1) What That he Violated Forum rules By Personally attacking me
2) And You agreeing with him

I guarantee A ISD moderater will moderate this Garbage. I pay $100 or more in Plex.a month to play this game This is the Primary reason New players Leave this game. If this continues i will make this a issue starting by recording and submitting a Ticket. so lets Keep on topic of this thread.

CCP needs to remove learning implants and not replace them with anything. The truth is that leaning implants add nothing meaningful to the game, are a terrible choice to make, encourage risk adversity, and removing them from the game would actually improve Eve without dumbing Eve down.

Let's start with choices. Eve is not a game of choices. If you think Eve is a game of choices you are wrong. Eve is a game of meaningful choices. That is a huge distinction. A meaningful choice is choice that affects the Eve universe beyond yourself. For example the choice to fit an AB instead of an MWD is a meaningful choice. Your decision now is going to affect the fight you and others are going to have in a matter of minutes. You decisions during that fight are meaningful choices. What you do after that fight will likely be a series of meaningful choices.

Learning implants are not a meaningful choice. Take any situation: mining, PvP, PvE, market trading, etc. Place yourself in that situation with another person. Ask yourself these simple questions: Does that player having no learning implants affect this situation? What if they have a set of +1 implants? +5 implants? Under no circumstances does their decision to use learning implants affect your gameplay at all. Some of you are going to argue that if you podded said player with +5 implants you would feel good because you destroyed something of high value they had. You will miss the fact that it wasn't the learning implants that affected your gameplay, but the value of those implants. If we set the value to 0 they would have little to no effect at all. Learning implants are still not a meaningful choice.

Clone grades were a choice between losing isk or losing SP. That is a terrible choice to make. CCP rightly removed clone grades from the game because of the poor choice they presented, among other things. Learning implants are the exact same choice that was presented in clone grades: lose isk or lose SP. Imagine there was a third choice added. This third choice is a "no change" choice. So if I offered you the choice between losing your isk, losing your SP, and doing nothing and losing nothing. A majority of people would chose to lose nothing. That may seem a little extreme, but the point is that anytime where the choice of "do nothing and lose nothing" is the best choice it should be altered to not be the best choice. In fact the do nothing choice became the only option for clone grades and people rejoiced because a terrible choice was removed.

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. People should be out enjoying the game, creating content for themselves and others. It isn't hard to see that removing learning implants will get more people out into space and doing things in space. One of the biggest arguments to removing clone grades, argued mainly by nullsec and lowsec PvPers, was that a 15+ mil isk clone was enough to get people to not fly small ships. It isn't hard to see why 40 mil isk in two +4 implants is discouraging PvP just as much as clone grades were.

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? I will argue that it would be better off. A meaningless and terrible choice is no longer present, more people are out doing risky activities while gaining the max SP/hour they can, and more content is generated. There are surprisingly minimal costs to removing learning implants. We lost a few LP store items. I am sure CCP can fix that. Other than that... it is all gains. (feel free to let me know if I missed costs.)

The bottom line is that Eve will be better off if learning implants are removed. I hope CCP can see that removing learning implants is really in the best interest of the game. I ask players that agree to speak to their CSM representatives and get them to urge CCP to remove learning implants.

I resemble that remark....

However, I'm currently sitting in station in a set of +5s while I add a few high-level skills (dreads, cap guns mostly).
I can see why CCP would do this, and I'm fine with it. Not having an option would mean I'd be in null, enjoying myself, instead of sitting in station for a few weeks to get the skills done a week or more earlier.

If the options were the same as with learning implants today, what could we plug in instead of the learning skills? I dont recall being able to use slave skills to improve the armor of my ship, at the cost of any learning skills. The learning implants are nothing like the learning skills and im sick of everybody saying theyre identical.

I cant grasp why you cant have learnng implants and fly around, when i had +5s i undocked and got myself killed many a time. Hell, when you go out and pvp its really hard to lose a pod unless you hit either a bubble or a dedicated pod hunter. Even when you get caught out, a full set of 5s cost what? 600 mil? Easily replaced when your at the stage of using those implants.

You cant fix what isnt broken, i see nothing wrong with the current setup beyond "I hate choices"

A couple of years. IIRC, depending on how well your spec and your training queue line up.

I think



we've already



got



this.


Thank you for sharing your greater understanding of human psychology with us.

Hi I just wanted to give my opinion on this. I think skill training speed should be independent of implants - I do spend about 50 mill ISK on my pod (I have a complete set of +3's), and if the learning implants were removed, I would not. In fact this is the primary barrier to me risking my ship right now, and is why I stay in high-sec to mine and do missions.

I don't want to give up that edge on skill training. IMO the skill system is dumb - linking your character progress to an endless timer means whoever has the fastest timer wins. Lots of players would argue otherwise, but the fact is a 20 mil+ SP character fundamentally has more fun than a 2 mil SP character. If that wasn't the case, the character bazaar wouldn't exist - we wouldn't have any need for it.

