Oh no, I'm fully in the "it would be better for me" camp, but laziness has nothing to do with it. I'm risk-averse, sitting in station not undocking, because I have exactly 18 more days of train 2 chars on 1 account left, and the skills fit exactly in this time frame, so losing my +3's would cost me a whole another plex (to extend dual training).

With the change, CODE would get soo many more potshots at me and my full industrial. But right now they'll have to wait 18 days.

Anyway, that's my selfish reason. Did understanding it make a difference in your opinion?

While I would be for the removal of attribute points and remapping, I think that attribute implants should stay. They give a bit of a bonus for the Risk vs. Reward out there, and are no different from combat-related implants.

The implants give a bonus when they're used, just like combat implants do. You aren't being penalized when you don't use them, you just aren't getting the bonus from them.


It's a stretch, but it's a real situation. There are a few basic alt skillplans (such as PI or basic research) that can be squeezed into a barely-sub-15-day plan, so you could create two alts on one account using a single 30-day dual-training.

Those types of characters, however, tend to be in the "no reason to ever undock" or "almost worthless until they're actually finished" categories. So while it's a real situation, the characters in question will probably either never undock, anyway, or will only be worth undocking once their final skills are trained, which means that the removal of remaps and / or implants wouldn't really affect them, anyway.

How does removing implants etc give more game play options. At the end of the day, if you dont want to use them then dont plug them in. Then you can fly and die as many times as you want.

Removing them hoping that people will do more PVP is stupid.

I've suggested years ago to remove learning implants because all they do is make people more risk-averse.

Replace said attribute implants with a TON of new and exciting (and useful!) hardwiring implants. All of which of course are destroyed upon clone death.

As a new player I was unsure about remaps so I went to Eve University http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Skills_and_Learning and read the page.

I think I see why removing attributes may be something they are looking at.

In the past (if I am correct) new content came out about once a year so you could hold off on your remap to see what was new and remap accordingly.

Now with new content and changes coming out monthly on CCP's new schedule it is affecting game play. People want try out new ships, explore WH space and different fits. Just look at the changes to fleet doctrine, gang fights and the new T3 ships. The whole underlying meta of attributes is now getting in the way of these changes and emergent game play.

Yes they could allow us to remap more often but that still just reduces the need and impact of attributes.

EVE is no longer a snail on guide rails as far as changes go, it wants to expand and entice players old and new to try new things and speed up player created game play and I think the need of attributes and remapping may be standing in the way.

And what about logi, scanning, cloaking, ect. Do they all use perc/int? What is the big thing now Bombers, does training up all the skills needed revolve around perc/int. (I really don't know) Your alliance or corp may need players to quickly fill different slots for different roles for all the new changes that have come out, do you remap for those and then are stuck for a whole year.

Also, if perc/int are the all around best defaults why would you would cripple yourself changing to something else.

Again, removing attributes would have no effect on the core meta of EVE which is killing ships.

Actually it is broken. Remapping and planning year long skill plans around.

You may be asking for instant gratification but I was not (see what I did there) I was just pointing out a reason why """I""" thought CCP may be looking at revamping or removing attributes and how they could be holding back the game. I get you don't like change but making dismissive statements does not a counter point make.

Actually I played the game for years just fine when re-mapping wasn't even an option. So no, this isn't a "you want it easy, I walked uphill 5 miles in the snow both ways, grumble grumble".

Re-mapping impacts newbies way more than older players because they have so many more skills to train, they need to diversify their training, they often have no idea what skills they even need and they often have no clue what they even want to do in the game. And the reason for leaving it in is so people who use 3rd party tools can get 10-15% more SP?

Just sink it into implants instead. Newbies can use cheap ones or focus on buying implants that focus on their current specific path while vets and "I'm training for my titan" guys can buy 1 billion isk training implants.

Remember I am an almost new player.

So engaging in this topic I learned about remapping, now my question is what do attributes do for you beyond your speed of learning certain skills.

Do they increase your DPS, ship speed, range or targeting speed, using these as just a few examples.

This information will help me remap my attributes.

Thank you.

My main has 125 million s.p. and I've been here since 2008. My humble view is that I think the whole learning/attribute/remap thing has had its day.
Hardwiring implants should be used more and fresh characters should feel less of a gap in their potential.
Seriously, just get rid of that nonsense and train skills you want without having to worry about waiting a year when it's better value for your attribute map.
In fact, I'd happily support a remap that allowed all skill points to be remapped to different skills every year.

Then why were remaps even added to the game? If choices are supposed to have these heavy consequences, then remaps never should've been added and you get locked into the type of character as soon as you hit the create character button. This could even be newbie friendly with "Choose the type of character you want to play: Industrial, Science, Combat" etc.

And yet neural remaps were added. And training skills were removed. Attributes going away with the choice being in the learning implants you run seems like the next logical step. It's a quality of life improvement(no year long skill planning, no 3rd party tool requirements) with the only downside being that the game gets less complex.

