.

Once again, I have no problem with 7 armour parts and I understand that entropia is dynamic, and you can't affect the open market, blah, blah, blah ... none of that has anything to do with what I want to understand. The only rationale I can see for the way you have implimented the 7th armour part is to force people to deposit for their avatars to stand still in terms of capability? If that's the case, just say it (although I suspect if it is the case you'll say nothing). If it's policy with this sort of thing to hit the most heavily invested players hardest then I would quite like to know that upfront. If I have missed something somewhere please tell me. If it's none of these please give a summary of the rationale - as support said above it have all been carefully contemplated so you must have the answer. And please not a politicians answer, all that does is indicate that the most synical theory is likely to be true.

Its not a trick question, I'm not necessarily asking for any changes, I just want to undertand the decision. At the moment I just see myself landed with completely unneccessary expense to stand still and an expense bigger than others purely because I have invested more than them into the very company that just gave me the bill (not to take anything away from their plight and also recognising there are many many hit alot harder by this than me).

John B Knight · 10-25-2007, 11:43

Hi Slapnuts,

if they would split the shins in two parts wouldnt that be unfair to those that havent got a full set yet ?
For example someone with 3 pieces of supremacy (Harness, Helmet, Arms) and a full set of shadow would receive shadow foot guards - but someone with full shadow and only supremacy shins would receive shadow and supremacy foot guards netting him/her (on the open market) 15-20k ped more then the first person regardless he/she has less money tied up in armor.

I have thought on this issue for quite a while now, but i cant find a solution which would be more fair then the one MA choosed - except if they would revamp the whole protection system to not hit parts of the body but the body as a whole and calculate the protection level of the body by adding up all single armor piece values and dividing by 7. This would result in only a small loss of protection through missing foot guards and would allow to get quite close to the old protection level using foot guards from a lesser more affordable armor.
Another option would be to divide by 6 so everyone would have the same protection as before and buying the foot guards would net additional protection - but i dont know if that would balance out through the entire hunting range.

Slapnuts · 10-25-2007, 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by John B Knight

Hi Slapnuts,

if they would split the shins in two parts wouldnt that be unfair to those that havent got a full set yet ?
For example someone with 3 pieces of supremacy (Harness, Helmet, Arms) and a full set of shadow would receive shadow foot guards - but someone with full shadow and only supremacy shins would receive shadow and supremacy foot guards netting him/her (on the open market) 15-20k ped more then the first person regardless he/she has less money tied up in armor.

Hi John,

I agree all this thinking ahould have ben done by MA before the VU and I'm not convinced it was. All that said if I had Supremacy but Shadow shins and therefore ended up with Shadow feet then:
a) I have protection for the new VU at no additional expense (except perhaps repair) at a comparable level to at least one of the parts I am using already ... my gaming experience isn't particularly impaired.
b) If i do want to get Supremacy feet then at least I have Shadow feet to put towards the cost.

I agree that is someone happened to have a stockpile of shin guards they would have a good day but that doesn't change the fct that I would end up with comparabl protection on the 7th body part as the 6th part. Only maybe a problem for someone with full Supremacy but Pixie shins but ... well you know what I mean ...

Generally speaking people would get footguards the same or one protection level higher or lower than their target armour depending on if they had upgraded shins first or had left that piece until last.

In the current situation I have no protection of any level and nothing to put towards the cost of getting it/any other than my credit card.

This has just decimated my confidence in MA and how they will impliment anything planned for the future. I used to look forward to the game evolving, trying to log in to find I can't because of an update was good news, now I just fear the future.

Nirfu · 10-25-2007, 12:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slapnuts

Hi Marco,

Seriously this is getting a bit embarrassing/comical now. I have asked to understand the distribution method for foot guards in this thread 4 times now but to no avail and have sent a support asking the same / similar ........................he decision. At the moment I just see myself landed with completely unneccessary expense to stand still and an expense bigger than others purely because I have invested more than them into the very company that just gave me the bill (not to take anything away from their plight and also recognising there are many many hit alot harder by this than me).

I have lately refered to this document:
http://www.mindark.se/docs/reports/I...nt_Q2_2007.pdf

The financial report of Q2 2007 from MA.

In there we see:

Quote:

Net sales and profit affected negatively by the falling exchange rate between
USD and SEK
o Less profit growth due to increased investments in organization, marketing
and research & development
o Operational profit margin is 34% (44% for 2006)

Quote:

Contingent liabilities
MindArk defines operating income as the net amount of provided and withdrawn
funds by participants in Entropia Universe.
Therefore participants in Entropia Universe at any given moment holds
significante amounts of unconsumed PEDs. These customer holdings are treated
by MindArk as a contingent liability. On June 30 2007 the summary of these PED
holdings amounted to approximately 31 million SEK compared to 21 million SEK
on December 31st 2006 and 17 million SEK on June 30 2006.

SEK to USD is about 0.6
SEK to EUR is about 0.9

In my eyes this contingent liability is something that MA works hard to increase. We see this in the old 50% melee weapon thing, that they later had to change. We see this in the clothes, and in a 7nd armour part players will lock even more PEDs in the game.

