|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.09 16:07:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Aramendel on 09/09/2006 16:12:42 IMO new chars should start with the basic learning skills on lvl 5. Cannot see anything but advantages by this.
And the "you do not have to train them" argument is crap. You do nothave to train anything. You can fly in shuttles for years if you want to - does not mean it is a good idea, though. While it is generally better to train a few basic skills before the lvl 5 basic learning skills - for example, I trained my first month for some basic skills to be able to do lvl 3 missions while I went into learning skill hell - it does notmatter much. If you *halfway* plan your skill progressing you *will* spend 33% of your first 6 months with learning skills.
Essentially those are some kinda of stupid "manhood ritual" for eve.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.09 17:59:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Aramendel on 09/09/2006 18:03:08
Originally by: Korovyov And a full set of +3 implants? And a torp raven? And insta-BMs for the entire eve universe?
Those you get actively (doing missions, earning isk). You get these thing by playing the game. Training the basic learning skills you do passively. You do not have to play the game for this sans logging in to change skills now and then.
Huge difference.
Quote: This brings up the fact that CCP would lose a 2+ month time-sink that can be held over the perfectionists that come along. That's $30+ they lose.
Extremly flawed viewpoint.
Why would they "loose" these 30$? You would have to train 10 years+ to max all skills, so it's not like they would get bored faster if they would not have to train the basic learning skills.
In fact, it's the complete opposite. If a player who would have otherwise stayed 1 year or more quit because the boredom of the learning skill "grind" thats 150$+ they loose... Learning skills do not increase the amount of time a player keeps playing eve on average, they decrease it.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.10 11:21:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Morp p'LLoran ...there is not much benefit in training learnin skills before most of your basic skills are at lvl 3 or higher, and advanced learnin skills only really help when you start looking at lvl 4+ in a spesific skill.
This is incorrect.
Learning skills give you exactly the same speed boost over time. Does not matter if you spend 1 day training 3 skills to a next lvl or spend 1 day training 20% of one skill. It is not the boost per skill which matters, but the boost over time.
Originally by: hangnoose ...You don't need them early on all that much, take the first month or two to decide if you want to stick with eve, then train up the learning skills since they can take awhile to train. That way you can decide if you plan to stick with the game rather then getting the skills, training them, then thinking this game is boring and quitting.
It does not really matter when you train them for the effect they have. Boredom, resulting in increased disinterest for the game. It's the same at the start, after 1 months or 2 months. They simply do not "give" the game anything.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.10 17:35:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Aramendel on 10/09/2006 17:37:52
Originally by: Esaka There is a blog entry from Oveur which says that the average player stays for seven months. But it would be wrong to claim that eve is build around that timespan, given that Oveur says 'only' i'd think they're aiming for a higher average. It makes me wonder though how many player are going the advanced learning route and quit before they get anything out of it.
People often confuse "average" with "most common" I think.
For example, you can have 2 players which quit after 1 month and 1 who plays still after 1.5 years. This also gives you 3 "average" players of 7 months.
Another thing are these two 2for1 offers so far. I would think those also created "population surges" since many older players created alt accounts then.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.11 11:23:00 -
[5]
I did exactly the same thing as bolt at his "age".
But the problem is not, I repeat: NOT that you "have" to train them at day 1.
Also, that "you do not "need" to train them" is also no solution because it applies for everything in the game. There is not a single skill which you "have" to train. This enables you to avoid problems (for example, if ship A is a lot weaker than other ships you do not "have" to train for it) but does not remove the existance of said problems (ship A is still too weak).
Training learning skills is, as Tripoli said in another thread "just a good idea". Realistically, the majority of all new players will train them sometime in their first 6 months. And yes, if you find a good guild where you can do stuff the learning skill phase can be less painfull. But note the "painfull". No matter when you do it or under which circumstances you do it, training the learning skills have a negative effect on your general fun of the game. All you really can do is some "damage control" to limit their effect.
