Entertainer Archive
Thread: Yet another AFK balancing proposal...
There is no reason that a PC be forced to deal with competition from NPCs. A computer program has NO rights to content, and a macro is a computer program. Rationalize all you want.
You're right, you get no respect from me. You talk all this smack about me being prejudicial and out for myself, well go look in the mirror cause you're the exact same way. You don't want to improve the situation for entertainers as much as you want to punish AFKers. Every "idea" you spewhasnothing for ATKers and is all about taking away from AFKers.
LOL now it's qualifiable and possibly quantifiable. I think it's qualifiable and possibly quantifiable that ATKers ruin the game for some combatants. Of course, like you, I'm not going to provide any proof, I'll just through out unfounded statements for the hell of it because they support AFKers.
Jason, I'm not prejudicial. I know why people go AFK. My best friend started up an SWG account and became an AFK entertainer because she wanted the pretty exotic dances.
As for helping ATKers, how do you help a by-and-large socilizing group? You give them people to socilize with. Why is there a lack of people to socilize with? Because antisocial rejects from society would rather deal with bots. Why can't an ATKer compete with an AFKer? Because we need sleep. We put effort into our work. Make no mistake, save for the very few like yourself, an ATKer gets a larger audiance than an AFKer during the time they're online. It really isn't that hard to impress people when standards have been lowered from 'entertainment' to 'silence'. The problem starts when people start looking at cost/benefit. If all I wanted was to socilize, I would have no complaints. But let's say I want to do more. Let's say I wanted to be able to actually afford a house and still have the spare time to go see it. Or to have a speeder. Or to be able to look at a 4000 credit instrument and not be able to count out the DAYS it will take to recoup that investment. But why should people pay when an AFKer will do it for free?
That's the crux of the matter. I remember just after release when tips were comparable to mission payouts. Those days are over. Why? What has changed that has made mind healing so simple to come by that those that put effort into it cannot afford the luxuries of their peers?
You have asked why should I be more entitled to anything than an AFKer. I ask why I should be entitled to anything LESS than the payouts of other professions.
Ryyger wrote:
Get the devs to run cencus data if you don't want to believe me. It is quantifiable -- we just don't have access to the numbers that would give us that quantification.
Jason, I'm not prejudicial. I know why people go AFK. My best friend started up an SWG account and became an AFK entertainer because she wanted the pretty exotic dances.
As for helping ATKers, how do you help a by-and-large socilizing group? You give them people to socilize with. Why is there a lack of people to socilize with? Because antisocial rejects from society would rather deal with bots. Why can't an ATKer compete with an AFKer? Because we need sleep. We put effort into our work. Make no mistake, save for the very few like yourself, an ATKer gets a larger audiance than an AFKer during the time they're online. It really isn't that hard to impress people when standards have been lowered from 'entertainment' to 'silence'. The problem starts when people start looking at cost/benefit. If all I wanted was to socilize, I would have no complaints. But let's say I want to do more. Let's say I wanted to be able to actually afford a house and still have the spare time to go see it. Or to have a speeder. Or to be able to look at a 4000 credit instrument and not be able to count out the DAYS it will take to recoup that investment. But why should people pay when an AFKer will do it for free?
That's the crux of the matter. I remember just after release when tips were comparable to mission payouts. Those days are over. Why? What has changed that has made mind healing so simple to come by that those that put effort into it cannot afford the luxuries of their peers?
You have asked why should I be more entitled to anything than an AFKer. I ask why I should be entitled to anything LESS than the payouts of other professions.
I think the term is revisionist history or something like that. You have a romanticized view of the way it used to be. The earning power of entertainershas been bottom of the barrel since day one, when coincidentally there weren't nearly the amount of AFK entertainers as there is today.In fact,I would guess that AFK entertaining was about as prevelant thenas AFK combat is today, which even you don't think causes big problems for combatants. Well, if you couldn't make money off tipswithout AFKers back in the day then it obviously isn't the fault of AFKers now since they weren't around way back when. With and without them, entertainers don't make any money off tips.Getting rid of AFKers now won'tchange that.