The entire skills system is nothing but a Skinner's Box. LOL @ people who think that training skills has any value/gameplay/skill involved. It is all a scam. There is no valid argument in favor of learning implants or attributes, it is simply complexity within a system that is designed solely to keep players subscribed. It is all a worthless time sink.

Get rid of attributes, get rid of learning implants, give everyone the current max SP/hour. Give all new players lvl 3 in all engineering and navigation skills while you're at it. Training a bunch of 5-20 minute skills to be able to fit basic modules is dumb.

I don't see this as a bad thing at all. As it stands the quickest way to skill up efficiently is to not play the game and sit in a station with +4's/+5's to try to catchup in the sp rat race that so many new players see separating them from veterans. The game heavily rewards you for efficiency when it comes to your sp allocation. Attributes along with learning implants create a gameplay adversion, not a risk adversion. It is a system where the rich who do nothing win. EVE should be about fun risk, not a game of defend your mandatory learning implants so you can skill up fast enough to catch up and do what you want to do. I for one would love to not continue wasting jc timers and living by said timers in order to skill up at a decent rate.

Can't wait to see this implant/skill/attribute crap go away. I will still be not smart enough to understand this game but every little thing helps. And please give autopvp/automine/autorat/autoincursion option. And autouse best blueprint please. One day the game will be dumbed down enough so I might even undock my ship (please make undock button bigger). Anyone knows how I can board my ship btw?

Not we should all start at lvl 90. We should all progress to lvl 90 at the same pace. New players quicker perhaps.

New players are affected most adversely by the current system. They are already behind in SP and that will forever be the case unless they purchase a character. To make matters worse, they are in less of a position than older players in being able to afford to replace lost learning implants when podded.

Right now the system benefits veterans over newbies. It should be the opposite. No learning implants and an expansion on the learning boosters so they work for closer to a year (with diminishing returns over that time).

Uh, no, that isn't what I said. What I said is pretty plain and clear in the quote box at the top of your post. Pls no strawman/slippery slope/He wants WoW. The current system rewards establishing an expensive implant learning clone and gameplay adversion with faster progression than those who choose to play and are newer and can't afford to risk/buy implants just to skill up and a decent rate. This is bad. SkillIng shouldn't favor gameplay adversion. It should be even ground to those who actually undock and go out and have a blast. Rate of progression should never have pay-and-don't-play-to-win barriers, and that is what it currently is.

Do you realize that every response you give is a strawman/slippery slope and has nothing to do with what we are talking about?

At 1800SP/h the skill training will be reduced a good 33% so it will be worse for the low SP characters as it will take even longer for them to catch up.

What I can do after 9 years with an average of 2447SP/h will take a new starter a good 12+ years to do due to a lower speed cap (1800SP/h).

If the cap is set to 2700SP/h for everyone that same new starter would be at my current level after only 8 years.

Ahh, politics.

You couldnt Have Said this any better And The Faster this Happens even more the Better. however Veterens should be Compensated.

You right Im Far from being a Eve expert However From A Paying Customer and My Individual point of view Paying $100 dollars a Month for subs I would be rather spending my Isk Buying Ships and Blowing up ships ASAP. Than waiting around training skills for 460 days to be able fly what I want and on top of that i gotta train for Implants that i can lose and evn lose more isk.Im sorry Its a scam to get us to pay more Money and Really its addictive like Crack I wouldve Cut my Lose a long time ago the reason I dont UNsub is I committed thousands of dollars to this game I would have to be crazy to terminate it (trust Ive thought about it)whatever CCP knows exactly what the are doing they know how to keep us addicted.

They will never catch up to the people starting a decade earlier.

I think the point is that if it took player X 1,5 years to get let's say a perfect super carrier train, then it should not require player Y "1,5 years + something" to get it after any change. The newbies are already swamped with so much things they know nothing about getting optimal sp/hours even if they are cross training while learning WTF this game has to offer should not be seen as bad IMO.

Actually Thats agreat Idea a option to reset our skills points they do that in LOL that is why they are so sucessfull maybe CCP should adapt that Businees Model.Sometimes the risky crazy Idea are the best "Fortune favors the Bold"

Skills at Level V Splendid Idea! Next Change: You Buy A Ship Its Unlocked Forever It Gets Destroyed And Spawns Again Just Like Your Clones However Thats For the next thread.

I could fly a thousand poorly fitted Merlins into the abyss and it wouldn't invalidate anything I said. Getting your head around the nature of character progression is one of those things that any moderately educated person could reason about, even if they never played Eve. This has its roots deeper than Eve. The problem is that Eve players have this blind spot; They think their game is so damned special that none of the normal rules apply.

I wasn't making a proposal, I was making a prediction. "Oh", I hear you cry out in contention, "but he's only predicting it because it's a change he wants". Let me be perfectly clear: There are many changes I want that I don't expect to be implemented, usually either because they're outside of the scope of reasonable implementation, or because they're changes with massive rippling effects. This is not one of those. This is a relatively minor change with a fairly positive outcome that CCP have, apparently, already been considering. If a thousand people rose up and screamed and threatened to burn another hole in a statue, they'd probably back off, but nobody's going to do that because most people realize this is a perfectly reasonable change not worth getting upset over.

