| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Drizit
   |
Posted - 2006.07.14 01:40:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Drizit on 14/07/2006 01:43:03
Before I start, I don't want a flame war about players who already have skills and how it will penalise them. This is not intended to touch existing skills but a way to make future skills more reasonsble in terms of time investment.
I'll start by showing how the system works (or doesn't work properly) now.
Let's say I have level 4 gunnery which gives me 8% on my ROF. This has taken me just over 2 days in total. It will take me over 4 days to train to level 5 to give me another 2%. Is it really worht it? The answer is very often no. Unless the skill is required as a prerequisite for another skill, there is little incentive to train it higher.
Take two players with equal skills and attributes. They both fly the same kind of HAC.
Player A has level 4 giving them 20% on thier resists across the board. This has taken a little over 6 days of skill training.
Player B has level 5 giving them 25% on thier resists across the board. This has taken around 33 days of skill training.
Now let's use a basic resist of 70%.
Player A now has 76%
Player B now has 77.5%.
Now think of a basic resist of 40%
Player A has 52%
Player B has 55%
Considering that player B has invested an extra 27 days in skill training, they have not got much to show for it.
What I propose is a logarithmic progression rather than a linear progression.
lvl1 gives 1%
lvl2 gives 2%
lvl3 gives 4%
lvl4 gives 7%
lvl5 gives 11%
The total still gives 25% but in terms of time investment, you get out what you put in. Lower levels that take little time give small returns and so on until the highest level gives the best return.
Now, player A has 14%
Player B has 25%
Look at it in terms of the bonus to resists for the 70% base.
Player A has a gain of 4.2% = 74.2%
Player B has a gain of 7.5% = 77.5%
And again for the 40%
Player A has a gain of 8.4% = 48.4%
Player B has a gain of 15% = 55%
Wouldn't that make it more worthwhile training level 5?
If someone is going to take all that extra time to train up to level 5, it should give them a far better advantage.
[Please someone sort these stupid boards out. This is the second time I've posted this because the first time it decided I was no longer logged in and I lost the lot and had to type it all out again.]
--
|
Dutarro
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 01:55:00 -
[2]
Just like any other player, I groan when facing 48 days of training (or whatever) for a level 5 skill. However, there is one point I'll make in defense of the current system -- investing more and more time in a single skill has diminishing return, and that has some good side effects. Most importantly, it acts as an equalizer. If a character's power increased linearly with training time (rather than logarithmically as it does today) the power gap between old and new players would be even greater than it is already.
|
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 02:17:00 -
[3]
The problem with this is that "diminishing returns" is one of the reasons new players arent screwed over.
If it's like you proposed then new peoples moans would have a lot more merit.
|
Kaylana Syi
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 02:25:00 -
[4]
lvl 5 skills are what make prerequisite skilling the defining banner of veteran skill training.
A highly trained cruiser pilot of 3 months that has excellent 'non-diminished returned' skilling is still a cruiser pilot where a 10 month HAC pilot can fly the same model but get better bonuses off the ship. Not to mention... t2 guns w. t2 ammo that benefit a lot more from the t2 hull's bonuses.
Team Minmatar |
Noriath
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 02:45:00 -
[5]
I think Level 5 skills are very much worth training for in many cases.
The real problem with level 5 skills is that skill bonuses are oftentimes so neglegable that there really is no point in training them very high if they aren't prerequisite for something.
For example drone interfacing, 20% damage bonus to drones. That's an awsome bonus, if you're going to train something to 5, this is the one that will make it worth your while. On the other hand, Minmatar Drone Specialization 5, 2% extra explosive damage on drones. Who in their right mind would take that to 5 with the requirement for tech 2 drones only being 4?
The only way anyone will ever train that is if it becomes prereq for something. I myself would rather see a bonus that is more worth my time.
Same goes for lots and lots of skills in this game, there just comes the time where training something for a 5% bonus to something for a month is just less convenient then just putting on three mods that each increases the same atribute by 30% or more...
Skill bonuses should be higher, tha twould make L5ing stuff more rewarding without eliminating the diminishing return property of it.
|
Reggie Stoneloader
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 06:38:00 -
[6]
I think this is fine where it is. Leave it alone. You've got other, more important skills to train. DOn't worry about those fives.
|
Maya Rkell
Corsets and Carebears
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 12:40:00 -
[7]
Drizit,
Eve is based arround diminishing returns. It's how never players can complete.
That player has CHOSEN to specialise.
|
Cloud Alexander
Nubs.
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 21:14:00 -
[8]
bad idea to change it to your suggestions...plus lvl 5 skills are optional if you want to SPECIALIZED and a small advantage over your enemy is what specialization surposed to be.
|
Me Loonn
Chosen Path
Center for Disease Creation
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 22:52:00 -
[9]
Personally i concider "a veteran" anyone with more than 50 skills trained to lvl 5. Its not that much, tbh.
Ofcourse just having some skills trained up on char is not what makes one a veteran player. Skill to play the game are also a big factor - singing on ts inmiddle of pvp op is not what will make anyone seem like veteran.
I agree to other replies, the dimishing returns favor the newbies and newbies are always good for game.
Unless the game is like that "boo" or "yay" or what the hell was it called ... well anyways, it should die soon enough. 
EVE 4TW !
---------------------------
Never argue with dumb people for they will only drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. |
Audri Fisher
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.15 02:11:00 -
[10]
they ARE worth training. just ask TRUK.
|
|
|
Reggie Stoneloader
|
Posted - 2006.07.15 05:34:00 -
[11]
 Originally by: Me Loonn
Personally i concider "a veteran" anyone with more than 50 skills trained to lvl 5. Its not that much, tbh.
50 skills times 6 days... Yeah, not much at all. Just 300 days of training, if they're all 1x multipliers, and that's what, 13 million skillpoints?
|
Lienzo
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.15 06:49:00 -
[12]
I dislike this proposal.
The fact is, those 2% damage increases DO make a difference, depending on how you select your targets.
Example:
Target Cruiser can 75em damage per second.
Player Crow can do 105 em damage per second.
So Player Crow lowers Target Cruiser's hp at 30dps.
Increase 105 by 2% to 107.1dps.
Player Crow now lowers Target Cruiser's hy at 32.1dps.
This is a 7% increase in effective dps.
Most skill based increases in damage are not inherently subject to diminishing returns, but the opposite if you look only at the numbers and do not put time as a factor.
All skills are simply denerfs to regain the base worth of a tool. All global skills are global denerfs that just hold new player specialists back for longer. Please do not ask for any new skills unless you wish to accomplish an entirely novel task.
Assault Missile Launcher Improvement
|
Kaylana Syi
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.15 07:19:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Me Loonn
Personally i concider "a veteran" anyone with more than 50 skills trained to lvl 5. Its not that much, tbh.
 
Team Minmatar |
Za Po
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.15 09:37:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Drizit
Wouldn't that make it more worthwhile training level 5?
If someone is going to take all that extra time to train up to level 5, it should give them a far better advantage.
Did the doctor order you to train that skill to 5? The way the system works now, choosing between training to 5 or not is a real choice with pros and cons; do I overspecialize here, or do I branch out there?
The way you put it, it's no choice; it's virtually always better to train to 5.
Less choice = worse game.
--------------------
Do you have a solution to the BM and instas problem? Test it against the bookmark requirements. |
Cathandra
|
Posted - 2006.07.15 10:14:00 -
[15]
I think level 5 skills are perfectly worth it if you want to specialize. I plan to get all of the skills that are useful to me to level 5.. once I get all the other mines I want to level 4 :D
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |