open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Wealth Distribution. The answer?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

Ira Theos
Posted - 2011.08.24 15:53:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Jacob Stiller
If you create a trade alt, you could try your hand at redistributing wealth from the pockets of impatient wealthy people to your own.


*******

Agreed... this is exactly what I have been doing since I quit working for the Zero Slave Plantations. Redistributing the wealth from their goods in zero into my pocket. Seems fair to me since they never shared the proceeds from their moons when I spent time to protect them while charging me rent. I have made back many times the rent that I paid them since I quit them.

The sad thing is that after 93 million skillpoints and six years of play I have no incentive to participate in the very central theme of Eve (i.e. Sov-Wars). This solution has only been a means of seeking entertainment out of my remaining game time (I have unsubbed). Plex from a fat isk wallet will keep me in Eve for years beyond that. Maybe CCP will wake up and change the game mechanics so somebody other than the Bot Lords, the Tenure Lords, or the Out-of-Game-Massive-Membership-Club Lords will be incentivised to participate, but I won't hold my breath.

Ira Theos
Posted - 2011.08.24 16:13:00 - [32]
 

Edited by: Ira Theos on 24/08/2011 18:20:13
Originally by: Brooks Puuntai
Edited by: Brooks Puuntai on 24/08/2011 10:30:53
Most corps/alliances do a ship reimbursement program because its the easiest to monitor and control. Trying to do isk payouts to individual players based off of productivity won't work at least when you are decent sized. Its harder to monitor activity when you have more members, not only that but how do you justify how much something is worth? In the end you will have alot people complaining because so and so go paid more for the same job.

*******
This is the fault of the poor Corporation mechanics that CCP put in the game. No mechanism for Corps to "pay" wages?? Why would anyone work for them?*******

People seem up overstate the amount of actual revenue alot of alliances get. Comparing that to costs of Sov, upkeep, reimbursements, Awox reserves there really isn't a whole lot left. Most corps find ways to try to either invest the reserve to make more or just keep it as a rainy day fund, just in case some **** goes down.

*********
Yeah.. "invest" in their banks that go bust.., then brag about stealing it with their Alts.*********

Being a member usually just grants you access to the space they hold, as well as some benefits depends on the corp/alliance(reimbursements, Cap/Super assistance, etc). What always annoyed me when being CEO or Director was hearing people ***** and moan about expectations or benefits from the corp, yet those same usually aren't willing to do anything for the actual corp itself.


*******
What annoyed me was paying rent for a monthly zero access pass while being expected to defend turf with only a "hit or miss" ship replacement policy... as if that was somehow a great deal.
********

"Corporation" is a misnomer... these are "mafia" Gangs run by Dons who serve the gravy based upon strictly subjective judgement. Numbers, Tenure, and Botting dictate everything.

Wacktopia
Sicarius.
Legion of The Damned.
Posted - 2011.08.24 16:17:00 - [33]
 

CTA's a lame.

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.08.24 17:08:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Si Omega
My alt flew for FA AND for Test and both points regarding CTA's is correct.

But, in BOTH cases, I was ONLY reimbursed for ship loss if I flew doctrine ships and ONLY if I lost them in defensive/offensive ops.


What do you mean "doctrine ships?"


Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.08.24 17:12:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Si Omega
If I am getting a slice of the Tech moon pie directly I will fight harder and longer to keep that wealth.

Let's say (purely hypothetically speaking) your 1000-man strong corp is controlling 50 Technetium moons.
The average INCOME from all of that is only about 360 mil ISK per month per alliance member, net profit is smaller. Not even enough for a PLEX...


IMO Thats allot of isk for basically nothing. Null sec needs even more isk???? For even more super capitals???

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.24 17:25:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Kunming
My own grievance with the situation is that all the moon-goo income requires no player efford, you just set it up and cha-ching!


You have obviously never been a logistics (not the space priests, the haulers) pilot. No player effort my ass.

Ira Theos
Posted - 2011.08.24 17:25:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Cearain
Originally by: Si Omega
My alt flew for FA AND for Test and both points regarding CTA's is correct.