As for why you would be entitled to less than another profession, it's a capitalist economy. You chose to use your resources (ie skill points and time) in a way that doesn't enhance your earning potential. Other people make the choice to pursue a profession that pays. Everybody can pick up the same skills and have access to the same earnings. What's more, everybody can choose multiple professions so they can have one to play that's fun for them and one to make some money with. There's no monopolies in SWG, no barriers to entry in any market, everybody can do any profession they want. That is pretty fair I would think, equal opportunity for everybody.
But I get the feeling you don't want equal opportunity, you want a hand out. You want everybody to make the same amount regardless of what they do. Sorry, but I don't buy into the communist version of economics. Probably because I'm on the means end of itwith themoney and I really don't like sharing it with theneeds people whochoose not to make their own money. I can tolerate some of the socialist aspects of the real world withhaving to fork over my hard earnedmoney to support some welfare because sometimes it just isn't the persons fault. But in this game, the only reason somebody can't make a decent living is because they choose not to.
If you really were concerned about entertainers earning money you'd be lobbying for better entertainer missions. Cause if entertainers are going to rely on the players who've valued your services at next to nothing since forever to provide them an income they'll continue to never make money no matter how many AFKers are around.
JasonK wrote:But I get the feeling you don't want equal opportunity, you want a hand out. You want everybody to make the same amount regardless of what they do.
Jason, giving money to an AFKer is a handout. I want to work for my tips, and I do. And the satisfaction of having someone take the time to thank me and even compliment me -- far more common than you seem to think -- is enough to keep me going.
I don't think you ever got that. I don't want to be paid just because I don't have an AFK tag. I want to be paid because I work for it. But in an economy where the service that I provide is numberically insignifigant, I have no recourse if it is decided that I should not be tipped. Every other profession in the game has a market and a way to set prices for goods or services, except entertainers. The reason for that isn't because we don't provide a worthwhile service, it is because we are so numberous that the monetary value has flatlined in the presence of an overwhelming majority that arn't even able to monitor their monetary returns, let alone require them.
There's another level to this. As a game, this entire process is about entertainment. Going out and hunting, that is entertainment. Making an uberblaster3000, that is entertainment. The whole process is allready entertaining, and for it we pay $15 a month. As entertainers, we are asking for yet more funds, in terms of credits, be paid ontop of that $15/month from other players. This is a fundamental flaw in the profession design as it compares to 'pure' achievers. And it is one that is utterly terminal in the game. An interesting conundrum.
I'm pretty sure I started rambling in here somewhere. Meh. I can do better when I finally wake up. Where's my coffee?
Was trying some surveying yesterday- seeing how it worked. Started a survey, had my cats get into a fight & went to clean up the mess. When I realized that 15 minutes went by, I thought, "Damn- I'm AFK surveying already... well, at least I'll have decent XP..."
Guess what, I had a dialogue box prompting me that the suveying tool had detected more resources elsewhere and it was prompting me for an option... I wasn't getting any more surveying activity till I clicked on it.
- - - -
If the devs wanted to stop- or tone down, the AFK entertainer, they could have a simple random dialog box that might appear every so often.
You're in the cantina, dancing away. You get a prompt saying that "an patron in the cantina is impressed by your talent. S/He's offering X credits if you'd entertain his table." Until you click "accept" or "decline" the dance continues, but no XP registers.
Like many dialog boxes, this wouldn't have a text-alternative, so you couldn't macro out of it, and third-party "click" macro software (which IS against the EULA) is defeated if you make the prompt vary in its appearance on the screen.
- - - -
This system is rare enough that it doesn't interrupt often, but it can reward the non-afk'er while stopping the AFK'er who's away for hours at a time.
Ryyger wrote:
JasonK wrote:
But I get the feeling you don't want equal opportunity, you want a hand out. You want everybody to make the same amount regardless of what they do.
Jason, giving money to an AFKer is a handout. I want to work for my tips, and I do. And the satisfaction of having someone take the time to thank me and even compliment me -- far more common than you seem to think -- is enough to keep me going.