The kind of people rejecting this are the usual suspects. People with a fear of change, or a fear of "casualization", whatever the hell that even means. My favorite is the "ironic counter-argument" type. You know the one, it usually starts with "yes I agree" and then makes a half-assed attempt to fly down a "slippery slope" that's about as smooth as a gravel pit, usually concluding with "and then everybody gets a Titan and the game becomes Call of Warcraft". If Eve had its own enforced version of Goodwin's Law, these people would immediately be removed from civil discourse. Alas.

No, this will not cripple the risk-reward dynamic. You could probably remove implants and even pods entirely and it still wouldn't cripple the risk-reward dynamic, because the average player is going to lose far more from ship deaths than pod deaths.

The idea of being a smoke-and-mirrors smooth-talker is an awesome mental image. I'll take it as a compliment. I choose to picture myself in a tuxedo with a cigar. You will never be able to take this image away from me.

Because you're trying to balance risk/reward when one of the currencies is skill points, and as has already been established, skill points are a finite resource. You can't magic more up, and you can't compensate for potential gain lost. Frankly I'm amazed that Strategic Cruisers are as popular as they are, given that if you lose one you lose SP, but then again I guess it's only SP for Strategic Cruisers, so maybe it balances out. I digress.

When you ask people to choose between suboptimal SP and anything else, they're going to take the anything else. For rich people, this means flying around with +5s, but for less rich people this means sitting in station because they don't want to lose their +5s. It's not really risk reward when the risk outweighs the reward so heavily that nobody takes the risk.

I'm not on the team that brought this question up with the CSM, but I do have a question for you.

If your practice, normally, is to spend, say, 50 million ISK for a pod full of implants today, why would that not be your practice tomorrow, if learning implants were to be removed?

Wouldn't you just spend your money on hardwirings instead, and maybe get an even larger edge in combat?

Or, is your concern that learning implants would be viewed by the average player as inherently more valuable than non-learning-implants, so their willingness to spend on their pod decreases?

I ask because it's not evident to me that making skill training speed independent of implants will somehow reduce the overall average value of a pod, or the average risk that a player is willing to take on its contents.

Currently I have 530M worth of attribute implants and 600M worth of hardwires, with no attributes tied to the implants I would have 2-4b worth of pirate implants plugged in instead.

I never talked about helping newbies, I was just shooting down your stupid idea where you suggest it should take them 15 years to catch up to where we are after 10 years.

My average SP/h since birth is 2440, Gregor Parud suggested all SP accumilation should be locked at 1800. How are people going to reach the same number of SP in the same timeframe that way?

didn't need to upgrade your clone when you died neither did you

but you did

There are multiple interests at work regarding the issue of implants, imo:

- CCP wants to get us out of the stations and believe the loss of attribute implants will.

- We're addicted to them; I believe people will willingly give them up only if presented with overpowered alternatives (implant for immunity to warp disruption, ewar, being probed, appearing on d-scan, and the like).

- People who are making money from acquiring and selling these implants want to keep making money and are opposed to their removal.

- People who want to keep the game visceral or the way it was in the past are opposed to any change.

- People who want freebies would gladly take a free +5 to all attributes for free.

If the attribute implants that we're addicted to get removed, I believe implant usage will shrink down to the same proportions that rig usage has vs. unrigged ships. Most used rigs are generic (power grid, cpu, cap.) Also, once things settle down, CCP will want to nerf the ship stats so we have to use implants to keep the same firepower as before.

Is it really "dumbing down" when the optimum training plan was to not play the game for two years, and removing attributes means people will actually play the game before they get bored of it?

And yet people do.

Why is that?

Because for the rest of us who don't really care about optimising a few days out of a two year training plan, removal of attributes won't change the game we play.

Removal of attributes will only alter things for the people who play Skill Training (Off/On)line (aka "Sokoban with Gantt Charts")

For that newbie to "catch up" they need to dedicate 12 months with one remap to a set of skills which will mostly be wasted until they finish the next 12 month period of training with a different remap.

Now you tell me, if I'm flying a Rifter and I already have all the skills required to fly that Rifter trained to 5, why am I using +5s instead of useful implants?

I think, at this point, they're not going for "if we add this EVERYONE will use it", but rather "maybe we get a 10% increase in subscriptions to get out of this downward trend." It's like scamming, they only need a few to bite, not all of us.

Gregor Parud vs. Mara Rinn: one of you is arguing from the point of view of playing the game solely for the game itself, the other from the point of view of training up a character over years. While playing the game and its PVP will attract new players, and even keep them interested, building up your character is a staple of MMOs and probably attracts more players than the specific PVP (with spaceships) that EVE has to offer. In any case, there's probably no room for an agreement.