But, in BOTH cases, I was ONLY reimbursed for ship loss if I flew doctrine ships and ONLY if I lost them in defensive/offensive ops.


What do you mean "doctrine ships?"




********

By "doctrine ship", he means a ship type that has been specified for him to fly in the fleet and one that is also fitted out exactly as they dictate.
In other words... they want YOU to assume the role of a human "bot" in fleet... (seems consistent with the Bot Lords nature to me).

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2011.08.24 17:32:00 - [38]
 

You gotta try things for 3 months before you understand them.

And you gotta trust in the world that things may make sense and then vet them later after you've understand the complexties of the "whys" and why what seems like logic to an outsider becomes impractical after some experience with it.

Mechanics aren't the answer to your particular issues.

And, it's rediculous to decide not to doe something for the point that someone might be getting ahead off your efforts (they'e not , but lets say) if you are still having more fun with it than your other options. That's a petty (the world is against me) sort of thinking.

If you're not having fun, it really doesn't matter whether you're getting a fair share or not.. you still shouldn't be their. If you stay long enough and have time to do all the boring, anal retentive, personality coddling, memo writing, website and forum, api verification crap that it entails to run a large corp or alliance you'll see that not only would the people earn isk if they got it, but that there wasn't any isk there to take with any sort of ship replacement program or even jb maintenance unless connected enough to get the right moons.

Ira Theos
Posted - 2011.08.24 18:13:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Diomedes Calypso
You gotta try things for 3 months before you understand them.

And you gotta trust in the world that things may make sense and then vet them later after you've understand the complexties of the "whys" and why what seems like logic to an outsider becomes impractical after some experience with it.

Mechanics aren't the answer to your particular issues.

And, it's rediculous to decide not to doe something for the point that someone might be getting ahead off your efforts (they'e not , but lets say) if you are still having more fun with it than your other options. That's a petty (the world is against me) sort of thinking.

If you're not having fun, it really doesn't matter whether you're getting a fair share or not.. you still shouldn't be their. If you stay long enough and have time to do all the boring, anal retentive, personality coddling, memo writing, website and forum, api verification crap that it entails to run a large corp or alliance you'll see that not only would the people earn isk if they got it, but that there wasn't any isk there to take with any sort of ship replacement program or even jb maintenance unless connected enough to get the right moons .


*****

SEE THE UNDERLINED IN YOUR OWN WORDS.. I REST MY CASE !Wink

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.08.24 18:30:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Ira Theos
Originally by: Cearain
Originally by: Si Omega
My alt flew for FA AND for Test and both points regarding CTA's is correct.

But, in BOTH cases, I was ONLY reimbursed for ship loss if I flew doctrine ships and ONLY if I lost them in defensive/offensive ops.


What do you mean "doctrine ships?"




********

By "doctrine ship", he means a ship type that has been specified for him to fly in the fleet and one that is also fitted out exactly as they dictate.
In other words... they want YOU to assume the role of a human "bot" in fleet... (seems consistent with the Bot Lords nature to me).


Oh my. What a bunch of sheep. I really don't get it.

Ira Theos
Posted - 2011.08.24 18:47:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Cearain
Originally by: Ira Theos
Originally by: Cearain
Originally by: Si Omega
My alt flew for FA AND for Test and both points regarding CTA's is correct.

But, in BOTH cases, I was ONLY reimbursed for ship loss if I flew doctrine ships and ONLY if I lost them in defensive/offensive ops.


What do you mean "doctrine ships?"




********

By "doctrine ship", he means a ship type that has been specified for him to fly in the fleet and one that is also fitted out exactly as they dictate.
In other words... they want YOU to assume the role of a human "bot" in fleet... (seems consistent with the Bot Lords nature to me).


Oh my. What a bunch of sheep. I really don't get it.