Whether you like it or not they provide me with a service, mind healing and buffs. Just because they are not there physically does not mean I'm not receiving the service. If it takes some of my credits to ensure they stick around I have no problem giving it to them.
I don't think you ever got that. I don't want to be paid just because I don't have an AFK tag. I want to be paid because I work for it. But in an economy where the service that I provide is numberically insignifigant, I have no recourse if it is decided that I should not be tipped. Every other profession in the game has a market and a way to set prices for goods or services, except entertainers. The reason for that isn't because we don't provide a worthwhile service, it is because we are so numberous that the monetary value has flatlined in the presence of an overwhelming majority that arn't even able to monitor their monetary returns, let alone require them.
It's not that you have recourse if you're not tipped, you could stop dancing/playing and /denyservice. And you do have a market, BF healing and mind buffing. The problem is for a lot of ATK entertainers XP is more valuable than credits so they would keep on dancing and playing whether they got paid for it or not. That's probably because they chose to also play a profession that has a good income. Been this way since the beginning of the game. Getting rid of AFKers won't change it as I stated in my last post that you conveniently skipped over. Unless you're going to refute that stop blaming AFKers. I clearly showed they could not be the cause of something that existed before they were around in an "overwhelming majority" as you would call it.
There's another level to this. As a game, this entire process is about entertainment. Going out and hunting, that is entertainment. Making an uberblaster3000, that is entertainment. The whole process is allready entertaining, and for it we pay $15 a month. As entertainers, we are asking for yet more funds, in terms of credits, be paid ontop of that $15/month from other players. This is a fundamental flaw in the profession design as it compares to 'pure' achievers. And it is one that is utterly terminal in the game. An interesting conundrum.
If you don't want a handout what exactly are you basing this subsidy from other players on? You'd like to think you provide "entertainment" but the players who pay you have clearly spoken as to the value of that entertainment. The only reason most of the player base even cares about you is because you're the only method of BF healing and somewhat for mind buffs. Those are the only marketable services you provide. You just don't get it. To the majority of players your entertainment value is zero and they pay you accordingly.
I'm pretty sure I started rambling in here somewhere. Meh. I can do better when I finally wake up. Where's my coffee?
If you don't mind, I'm not going to quote, since this is getting pretty long. I hope I represent your argument well, as I hate being accused of taking people out of context.
First, how do AFK'ers harm the entertainer's ability to earn? Well, this is a supply-and-demand economy. An AFK'er is NOT necessarily "playing" in the traditional sense, but they are supplying a service, and because of that, there is a glut of supply on the market for a limited demand. Please note, that I'm not as concerned as the afk-to-go-eat as I am the overnight afk'er. I afk on occasion- especially when I was in a room with zombies and no one to chat with.
Supply is so overabundant, that a player cannot "require" payment, since there are so many people available who would provide the service with absolutely no objection (the AFK). If the supply were more limited, the ATK entertainer would have more leverage to expect some sort of tip.
2) Something else that doesn't fit- your "survey" comment that antisocial dweebs prefer bots. There are people that want to go AFK or grind or guild chat while getting healed- fine. I'll chat online- get your heal and go. They don't have to "interact" with an ATK'er, so that argument seemed a bit week. I've never seen an ATK'er deny service for someone being to passive.
But your assumption that most gamers is a poor-social-skill dork is inaccurate. All gartner and other professional surveys on the topic of net use have found that online users have higher social skills than the mainstream population, and online community builders even moreso. Sure, we attract the console gamers who would rather GTAIII or other socially-inept twerp, too, but the true majority does not fit your media-induced stereotype. Go online, look at the real pollsters, read some sociology reports on the subject.
3) Another error in logic: that ATK'ers value XP more than AFK'ers. Seen many master dancer AFK? Neither do I. The UBER AFK'er is entirely about XP. Days and days of continuous XP grinding. The ATK'er is often a roleplayer or seeking a social connection, but is frequently discouraged when the AFK'er advances faster and more effectively than they are. This is where the XP issue comes up- when they feel they are working harder for less reward. If they were truly an XP hog, they wouldn't logout when they were done playing, but join the AFK zombies.