Speaking for myself and probably several others who I have discussed this topic with...Remove the learning implants. Personally, I will just start rolling at the very least LG sets in every char at that point which would dramatically increase my average. I am sure many might forgo implants to offset this but anyone with any amount of wealth in EVE is rolling +5s because they are required for SP/hr rather than PVP/QOL edges.

If I can have an edge instead I would take it.

The guy who stays docked still pays his subscription, so you may not care about him but CCP does.

As for which is it, they're trying to turn the first type into the second type. Get the people who stay docked to build characters to undock. Even if they don't actively search out PVP, they can still be targets. Which is more content for PVP'ers.

For CCP the decision is: do we get more money by changing the game to appease the WoW types, or do we keep the game the same because the awesome PVP that these guys are doing is attracting tons of new people without us lifting a finger?

Yes to both.

Whats A itrolly .Jpg tactic?

You're completely missing the point. Yes you despise or couldn't care less about them, but CCP does. Imagine that they get pissed off every time you tell people who are willing to pay their sub to HTFU or go away (back to WoW whatever).

Edward Olmops: Implants in your brain = same thing as rigs on your pod, at this point in time. Why bother changing the way the UI presents it conceptually? The underlying gameplay effect is the same.

Learning implants encourage risk adversity.

I have trained many pilots to PvP over the years. One of the biggest issues is that the players, who often don't have lots of isk, would rather stay in highsec where they can use their learning implants to gain skills quickly than PvP or do something where those implants would be at risk

Ask yourself: if learning implants were removed, and we were given a flat SP/hour that compensated for their removal, would Eve be better or worse off?

These skill training modifiers dont necessarily have to be plain learning implants. Pirate implants for instance not only affect ship stats but the training speed of skills. It would seem natural to combine hardwires and learning implants as hardwires already affect ship attributes from 1% to 6% and could also affect the training modifier from 1 to 6. CCP could even expand the pirate and other implants if they desired so there is a wider range of training modifiers available.

There is a small concern that needs to be raised with the removal of learning implants. That concern is the removal could lead to "Power Ups" bought with Aurum to increase training speed. It is doubtful CCP would pull something like this though and I only bring it up so people are aware of the possibility.

** apologies in advance if the above thoughts have already been discussed **

and why shouldn't established players get a reward (which is optional and still expensive) for their time? What your logic eventually unravale sto is that everyone should enter the game and stay in the game as equals. Your argument is exactly the same when you consider advanced skills of established players over new players ... the difference the mods make, comparted to the SP difference, is negligable. And still, a frigate can be equally as deadly as a Battleship.

LOL ... that argument would stand if we were requesting extra things to be added. But these have always been here. Their structure is the same as everything else in else - ie cheap small ones, high skillpoint better ones, and low skill point uber expensive ones ... that same structure applies across eve in everything. Everything bares it cost. We are not getting something extra, and we should not be capped unfairly. We have earned the right to be where we are, well, most have. New players have their usage.

If attracting playser is the end game and the issue ... solve that ... don't think hurting older players will start to recruit younger players. because they have no conept of what that is when they start, or before they've thought about eve. To get new players you need to advertise, and look after younger players better in terms of guidance and introductions. YOung players can be just as effective as older players, just using different tools.

Pay to win is using real life money to gain advantage in game. Pay to win is exactly the opposite of earning resources in game to buy an implant.

As for removing the option of learning implants so people can choose combat implants, that is why I said "These skill training modifiers dont necessarily have to be plain learning implants." and I go on to explain how the learning speed increase can easily be added to hardwires.

You are purposefully saying the exact opposite of what was posted. You are trolling.

Here you are saying that its unfair that older people in game have more resources than people who first start playing Eve. You are then implying that younger pilots cant compete and that it is unfair that people with more resources have an advantage. Any pvp pilot knows young pilots can compete against vets if the young pilot understand more about pvp than simply warping to zero and pressing the fire button.

I understand perfectly well what you are doing and logic has nothing to do with it.

You are trolling.

You also go on to state in your previous posts that buying in game items with in game resources is Pay to Win. Your redefining what Pay to Win is as I stated before.

You keep saying young pilots cant compete. Having actual pvp experience against younger pilots in the militia I call BS on your claim. I can tell you with first hand knowledge that young pilots in the militia learn how to pvp in frigates very fast and can kill a vet whether that vet has implants or not.

PVP is more than just buying the most expensive ship you can fly, warping to zero, then pressing the fire button. You cant just throw isk at pvp and expect to win. Everyone who has pvp'd for any length of time understands this.

You are purposefully stating the exact opposite of what Pay to Win is, purposefully saying the exact opposite of what someone is saying so you can turn the debate something totally different than that person stated, and purposefully saying that young pilots dont stand a chance against yets when clearly they do.

You are trolling.

Your entire premise is based on Eve not being fair to new players, what you call average players, and finally most players because most players cant fight. Your debating that Eve should be more fair.

If you want "fair", I suggest you play on the Singularity test server where everyone has access to most everything for 100 isk and you dont need plex.