*****

Well the Corporate or Alliance position on this is generally that if you are not flying their definition of what an optimal combat ship should be, then they are not going to reimburse you for your stupidity... nevermind that you might want to fly something else in combat. Remember that they are not about improving your situation... they are only concerned with defending their revenues... their only focus is optimizing the outfitting of their fleet, not worrying about your wallet. But that's OK, right??... because it's ALL FOR THE CAUSE !... Right?? Guys?? Where'd they go??

Nick Bete
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2011.08.24 19:07:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Ira Theos

Well the Corporate or Alliance position on this is generally that if you are not flying their definition of what an optimal combat ship should be, then they are not going to reimburse you for your stupidity... nevermind that you might want to fly something else in combat. Remember that they are not about improving your situation... they are only concerned with defending their revenues... their only focus is optimizing the outfitting of their fleet, not worrying about your wallet. But that's OK, right??... because it's ALL FOR THE CAUSE !... Right?? Guys?? Where'd they go??


Exactly right. This is why I and so many others want nothing to do with 0.0 and why CCP's efforts to "encourage" players to go there will ultimately fail. No one wants to pay $15 a month (or more) to be a peasant serving at the whims of a small group of overlords, even if the rewards were shared (which, of course, they're not). This is especially true if one is more interested in the industrial side of the game. Indy characters are viewed with flat out hatred by many in 0.0.

Until the attitudes of the players change no amount of tinkering with game mechanics will have have any effect. I don't see any way for CCP to change human nature.

FeralShadow
NME1
Posted - 2011.08.24 19:23:00 - [43]
 

Well the whole ship doctrine issue is pretty understandable. A fleet of a single composition is much easier to fight with for the FC than a mixed fleet where some will get close, some will snipe, and everybody's floating all over the place.

A doctrine fleet knows what it can win and what it cannot, and will be able to avoid the situations that aren't beneficial for it. A doctrine fleet will also wipe the floor with a non-doctrine fleet because everybody is on the same page. That is the reasoning behind it (or it was to start), the ship replacement just makes it so you can go out again.

Personally I think it's bad that there's one fleet comp that can "best everything". It's not really eve, but I certainly see the reasoning.

Ladie Scarlet
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.24 19:35:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Nick Bete
Exactly right. This is why I and so many others want nothing to do with 0.0 and why CCP's efforts to "encourage" players to go there will ultimately fail. No one wants to pay $15 a month (or more) to be a peasant serving at the whims of a small group of overlords, even if the rewards were shared (which, of course, they're not). This is especially true if one is more interested in the industrial side of the game. Indy characters are viewed with flat out hatred by many in 0.0.

Until the attitudes of the players change no amount of tinkering with game mechanics will have have any effect. I don't see any way for CCP to change human nature.

Well look at you not knowing what you're talking about.


Except for indy characters...**** those guys.

Thur Barbek
Posted - 2011.08.24 19:41:00 - [45]
 

Edited by: Thur Barbek on 24/08/2011 19:41:54
Originally by: Nick Bete

Exactly right. This is why I and so many others want nothing to do with 0.0 and why CCP's efforts to "encourage" players to go there will ultimately fail. No one wants to pay $15 a month (or more) to be a peasant serving at the whims of a small group of overlords, even if the rewards were shared (which, of course, they're not).


Here is a radical idea, take the time to form up a big corp, take more time to form an alliance, take EVEN MORE time to organize it so you can take a moon or two. Then, a couple years after you started all this, read the forums, and see the new people who come to 0.0 with almost no prior knowledge, and expect to get paid large sums of money because they live there. The alliance leaders and people who profit off of moon goo, are the people who have spent months if not years organizing.

For a real world example of what you expect: Bob gets a new job at CCP, bob moves to a new state/country to work for them. After a month of living and working there, Bob decides that its not fair the CEO makes more money than him. He then tries to tell other people about his plight and wishes that he could get something for nothing.

Originally by: Nick Bete

This is especially true if one is more interested in the industrial side of the game. Indy characters are viewed with flat out hatred by many in 0.0.



The majority of 0.0 corps are pvp based. Mabey you should try to find an industry based one. Yes, they exist, I happen to be in one. Our corp has no CTA req's, instead we build ships for the pvper's and seed the market.