With contingent liability of $16 million MA can easily get more money from the bank or earn a lot from intrance.

My 2 pecs is that MA shareholders demands this from MA and we will see more of this in the future.

Now I'm not a financial guy and could be totally wrong, but I'm 100% sure that there is others in this community that can uderstand what this means and tell it the right way.

Slapnuts · 10-25-2007, 12:59

Hi,

Thanks. The continent liability simply explains as a note to the accounts that there is an amount of money in game (in the accounts) which at present is in an undeterminable state due to unforeseen future events. I.e it's deposited, but can't be regarded as MA P&L as it is free to be withdrawn. If everyone withdrew from game tomorrow this would be a real liability requiring provision but as that is 'unlikely' and it's 'undeterminable' to what extent that may or may not happen it has to be noted as a contingent liability.

This qualification is needed because of their definiteion of Income as deposited vs withdrawn.

Thanks again, I'll read over the link you gave.

Slappy

Sneaky B'stard · 10-25-2007, 13:47

What can I say - we were told we would have an OPTION to remodel our avatars... WHAT OPTION - it was FORCED on us..
I liked my avatar the way it WAS before this VU. Now I cant get it back the same WITHOUT SPENDING PED...
What a ripoff that is..
How would Marco like it if someone re arranged his face - and he had to pay to get it back. Even then he would still end up looking like a barbie doll.

The decay on armour for equipping is a complete RIPOFF and is unwanted. Sure some decay on clothes to get them all to look different isnt such a bad idea - BUT WHY SCREW UP our old clothes... Even if I repair my clothes to full TT value - they look nothing like they did before. The colours are faded no matter what TT value the clothes have.

The biggest laugh is how MA changed the EULA........

It now has this in it :
Gambling activities are expressly forbidden in the Entropia Universe.

But MA are making us gamble with this VU......
Entropia Universe is advertised as a virtual world where we can "INVEST"
Now all my armour sets are incomplete and all my clothes dont look the same(even repaired) HOW IS THAT AN IVESTMENT ?????
It has simply made EU a place to gamble. I made a gamble that my armour sets and clothes would always be what I paid for. Now they are just shit.

We cant gamble - but MA can gamble with our "investments" - no wonder Marco is always on vacation when a VU is released that screws the users - he must be gambling with my investments.
Sorry Marco no hug for you

Slapnuts · 10-25-2007, 18:43

I totally agree that lots are cheesed off with remodelling and the equip decay, and some of both has been addressed in fairness. Also I guess at the end of the day on these two you either look different or you leave you armour on permenantly ... both are pretty much avoidable, as annoying as they maybe for you/some.

However, the way footguards have been introduced gives everyone a (pretty much) no option cost for zero player, or game experience, benefit. If there were no other options available for the method of implementation then maybe no problen also, as I keep saying I have no problem with 7, 8, 9 pieces of armour being needed, but stinging people for potentially 1000s of ped just for them to stay static in terms of their avatar development, not give a reason for it other than a keeness for the number 7, and then to deliver a 1ped scarey skull mask etc a couple of weeks later and tell us happy halloween! Incredible.

Marco seriously, why have we been billed?

Metatron · 10-25-2007, 19:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slapnuts

I totally agree that lots are cheesed off with remodelling and the equip decay, and some of both has been addressed in fairness. Also I guess at the end of the day on these two you either look different or you leave you armour on permenantly ... both are pretty much avoidable, as annoying as they maybe for you/some.

However, the way footguards have been introduced gives everyone a (pretty much) no option cost for zero player, or game experience, benefit. If there were no other options available for the method of implementation then maybe no problen also, as I keep saying I have no problem with 7, 8, 9 pieces of armour being needed, but stinging people for potentially 1000s of ped just for them to stay static in terms of their avatar development, not give a reason for it other than a keeness for the number 7, and then to deliver a 1ped scarey skull mask etc a couple of weeks later and tell us happy halloween! Incredible.

Marco seriously, why have we been billed?

I agree. I'm beginning to get impatient, as I have not looted a single pair of foot guards this VU. I'll probably never loot Shadow foot guards, and it would probably be cheaper just to buy them anyway since you can lose thousands of peds a day hunting Hogglos. The way I see it, MA took a section of our armor sets and gave them to random people to hold ransom. People either benefit greatly by looting foot guards they won't need and will just sell, or they get screwed by having to buy the foot guards from these people just to be sure their armor set is back to "normal" for the next VU. We still haven't received an answer on WHY they couldn't just have given them out to us. I'm just going to go ahead and assume that they are greedy and wanted to increase hunting so they could earn more from decay. F*&# you MA.

00000 · 10-25-2007, 20:07

Mr. B: Sir, the guys are not fapping enough!
Mr. A: well, make the mobs hit harder, then...
Mr. B: We can't, they will be pissed!
Mr. A: hum... then make the armours more fragile...
Mr. B: Sorry, Sir, we can't change the stats neither.
Mr. A: Uff... then put a new piece in, make it rare and let them get hits in the balls all day long!
Mr. B: (making Mr. Burns voice) Excellent!