You and I can both judge risk and reward. Currently pirate implants offer a bonus that you have deemed Pay to Win and an attribute boost. For this point I assume use of high grade implants which give a +4 attribute boost and a perfect remap. Seeing how you have determined that pirate implants, under the category of combat implants, are pay to win wouldn't it make sense that the advantages presented in the pirate implants outweighs a mere 90 SP/hour? So why do we not see more pods with pirate implants? Why do we see learning implants below the level of +4 attribute increase when there are better Pay to Win pirate implants readily available for purchase (aside from the lack of cybernetics V)?

Tip of the day:

Your about to have your ship explode and need to get your pod out.

Make sure you have a celestial selected before your ship explodes. Click the warp button to the celestial once or twice per second shortly before your ship explodes and continue this after your ship explodes until your pod warps off. By doing this, your sending the warp command to the server constantly. One of these commands will reach the server right after your ship explodes and your pod will warp immediately without the pause that normally occurs if you were to wait to issue the warp command after your ship explodes. You will get your pod out safely nearly every single time.

Tip of the day 2:

Now that your in your pod and need to get back to high sec, warp to the tactical bookmarks you should have made around the gates in low sec before you engaged in pvp. Warping to these tacticals will help you avoid getting smartbombed like a lot of people do who warp directly to the gate.

Both of these tips will help you avoid getting pod killed most of the time.

Tip of the day 3:

ZOMG ships are too expensive to pvp in!

PvP in frigates and destroyers in militia areas. Sit in the novice plexes for frigates and small plexes for destroyers. Novice plexes wont allow anything bigger than a T1 frigate into them. Small plexes wont allow anything bigger than a destroyer into them. Frigs and destroyers are cheap fun.

These tips will keep your pod alive and save you isk while getting your feet wet in pvp.

PvP in frigates and destroyers in militia areas. Sit in the novice plexes for frigates and small plexes for destroyers. Novice plexes wont allow anything bigger than a T1 frigate into them. Small plexes wont allow anything bigger than a destroyer into them. Frigs and destroyers are cheap fun.

People in the previous posts were talking about getting their pods killed and about ships being expensive to pvp in. I gave them alternatives that mitigate the pod killing and the expense.

Where is your advice to those players? Share some tactics you have come up with besides warping at zero and pressing the fire button so those people can learn, overcome their fears, and have fun with pvp.

Where are your kills?

I am firm in my claim that you are simply a troll and nothing you have said has been constructive.

been participating in gameplay in the meantime that takes advantage of that choice.)

2) A new player who for some reason fully understands the attribute system on day 1 and can't bear to play suboptimally faces an optimal choice of starting with an int/mem remap and training mainly tons of support and drone skills that should be at V, deferring for months the ship and weapon system skills that widen the range of what they can do in the game. This player, like the player in (1), isn't having much fun either.

Noting one more time that I'm not a game designer and not on the team considering these changes, just participating in the conversation. :)


I think you missed my point, which was that the attribute system explicitly punishes behavior that it's probably better to encourage for new players, trying out a range of different skills, ships, modules. Choices with consequences are great, they're what makes EVE what it is, but a choice between optimal play and fun play is probably not where you want to end up as a game designer.

(Edit: To be perfectly clear about what I mean, optimal play with the attribute system means picking skills that match one's current remap rather than the skill one would like to play around with in the game. For a veteran player who's already tried everything EVE has to offer or who is already juggling multiple accounts, this is not as much an issue, but for a new player, it gets in the way of trying out different types of gameplay.)

An example of a meaningful choice that isn't like that is the choice between fitting a PvP ship for more tank vs. extra damage. There's a downside to fitting a very light tank, but the upside (doing more damage) leads to more fun gameplay. And, you could make the argument the other direction, too, that having a strong tank can be fun in its own way.

I think one of the reasons that the attribute system is getting a look is that all the choices you can make with attributes feel kind of bad. The time scale of the impact of a decision is so long that you never really know if you're making a mistake by committing to a remap, and the reward is so deferred and so abstract that the system always feels like it's punishing you.

Removing learning implants and granting the full "max" possible SP/Hour for all skills would be the best for the game overall me.

How do I know this? I'm involved in two major newbee recruitment programs for Goonswarm Federation and talk to new players on a daily basis. Literally every single time we explain how the attribute system works over mumble, it's followed by "... it's really stupid, welcome to eve"

But please, continue to argue your short sighted opinion on why people should have to make a choice about committing their ability to train skills for a year when that does nothing but prevent people from getting more ships into (and blown out of) space.

I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying.

o/

i think his point was care-bears will avoid regardless of the implant they have . they will always find an excuse to not pvp

Jump clones are definitely not a solution as they are only able to be used very infrequently, are a pain in the ass, and just a general hassle


The learning implants create an incentive to avoid pvp, and nothing should incentive avoiding gameplay.

Learning implants provide nothing to the game other than loss, and that loss can be kept just by changing them to do other things.

It would be the best of both worlds, think about it.

Nice straw man argument.

Losing a ship doesn't cause your character to develop more slowly. Losing ships and killing ships is the point of the game.

You can't apply the logic that is used for one subject against another different subject. Implants are not ships, and ships aren't implants. My reason for rallying against attribute implants isn't a matter of isk loss, which ships have, it is a matter of SP loss/gain.

Hence, straw man.

But to further point out differences between ships and implants:

• Ships are replaceable, lost SP is not.
• Newbie ships are far cheaper than even mid-tier implants.
• Newbies are much more greatly affected by implants than longer term players are, and yet they're the ones most affected by slow SP gain.

So you should probably stop talking about removing ships and get back to the subject at hand: implants.

Secondly, I never said I wanted to remove implants in the first place, you should read my posts more thoroughly. I said I wanted to change what the implants do.

If it's not fun it won't be played. Mining, for example, is a sub-game that has unique play, sense of achievement, and a number of options, but I'm not sure how many non-bot players it actually attracts and for how long. There's gotta be fun somewhere.

Also, fun for whom? There are some people who DO mine.

No, I don't mean to say that.

Which I believe is your goal anyway.

Remove learning implants. IMO they are just some kind of +XP thingy that doesn't belong in this game. It's just an XP-Boost for ISK and encourages people to stay docked.

You're exposing fake arguments and selfish agendas, fine, but that just pisses off the people you're arguing with, and angers you when they reply back.

I'm already sick of your crap.

Locking someone in a skiltraining plan is not very good gamedesign. It forces you to stick to your skillplan (to min-max) even if you want to do something else after a few weeks. It happens a lot with new corp fitting requirments, new gameplay elemnts you want to try, etc.

Being unable to share GM responses is part of the point. If they don't want to participate and communicate publicly, let the workload be compounded by communicating with us 1 on 1. The goal is for this "be nice to devs" excuse to go away, because it's an excuse to stay out of touch with players who attempt to communicate at all.

A remap can be picked once a year. So saying that you can just pick one doesn't make any sense. But basically you are right, that's exactly what I want. Remove ****** gameplay.
I'm stating that the game is forcing me to nothing but should enable me to having fun. This is not a part of it. And I play and enjoy Dwarf Fortress, so please don't tell me what fun is to me...
Your comments are obviously just based on wannabe deformation of others and don't contain any anything of value. Denying this is an obvious lie.

It means everyone else is forced to choose it as well.

Though that was obvious

Well ....it is simple
He or she who has implants in his ...head..Thinks... two times before going into battle

so if you want more people in pvp ...the implants must re-spawn in the new cloon

Otherwise a care bears thinks twice

http://youtu.be/ql1QIqS_pq0 ( C Dion Think twice )

and yes i am still a miner after 3 year
and never saw -o.o for the past 2 years

why not ....? Well i think twice

i see you do not get my point ...

besides that ..
on forehand you do not know if there is value in that cloon
so if there are no implants in that cloons head you are heavenly disappointed i presume

the point is i do not take any risk
if i have 300 mil of value in my cloons head
and i must battle a 50 mil vessel
the risk is just to high

Probably you missed the discussions about that going on for a while ... there is a significant number of players lobbying for a change in the attribute system.

Sick and tired of this argument you keep bringing; it's not true, and to disprove it, if this thread doesn't reach 40 pages of supporters you owe me and everyone you've replied this to a ******* apology. If it does reach 40 pages you'll have proof of truth and I'll owe you an apology.

No, I don't believe people's stated reasons, and I don't believe that you don't have an agenda either.

It doesn't matter what the reasons are; everyone else argues idea vs. counter-idea or just counter-arguments in this thread, except for you - you have a crusade to just call everyone a selfish hypocrite, and to do that you twist every single statement anyone makes and regurgitate it coated in your particular bittervet shade of bile. You're simply shitting the thread just for the sake of it.

So I've started that other thread, and in it I'm going to be called an idiot a million times, until the ISD close it. Imagine those comments are directed at you, though.

Whatever you deceide to do, please don't make skill training any slower than it is. By planning remapping and actually using attribute implants all the time, you can easily exceed 2400 SP/hour. Don't remove attributes and attribute implants and feed us something like 2k SP/hour.

At this point I feel like Gregor Parud is the only one lobbying for reasons other than the ones he stated. He probably runs the implant market or owns a bunch of high SP Characters he doesn't want 'devalued'

There are a lot of good points here. I'm not sure the attribute mapping system adds anything of value to the game for me.

While we're on the subject of things that screw new players... how about 'dem NPC standings? How many new players get locked out of parts of empire space for doing too many missions that tank their standing? That's the issue we should address first here.

Frankly, although I don't agree with Darwins stance at all on this subject, I definitely appreciate Dev interaction in what is clearly a highly-emotive subject. I feel its helped keep the thread on track, and the talking points from both sides focused and clear. So, no, I strongly disagree with his stance, but I'm thankful to hear it, since I would assume he wouldn't be able to be quite so candid if the discussion wasn't in the general ballpark of what's being looked at, and its kinda helpful to see what parts of the subject we have potential to influence here (the impression I get is Attributes are gone whatever we discuss, but Learning Implants are still teetering on the abyss).