Side note to people complaining moo goo is free passive isk: Try running multiple pos's in 0.0 at once. The logistics is a nightmare.

Ira Theos
Posted - 2011.08.24 22:44:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Thur Barbek
Edited by: Thur Barbek on 24/08/2011 19:41:54
Originally by: Nick Bete

Exactly right. This is why I and so many others want nothing to do with 0.0 and why CCP's efforts to "encourage" players to go there will ultimately fail. No one wants to pay $15 a month (or more) to be a peasant serving at the whims of a small group of overlords, even if the rewards were shared (which, of course, they're not).


Here is a radical idea, take the time to form up a big corp, take more time to form an alliance, take EVEN MORE time to organize it so you can take a moon or two. Then, a couple years after you started all this, read the forums, and see the new people who come to 0.0 with almost no prior knowledge, and expect to get paid large sums of money because they live there. The alliance leaders and people who profit off of moon goo, are the people who have spent months if not years organizing.

For a real world example of what you expect: Bob gets a new job at CCP, bob moves to a new state/country to work for them. After a month of living and working there, Bob decides that its not fair the CEO makes more money than him. He then tries to tell other people about his plight and wishes that he could get something for nothing.

Originally by: Nick Bete

This is especially true if one is more interested in the industrial side of the game. Indy characters are viewed with flat out hatred by many in 0.0.



The majority of 0.0 corps are pvp based. Mabey you should try to find an industry based one. Yes, they exist, I happen to be in one. Our corp has no CTA req's, instead we build ships for the pvper's and seed the market.


Side note to people complaining moo goo is free passive isk: Try running multiple pos's in 0.0 at once. The logistics is a nightmare.

****************

Excuse me, but I have played Eve for nearly six years.. formed two Corporations that went to zero... formed another that fought wardecs in empire for a year.. then joined a zero "PvP" Corp that was swallowed by an Alliance and ended up in a Corp that was a rent paying "pet" of Bob (we were then the lowest form of Eve peasant). I have been around the block... am not the slightest bit impressed by promised "services" from the Zero Slave Plantations...

I have a more radical solution than yours.. Do what I finally did. Quit the Botting/RMT Slave Owner Plantation Alliances in Zero, go solo as a trader in NPC zero where you can screw the Alliance members out of wads of their hard earned isk thru trade while they can't do a damned thing about it, and let the Alliances go circle jerk themselves until they are blind. As for industrial support for Alliances... Hell No... if they can't pay me three times the price in Jita... they can't have it.

Si Omega
Posted - 2011.08.24 23:08:00 - [47]
 


Quote:
Here is a radical idea, take the time to form up a big corp, take more time to form an alliance, take EVEN MORE time to organize it so you can take a moon or two. Then, a couple years after you started all this, read the forums, and see the new people who come to 0.0 with almost no prior knowledge, and expect to get paid large sums of money because they live there. The alliance leaders and people who profit off of moon goo, are the people who have spent months if not years organizing.


I'm not suggesting this at all. What I am saying is that if CCP want more people in zero and the alliances want more people so they can push the "I win" button then there needs to be more incentive for people to stay/move to null. (i.e. As corp growth occurs you're distributing NEW income. I'm not asking for your wife, the house and the car keys.)

Alliances seem to believe that an SRF is an incentive. It might be if pew-pew was your only objective but as it stands, the ONLY thing you're fighting for is the right to rat and mine.

As for the argument on how to distribute, if too many members make it "too hard" then quite simply, corp sizes should drop and learn to specialise. This can only be a good thing. As I stated, lazy sob's get booted, no different to current. atm, it's no more than a numbers game to recruit more dudes to make up CTA blobs.

Quote:
And, it's rediculous to decide not to doe something for the point that someone might be getting ahead off your efforts (they'e not , but lets say) if you are still having more fun with it than your other options. That's a petty (the world is against me) sort of thinking.


I welcome people getting ahead from their efforts. What I don't apprciate is YOU expecting me to help you get ahead while I get nothing (except my ship replaced if I lose it fighting for YOU.)

And not once have I stated this IS a solution. What I am suggesting is an alternative to break up blob alliances, get people (and staying) in null and make fighting for space worth a damn sight more than just ABC's and Sanctums.

Ira Theos
Posted - 2011.08.24 23:15:00 - [48]
 

Oh.. and Si... You are SO much more forgiving than I am.

Thur Barbek
Posted - 2011.08.25 02:48:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Ira Theos
...
Hell No... if they can't pay me three times the price in Jita... they can't have it.

Rolling Eyes

I admit I might of assumed too much, but i think you'll agree that a lot of the people on the forums are relativity new to 0.0, if they have been at all, when they start complaining.

Also, to the OP, I have seen a few corps that try to distribute wealth. One method i've seen used was; a player got a point for each hour of an op they were in. At the end of each month (can be whatever timeframe), they took 50% of the profits the corp wallet made during that time and distributed it to each member according to accumulated points. The other 50% was reinvested into corp assets. This particular corp happened to be an industry corp, so most of the ops were mining. But the method can still roughly be applied to CTA's and pvp ops. The only downside to this method of distribution is that the leadership has to spend some time keeping attendance and some additional bookkeeping. It would also be more labor intensive as the corp/alliance grows.

For alliances the same system can be used, but give points to the corps instead of individuals. Then it would be the corp's responsibility to further distribute the wealth.

More possible ways members could earn points: pvp kills, ships built at cost for members, JF runs, BP research for corp...




Rumplefink
Posted - 2011.08.25 03:58:00 - [50]
 

O.ne B.ig A.ss M.istake A.merica

Brooks Puuntai
Minmatar
Nomadic Asylum
Posted - 2011.08.25 04:02:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Rumplefink
O.ne B.ig A.ss M.istake A.merica


Not really.

Rumplefink
Posted - 2011.08.25 04:08:00 - [52]
 

Oh right, it is George Bush's fault.

Rolling Eyes

KaarBaak
Minmatar
Seatec Astronomy
Posted - 2011.08.25 04:18:00 - [53]
 


How about allowing alliances to issue their own LP, redeemable at their own LP store?

I know, I know...a programming nightmare. But hey, isn't that what everyone says CCP is good at? Programming nightmares?


Brooks Puuntai
Minmatar
Nomadic Asylum
Posted - 2011.08.25 04:18:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: Rumplefink
Oh right, it is George Bush's fault.

Rolling Eyes


Actually it could be linked back to the Clinton years. Mostly giving breaks to companies who outsourced a majority of their employers overseas, as well as allowing banks to do whatever they want. Bush just turned what surplus this country had into a deficit, then turned around and put us into a war. Add that to current Republican unwillingness to reach any agreement on anything and causing Congress to be in a gridlock on many issues. Granted Democrats can be blamed for this as well.

But no lets blame Obama. Cause its easier.




Rumplefink
Posted - 2011.08.25 04:20:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Brooks Puuntai
Originally by: Rumplefink
Oh right, it is George Bush's fault.

Rolling Eyes


Actually it could be linked back to the Clinton years. Mostly giving breaks to companies who outsourced a majority of their employers overseas, as well as allowing banks to do whatever they want. Bush just turned what surplus this country had into a deficit, then turned around and put us into a war. Add that to current Republican unwillingness to reach any agreement on anything and causing Congress to be in a gridlock on many issues. Granted Democrats can be blamed for this as well.

But no lets blame Obama. Cause its easier.






I commend you for accepting Democrats share some blame. People get the government they deserve. Also global warming enables more food growth.

Ehdward
Caldari
Nex Exercitus
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.08.25 05:15:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Si Omega

4) Caps/super purchases moves to the hands of the individual. This makes them personally more valuable and makes them less likely to be deployed like a $2 toy.



So supers aren't used cautiously enough as is? The more titan wrecks the better IMO.