How do you call something which is decreasing your fun in a game? Bad design.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.11 11:59:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Aramendel on 11/09/2006 11:59:30
Originally by: Severe McCald That is complete rubbish. If a player has put in the effort to develop his or her learning skills to adv. 4, they will stay longer than if they had not. People who choose not to stay at all because of the perceived need (not actual need) to train learning skills from the start, are the ones that are lost to CCP.
How is training the adv. to 4 any different to training cruiser to 5 or in fact any other skills? It's the same investment for exactly the same effort. Does having more fun in that investment reduce it?
Besides, you are missing the point. If we have 1 person "which stays longer" and 3 which quit because they got too bored during the learning "grind", is that a win or loss for CCP?
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.11 12:41:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Aramendel on 11/09/2006 12:47:08
Originally by: Korovyov No, he's not. You call it a grind, which is what it is. Everything in an MMO is a "grind" and if they get bored with EVE's style of grind, it doesn't matter, they're not going to stay.
So training the learning skills has for you the same enjoyment factor like training other skills?
Quote: Giving them all the skills deemed "essential" isn't going to take away the grind. Their skills will advanced faster, but now they have to ISK grind. But you said we don't need to give them anything else to start, so hey, whatever.
Again, since you ignored my last reply to this particular argument: Isk grinds you can effect yourself (and besides it isn't really hard to get isk if you know what to do once you have some start capital). The learning skill grind you cannot. You can only wait it out (implants can reduce it, but not by a significant amount).
This is an huge difference. It's basically active vs passive. One you "solve" by doing stuff, one you "solve" by...waiting. Which do you think is leaps and bounds more boring?
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.11 16:08:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Korovyov Edited by: Korovyov on 11/09/2006 13:15:59
Originally by: Aramendel So training the learning skills has for you the same enjoyment factor like training other skills?
Get a job. Walk the dog. Do something else. I don't spend 14 hours a day playing eve, every day. And now that I'm taking classes full time, yet again, I don't care. Something is grinding in EVE while I'm grinding in life.
This game has no advantages for the "powerleveler." That's what WOW and the others are good for.
And this has what to do with learning skills not being fun?
Originally by: Aramendel Again, since you ignored my last reply to this particular argument: Isk grinds you can effect yourself (and besides it isn't really hard to get isk if you know what to do once you have some start capital).
See my above statements. Some of us have obligations outside of the internet.
See the statement you quoted. A month ago I was visiting friends for 2 weeks and was actively online (aka not afk) for at most 30 minutes a day. I made about 100 mil in these 2 weeks simply by selling items I bought elsewhere using 200 mil starter capital.
"Isn't really hard to get isk" means that you can do it with very little time investment. Nice try with the "OMG powergamer" argument, but it does not apply here.
Originally by: Aramendel The learning skill grind you cannot. You can only wait it out (implants can reduce it, but not by a significant amount).
A full set of +3 implants took two weeks+ off the "full training skill" plan for me.
2 weeks out of 2.5 months. If you have very low mem & int. A 20% reduction is, as said, no significant amount.
Quote:
Originally by: Aramendel This is an huge difference. It's basically active vs passive. One you "solve" by doing stuff, one you "solve" by...waiting. Which do you think is leaps and bounds more boring?
Which is the fundamental difference between EVE and the rest and why level 5 learnings will never, ever be added to the starting slate.
Have a real life? Fret not! You can fill that time with AFK timesinks!
Meanwhile the powerlevelers wallow in "painful" training because they have to wait just like everyone else. But hey, they can grind out the 100+ mil isk for a full set of +3 implants.
The training is painful for everyone. And just how exactly are the training skills needed as "AFK timesinks" when you have tons and tons of other skills? Those fill the role just nicely *and* give players actually a real sense of accomplisment because they have some direct improvment when they finish it.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.12 09:24:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Korovyov Nobody starts with 200mil. Which means you grinded until you had 200mil, you had a benefactor that donated you 200mil, or you bought 200mil with a GTC. None of which backs your arguement.