I just find the topic interesting, and the designers on the team are looking at the thread.

I'm offering ideas to provoke interesting discussion, but even if I were personally biased (and I don't believe I am, since I eagerly listen to and think about contrary arguments), you can be secure that I'm not the one choosing what gets implemented in the game from all of this.

Because as soon as they say one word, everybody is going to jump to the best conclusion that starts the next pointless argument =p

Whenever I see someone posting with a righteous or indignant tone I assume it's a dev posting on an alt.

But choosing not to use them is a negative choice. You're not choosing between two different options with distinct benefits, you either choose to get the benefit or choose not to. Much like the reason clone grades were stripped out, CCP are looking to remove systems which give you one one sensible choice. With implants it's even worse because the choice also means you need to be more protective so you are unlikely to jump into content on a whim. If you've got a head full of implants, you're less likely to jump in on some spontaneous action. The implants aren't there to benefit you in space, they are simply there to make you take less time to train at a cost of being more risk averse.

In many instances you won't know whether or not you are in the winning group until it's over. And no, that's not the choice made. Most people just say "I'll just stay docked and save the several days of training time this removes".

I really don't get the problem here. CCP want to remove some of the boundaries that prevent people from readily engaging in content. Why is that a bad thing? Why is it that ANY change is always met with people crying about how terrible and carebearish it is, no matter what the change is. If CCP said tomorrow they were removing concord, someone would still find a way to whine about CCP making the game a themepark. I tell you what, CCP: Stop developing EVE. Apparently it's fine exactly as it is and every change is terrible, so lets just not have any more changes. Is that a better position to be in?

Tell you what, when your ship respawns back in station with your skill hardwiring implants that you had when you get podded, then we will have WOW in space, till then Eve is still Eve learning implants or not.

I can't agree with CCP Darwin more. I did a ton of reading and research before starting EVE Online a few days ago. But even still, the first few days I totally forgot about the attributes, remaps and learning implants. When it came to what skills to learn and train, I just picked the stuff that enabled my interests. I am a bit all over the place trying things out and I loved it.

But because I love to read forums and such and seeing this thread, I was reminded attributes, remaps and learning implants exists. Now I'm sitting here trying to figure out the most optimal way to train and it does not even remotely resemble the choices I was making earlier and more importantly - is not fun at all.

It leaves no room for me to explore and try new things. Like some strict diet where there is no room for the enjoyable foods. The whole time I keep asking myself, "What if I spend this whole year training into something I don't find enjoyable at the end of the year?" I just want to enjoy the game and have fun. I hate having to endure certain game mechanics that leave me with no enjoyable options. Either endure a year not having fun or fall further and further behind. That is hardly a good choice now is it.

I really enjoy making decisions where I have to deal with risk and reward. Strategic decisions and the like. But having to decide which path to walk down when all presented to me are equally not enjoyable...

So the first year of the game I have to pick between leveling up my ship or leveling up my support skills... Wow. Thanks.

so you're saying that all new players, because of a ****** attribute system, should not be able to train optimally?

stop prenteding there's effort anywhere in here; you simply cannot optimally train basic skills as a new player due to the fact that they all use different attributes which forces them to either training half of them painfully slow, or all of them just plain slowly.

the only thing they can do optimally is train a bunch of skills that without other skills are borderline useless. congratulations, you can fly all of the cruisers with t2 guns... can't fit any of them because you've got no support skills.

why should new players have to accept that the only way for them to train for the first few months is suboptimally?

lies?

not in the slightest; tanking skills and gunnery skills use two totally different sets of attributes. it's an undenyable fact that you cannot train both optimally on the same remap. this leaves the situation where new players, who need both sets of skills are FORCED to train at least one, if not both of these types of skills suboptimally.

feel free to find a lie there, but that's the reality of the situation.

for the likes of (probably) you and (definitely) me, who are probably somewhere around the point where our support/fitting/tanking skills are where they need to be - we can comfortably sit in a per/will remap and cross train all the guns/ships optimally and not care about attribute remaps for years at a time. new players do not have this luxury.

for a new player, 8 days is a long time.

and congratulations you've just proven you've had to blow THREE remaps to achieve a level of training the rest of us enjoy simply by not being new to the game.

basically you've just told us what i've been saying all along; they either get shafted by 8 days, or 23 days. they have to waste all that time to achieve a training time that we, once again, get to enjoy just because of our character's age.

cheers, saved me doing the maths myself and still proved my point.

actually, all we've proven is that i'm right.

new players, because they're new are forced to suffer lower training times because of the range of skills they need.

There's also the matter of value for your sub fee. If you train slower, you're receiving less SP value for it.

8 days can also be especially painful if it's a prereq for something else, that has to be suffered.