Johnny May
Posted - 2011.08.25 09:37:00 - [57]
 

somehow this thread represents a disturbing mindset to me.

no reimburstment = no value
and reimburstment = no value aswell,
therefor you dont go to CTA?

seriously, whats wrong with you?
the motivation to fight is not about
getting personally rich its about
a) having fun doing pvp
b) helping out the team your in.

having a reimburstment plan in place is not a scam,
it allows people who pvp alot to keep fighting without
having to make breaks for getting isk - its meant to
make stuff easy on those who fight, not to reward them,
again the fighting is the reward.

then your unbelievable comments about flying 'your own fit',
reimburstment or not, any serious corp/alliance will kick you out
when you turnup with non-fleet-fits. thats because fc's need to be able
to know the performance of a fleet to make plans. you turn up in your own fit makes their numbers being off.

and tbh,
if you think faking rl trouble so you can skip CTA and go ratting instead, you should ask yourself the question 'do i really want to be in 0.0? is PVP what i want, or do i want a safe place where i can run my pve ****. If its the later, go to highsec, but leave our gameplay alone.

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.08.25 14:36:00 - [58]
 

Edited by: Cearain on 25/08/2011 14:37:24
Originally by: Johnny May
somehow this thread represents a disturbing mindset to me.

no reimburstment = no value
and reimburstment = no value aswell,
therefor you dont go to CTA?

seriously, whats wrong with you?
the motivation to fight is not about
getting personally rich its about
a) having fun doing pvp
b) helping out the team your in.

having a reimburstment plan in place is not a scam,
it allows people who pvp alot to keep fighting without
having to make breaks for getting isk - its meant to
make stuff easy on those who fight, not to reward them,
again the fighting is the reward.

then your unbelievable comments about flying 'your own fit',
reimburstment or not, any serious corp/alliance will kick you out
when you turnup with non-fleet-fits. thats because fc's need to be able
to know the performance of a fleet to make plans. you turn up in your own fit makes their numbers being off.

and tbh,
if you think faking rl trouble so you can skip CTA and go ratting instead, you should ask yourself the question 'do i really want to be in 0.0? is PVP what i want, or do i want a safe place where i can run my pve ****. If its the later, go to highsec, but leave our gameplay alone.


Certainly you have to follow the general requirements of what sort of fleet you are in. You can't bring a blaster brutix to a sniper fleet. And I will admit if an fc really wanted me to fly an exact fit *on occassion* I would do it.

But the idea that you are cut off from any profits that you are fighting for if you do not always fit your ship the way you are told is ridiculous.


If you like pvp and fighting join some low sec corps or fw. You get allot of fights, where your input may actually make or break the fight. Plus you are not told what to do by someone who thinks there is only one way to fit a ship.


The mindset is we are playing a game where we are immortal in a science fiction universe where we can do whatever we want. Why, knowing this, would we immediately enlist in a legion of lemmings?

I'm always amazed at the number of sheep in this game.

Nikodiemus
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2011.08.25 14:56:00 - [59]
 

If you want to never meet anyway or have any fun other than what your own two (or one) hands can offer, then you should not be playing EVE. Rather, sitting in a corner and ****ing it to pop idols maybe your thing. Meeting people in corps//alliances, making connections and shooting the **** is its own reward. It can also mean creating many future opportunities for isk creation if that is your sole reason for being. This aside from all other good points mentioned.

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.08.25 15:13:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Nikodiemus
If you want to never meet anyway or have any fun other than what your own two (or one) hands can offer, then you should not be playing EVE. Rather, sitting in a corner and ****ing it to pop idols maybe your thing. Meeting people in corps//alliances, making connections and shooting the **** is its own reward. It can also mean creating many future opportunities for isk creation if that is your sole reason for being. This aside from all other good points mentioned.


You know, you have more than 2 options. You have more options than A) talking to your internet friends hoping to "make connections" in a virtual world or B) sitting in a corner ****ing to pop idols.

If you want to spend allot of your time socializing over the internet that is fine. I am happy you find an internet spaceship game a good place to find friends.

But just because everyone does not log on to chat with internet buds doesn't mean eve shouldn't be for them.


Pages: 1 [2] 3

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only