Learn to read? I said you need some starter capital for that. Also, I could have done the same thing with 20 mil as well, would just have had to make an afk trip to resupply once a day instead once a week. And getting that much is not that difficult.
Originally by: Aramendel Then there is no reason to train any skill beyond bare minimum at all. A turret skill, at most, gives 25% bonus, for example. If 20% is nothing, then you don't need any skills. And if you don't need any skills, why do you need to start with learning 5?
You are taking it out of context. The problem is that lvl 5 of the basic skills are the prerequs for he advanced learning skills. And those give you a bigger boost. And you cannot loose them. If they would only need lv 4 in the basic as Stephar suggested that would be ok, too.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.15 18:57:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Caliwyrm O'Libr ...As someone just starting out in the game it simply doesn't make sense to spend 7d training a learning skill to 5 just to shave 1 hour off training another skill to level 3 or 4. (ie. The returns for taking something like Analytical Mind to 5 isn't worth it until you start getting to the 28d or longer trains, IMHO)...
Training speed boost is identical for a rank 1 lvl 1 skill or a rank 14 lvl 5 skill.
For example, +1 to all attributes gives you a bit more than 2k additional skillpoints per day, independant if you spend the day training 100 lvl 1 skills or 1 lvl 5 skill.
The time when it is "best" to train the advanced learning skills is not dependant on the training time of the skills you want to train, but is when you think that your char can suffer the 2 month learning skill deadlock and still keep operational in the game.
|
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 10:30:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Adonis 4174 This is true if you are time indifferent. However, humans are not and I can prove it. If you offer somebody ú10 today or ú20 in a year's time they will take the ú10 even though the better offer is for the ú20. The reason for this is that a year is a long time, a lot can happen in a year and missing out on the extra tenner isn't so great a problem.
This has nothing to do with this. Also, with this argumentation would apply on the advanced learning skills people would never train them.
Quote: Also, the perceived benefit of an increase in speed isn't about sp/day it's about % increase in speed. No coincidence that my last advanced learning skill to 4 is Eidetic Memory and I'm a Detei. Wow, I get a whole 3% increase on most of my planned skills involving Memory primary according to the character manager.
But this is exactly the point. Increase in speed is progress over TIME.
People look at a lvl 4 skill and see they "only" get 1 hour less with the advanced learnings so think it is not worth it, then look at a lvl 5 rank 5 skill and see they get 1 day less and think that is worth it.
But they completely ignore that the first skill takes 1 day to train and the latter 24 days. Saving 1 hour at a 1 day skill and saving 1 day at a 24 day skill is *exactly* the same speed increase.
sp/day and % increase in speed is the same thing here.
Of cource, the effective speed boost is lower for attributes which you have already high. But this still does not change anything here. Does not matter if your int/mem is 5 or 15, the learning speed boost you get for a lvl 1 or lvl 5 skill is the same (for lvl 1 vs lvl 5 with 5 int and lvl 1 vs lvl 5 with 15 int respectively, not 5 int vs 15 int).
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 13:21:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Calantus Reik I think the point is more that you can train a whole bunch of quick skills before learning and you won't have lost much benefit from learning.
Of cource. I was saying that the benefit you get form learning is independant to the skill training time, not that you have to train learning skills before everything else. As said:
The time when it is "best" to train the advanced learning skills is not dependant on the training time of the skills you want to train, but is when you think that your char can suffer the 2 month learning skill deadlock and still keep operational in the game.
Quote: You could train yourself into a battleship plus fittings in the time it takes to train a skill to level 5 for instance.
Actually you cannot because BS size guns/missles need lvl 5 in gunnery/missle launcher to use them in the first place.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 16:00:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Adonis 4174 False.
Let's say I have INT 20 and PER 5
+1 int gives a 5% increase in speed, +1 per gives a 20% increase in speed, both give the same increase in sp/day
(I know I've ignored secondary attributes in this example)
Read my whole post perhaps next instead of taking things out of context? Especially the paragraph after the text you quoted? Then you would have probably seen that for the actual issue I commented - namely the "effect" of learning skills on lvl 1 and lvl 5 skills - this is very much "true". It does not matter if you have a 1 per char or 100 per char. For one char you will get an 100% speed boost, for one a 1% speed boost. But this is completely meaningless for the matter at hand. The point is that the speed boost you get for each char is universal. The 1 per char will get a 100% boost for lvl 1, lvl 2, lvl 3, lvl 4 and lvl 5 skills. Meaning you do not need a 30 day skill to make the advanced learning skills "worth it".
Also, as a sidenote, in case of your first exemple with memory even the argument with the speed boost is plain out wrong. If you have high memory getting +1 mem gives you a smaller bonus, yes. But it also lets you train the learning skill faster in the first place. It only gives you a 3% boost compared to a 4% boost for another attribute, but it also needs only 3 days to train instead of 4 days. The time invested : boost ratio is the same.
Quote: However, the next ten minutes are worth more than the ten minutes after that which are worth more than the ten minutes after that. This is time preference, humans are impatient.
Thus the feel of the benefit is only felt when you can quickly make up the time lost training the skill. However, if you spend 5 days training a learning skill to take 3 days off your next skill then the time you actually lost training the learning skill is only 2 days, so the benefit comes much quicker.
What you "feel" is irrellevant. What is important is what happens in reality.
And, again, the benefit comes not quicker. To repeat myself (again):
But they completely ignore that the first skill takes 1 day to train and the latter 24 days. Saving 1 hour at a 1 day skill and saving 1 day at a 24 day skill is *exactly* the same speed increase.
Train 24 1 day skills and you have saved 24 * 1 hour = a day. Train one 24 day skill and you have saved 1 day. The benefit comes back at the same speed. Actually, one might argue that it comes actually back "faster" with the 1 day skills. After 12 1 day skills you have already the direct benefit of having them all finished 12 hours earlier. After half of the 24 day skill you still have recieved no benefit at all.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 20:55:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Adonis 4174 Where is the benefit in delaying your plans to make ISK on the offchance that a later plan will take less time to realise (so long as by then you have the ISK to make it happen)?
Learning skills should take their place as part of a specific strategy, not in lieu of one.
Did I say something like that? Oh, wait, no, I did in fact say the complete opposite.
The time when it is "best" to train the advanced learning skills is not dependant on the training time of the skills you want to train, but is when you think that your char can suffer the 2 month learning skill deadlock and still keep operational in the game.
Are you even reading posts other than your own?
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.09.17 19:14:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Aramendel on 17/09/2006 19:25:00
Originally by: Calantus Reik Generally correct, but you can fit siege launchers and tech 1 torps with only Missile Launcher Op 4.
It wouldn't surprise me if I was still wrong anyway though.
Mhh.. true, I only checked cruise missles. But this is more the exeption than the norm.
Originally by: Aterna My response to argument 1: That would solve the problem of learning faster, but a noob is someone who doesn't know what they are doing. giving them all learning at 5 just speeds up their movement into ships that are too big for them. They spend less time sitting in small ships that they can afford to fly and lose. The longer it takes to get into a BS, the more time you have to learn how to fly your cruisers, and gain valuable experience that will let you fly a BS better
That is a bit too generalized. Not every person has the same learning curve and it also depends on what you are doing. For example, if you spend 6 months only flying missions with a raven and then go into 0.0 "to pown people"...well. Also, this is assuming people do the lvl 5 basic + advanced learning skills before getting into BSs. People can without them easily get into a BS within a month right now. Getting into them - if you really want to - a week earlier wouldn't change much there. Most new players have to learn the "do not fly something you cannot afford to loose" rule by practise.
|
|
|
|