I think we're forgetting how serious the effects of attributes can be on the game. Jita and Amarr... influenced by the Achura stat distribution that used to drive character selection for a long time. That's been changed, but the momentum of Jita is a juggernaut at this point.

I mentioned it before, but when it comes to something like attributes and implant costs, there's no way to know how else players might behave if it was different.

The example of Jita and Achura's popularity is kind of important because it involves the same mechanic, of attributes and SP accumulation. I can't tell the future, but I'm willing to say I'm sure we'll find that EVE was gimped as a result of how attributes, remaps, and implants impinged on gameplay.

My personal take on learning implants is that they should be removed. If I want to spend ISK on hardwirings or pirate sets which improve my characters ability in PvP, that is a meaningful choice that has a varying impact depending on how much I want to spend.

Training Cybernetics V and dropping over half a PLEX to buy a +5 learning set - just to get Jump Drive Calibration V and all the other rubbish support skills I have to train at the moment a bit faster is not meaningful, its an expensive pointless mechanic and a chore. Its even worse for newer players who both want to achieve their short term skill training goals as quickly as possible, but also want to learn to PvP where their +3 set is more expensive than their 3M ISK frigate.

And yes I understand that technically removing things like learning implants is 'dumbing down' the game but in my opinion it is not significant. The complexity in EVE should come from ships, fleet compositions, fittings and tactics. Really for me the bottom line is that the risks you take engaging in PvP and the speed that you train skills really should be independent of each other.


The case for attributes and remaps I'm not even sure myself on. Specialised remaps are great especially for alts and older characters but it is frustrating at times. At the moment I'm on a balanced, non specialised remap and its rubbish knowing that really I could be opening up more hulls faster if I remapped Per/Wil. I certainly wouldn't miss them if they were removed and as above I don't think the removal would represent a significant dumbing down of the game.

Not to mention heavens forbid that a new player may actually want to try their hand at Exploration, Industry and Leadership thus training Corp skills, Leadership skills, Probing skills, Manufacturing skills and Mining skills, before they actually settle into the null doctrine of 'fly these specific ships with T2 fits'.
Lets not even start to think about how many remaps that would actually take for a new player to actually experience all the various types of game play EVE has to offer without training a single one sub optimally.

you still haven't justified why it's perfectly acceptable for new players to get shafted on sp/hour unlike us veterans, mind you.

or if you have and i missed it, would you care to link the post?

You keep mentioning this 5%. But in this very thread it was shown that it can in fact be upwards of a 50% gain.

My point here isn't to say you are wrong, but that simply brandishing a figure like that means nothing.

there's no extra effort in "planning" a skill plan. stop pretending there is.

when you've been playing for a few years, 2700 is the base number - because you're no longer having to train off-remap skills that are pretty much essential to flying ships. you've got all your navigation skills, your core skills, your tank skills, etc. you can just focus on cross training your hulls and guns so you have more diversity in your engagement profile.

Also newer players training stuff here there and everywhere would have to buy a full set of +5's, where older players only have to fly around with 2 of them which match their current specialised remap.

So new players have to spend more, to get a slower training time than an older player achieving max SP/hr for less ISK. Hmm sounds a bit borked to me.

+4 on HG sets is kind of nice, for PVE types who don't have to worry about PVP. I recently started going out in a Golem in high sec for kicks, which I haven't done in a few years... I'm thinking pirate sets are a nice blend of training and PVP, and worth their cost.

I'm not sure if the statistic is still valid, but if it's true that a lot of players (possibly the majority) are high sec lurkers who level up their Raven, something like attributes added to more implants is a nice option.

A blend of attributes into every type of implant in slots 1-5. A new tier / class of implants, perhaps.

i simply don't think that new players either being 'locked' in to one set of skills, or simply having to accept lower training times is good for the game. especially when CCP are trying to put a real effort in to attracting and retaining new players.
yeah, i suffered it, you suffered it... but there's really no reason why new players have to suffer it too - what does that actually achieve?

For starters, a responsible thing to do for the ignorant new players is set their attributes to Charisma:empty, and the other four categories leveled out. I don't know what starter characters' attributes look like nowadays.

anyway, back to my question; what does it achieve to have an SP system that puts new players at a disadvantage from the very beginning?

but it does, you proved that in YOUR OWN post about 2-3 pages ago.

But this is EVE and every time someone mentions "wouldn't it just be easier if we'd remove choice and risk" I'll start kicking and screaming unless I am/get convinced that it's actually better that way (like clone cost).

The game's complexity and what makes it interesting should come from ships, fittings, fleet compositions, tactics and above all piloting though, don't you agree?

And I really disagree that learning implants and attributes have made the game any more interesting anyway to be honest. Using hardwirings maybe, but generally when I have to think about learning 'plants and remaps it's a chore not something I actively want to log in to deal with.

Only one person in this thread is trying to make that sound like it's a bad thing.

read this very carefully:

You may be right.

You may be so right about so many people that their collective decision making is slowing EVE's pace of gameplay.

The ideal of making EVE hard is valid. The reality is it's not conducive to gameplay.