4) A bit on SWG economics: One of the current problems in the game is chronic inflation. When more money enters circulation than exits, prices tend to go up- ridiculously so. Money enters circulation through mission terminals and (less so) loot. It exits circulation through closed accounts, player hoarding, garages, npc trainers, travel, and maintenance. Right now, much more money is being generated in mission terms than what is being sunk out, resulting in excessive pricing well over "traditional" market expectations.
In such a situation, making entertainers more dependent on "mission income" contributes to the problem, whereas earnings from "tipping" (or sales) uses money alread in circulation. Empowering the service-provider (entertainer, dancer, musician) by decreasing the supply (limiting the presence of the long-term AFK'er) means that they can reasonably expect a tip from people that want continued service. This means less mission terminals and less money entering circulation.
5) You tend to fluctuate on whether a /tip is a handout or payment for a legitimate service. It appears that such variation is not because you don't have a clear perspective on the topic, but to provoke Ryyger. It really hurts your argument's legitimacy and should be avoided.
- - - -
So, what do I think? Well, I think people who try to add content to the game should be rewarded. This game is, above all else, player driven, and that means active players are needed.
I think that all AFK activities add no content, no service to other players that would not be available elsewhere, and therefore should be discouraged where they interfere with traditional players.
Unfortunately, this would force alot of wannabe jedis to actively play a style they dislike. While I'd prefer that Luke remain one of the few in this timeframe and there be NO jedi profession, I don't think people who want to try should be miserable doing so.
As for being entertaining or not, why is it that approximatly 1/3rd of all my customers compliment me specifically on my music? Most thank for the healing as you expect, but you are ignoring a fairly large minority when you say 'everyone'.
And, finally, I have never made as much doing missions as I have in tips. Not even close. And yes, I have done gig missions. I started on Rori and reached 0/1/1/0 there with 3k to spare in about two, three days of casual play. In that same time period with tips I can make about twice that. I could care less about XP, save the brief period of grinding dance up to Master Ent.
Let's see, which holds more weight, your experience or a few dozen people's experience? Hmmm, tough one. I think I'll go with what at least a few dozen people had to say at the time over what you now say happened back then. Sorry, but your experience doesn't refute that of at least a few dozen people.
It's obvious everything you say is based on your own biases rather than actual fact. Go troll somebody else with your inability to tell fact from fiction. I'm done with you.
I ask you this: which holds more weight? The first person account of a person who has actually played the profession or the THIRD hand accounts of a person looking SPECIFICALLY for evidence to refute a point?
A dozen accounts or one, statistically speaking, are equally incompetent proofs. However, a primary source carries FAR more weight than a tertiary source. IFL 101.
1) Nice economic theory, but I've already provedthat entertainers didn't make much money with or without AFKers. Just because a few of them did does not invalidate the fact that the majority of entertainers have never made good money off entertaining. Your assertations disregard fact and instead rely on your own biases.
2) You probably should have quoted this one as I think you're referring to Ryyger's post that I quoted and not mine. I only highlighted those comments to point out the hypocrisy of them.
3) You should have quoted what I said here cause you're mis-representing it. "for a lot of ATK entertainers XP is more valuable than credits." Has nothing to do with who values XP the most, only how people value XP compared to credits for themselves. And no, I don't think a lot of ATKers value credits as much as XP. If they did they'd be out running missions, cause even the minuscule amount they pay is still more than the tips they'd be getting. But they aren't, they're packed into the cantinas with the AFKers trying to get into the big group and trying to get people to take a mind poison from a combat medic so they can get the precious healing XP.
4) Can't force people to tip you so I'm not sure what you're point is. Go back to #1.
5)Depends on what the tip is for. If I tip somebody because they did something for me it's a payment. If I tip somebody and they didn't do anything for me it's a handout. If Ryyger somehow convinces the devs to takecredits out of my bank and give them to entertainers that's a handout. I'm pretty sure I've never said otherwise so I'm not sure what you're talking about. Maybe you're confusing another of Ryyger's posts with mine.