So yes, if learning implants didn't exist, I would play the game differently.

What a pile of fluff. I wouldn't fly something worth more than maybe 5 mil into low/nul. A T1 fit frigate or cruiser would work fine. Actually I have done this before, and got by butt handed to me. It wasn't the loss of the ship that hurt, it was the loss of my implants which were far more expensive.

You don't know anything about me, so I would appreciate it if you didn't tell me what I would or would not do.

Depends on the camp and what are you flying, also are you expecting to see a camp on every gate or something.

Low-sec isn't that much dangerous than hig-sec if you know what you are doing.

Not "needing" something is not the same as saying that not using them won't impair your competitiveness and that you will definitely won't lose the only arms race that matters: sp.

People saying sp doesn't matter don't seem to recall the early days. Yeah you can take a catalyst out and gank a freighter or maybe a cruiser if you know what you're doing... but when you're new and stupid you will get murdered because you are playing chicken against luck of the draw on who you fight. This is a game where it actively punishes you for upsizing your ship.

This is a game where frigates do 80% of the dps of some cruisers despite being 10% of the cost. This is a game where you plateau in effectiveness eventually but not before being 37.5% better at the same job as someone just starting out. For any player in the game who doesn't spend every second of every day flying around in wormholes on combat duty the only logical answer is to have 1 clone with a set of +5 inside.

That's not risk vs reward, that's called sound business strategy.

Okay. That's false equivalence really since many ships and items require rank 5 in something.

For reference my skill queue dropped from somethig crazy like 680 days to 471d when going from 0 - +5. Cutting half a year off your training time is a measurable advantage for any person or group who doesn't need generalists. Infact during those early days the gains from rank 5ing the important skills would be so much more important as to say again don't not have a training clone unless you live in wormholes.

Oh I remember the early days. Getting killed by rats in my blackbird because of my shitfit (I also was highly dissapointed in the look of the ship as I thought the picturecard was of the ships side on view), the joy our corp had when I got a mining barge, swapping from caldari to amarr because "lazors look perdy".

I also know that new players are viable in pvp from 30 minutes old and are far more bloodtursty than players who decide to wait six months before they try PvP.

Then stick in the cheapest +4 pirate set you can find and don't worry about it. There are already plenty of high-grades on the market cheaper than the current gen +5's.

The point is to normalize the implant curve so that there is never a reason not to have combat implants so absolutely no one is ever "stuck" in a +5 learning clone and no one is tempted to burn a JC cool down just to get back to their +5 clone. Everyone caps out at +4, period, which leaves more people in combat sets more of the time. There are already way too many excuses for people to stay docked; we don't need to keep this one.

Further, the differential from newbie training to vet training because of implants and remaps is precisely what needs to be narrowed. The way to do that is to get rid of remaps completely and condense the benefit of implants into a smaller range. All attrs at, say, 25 base with a range of +2 to +4 on the implants gives everyone a much more balanced training curve. You still get the excitement and benefit of improving your character a bit when you buy your first set of +4's or whatever (good new player goal) but it's not so drastic as to be crippling when you don't have it.

But I guess, fundamentally, what I'm saying is that, yes, the "playstyle" that dictates training is a gameplay facet that should be balanced against doing fun stuff with your character is essentially flawed and should be removed. So if that is your playstyle I'm 100% for nerfing it into the ground. No one, vets and newbs alike, should have to make a serious long-term choice between "having fun with a character" and "training the character optimally". That's exactly why the entire set of learning skills were removed in the first place. The ability to train your character should not be interfering with the ability to play the game.

Attribute implants are just as stupid as learning skills and likewise should be removed. Everyone should be able to train at the same speed and have the freedom to do so regardless.

Right now my main is stuck in highsec instead of me having some pew pew fun in lowsec just because of my attribute implants. I just came back to the game after being away for 3 years I need to train skills but I don't want to keep coughing up millions on attribute implants. Right now I'm forced to carebare or sit docked at my station spinning my ship. This was part of the reason why I left in the first place!

Come on CCP don't talk about it do it! I have complete faith in you it's for the good of the game.

I'll answer the question, since I feel about the same, only I would probably wear cheap hardwires and maybe have a more expensive hardwire jump clone.

On my main and primary alt I run a set of +4s I would like to get to +5s once I feel I could afford them. I am only 6-7 months into the game and skill points are what open most new content for me. New ships to fly, new modules, new fits all come sooner with training implants.
But I am not rich so I don't want to risk my implants on a regular basis in risky behavior. So I got my rep with 2 corps up to 8 to use jump clones. Then I realized that I didn't want to be in a clone earning less SP for 19hrs minimum; just to enjoy my low/null/WH activities more.
I still go for pve, but less often than I would if I didn't have a set of 4s in. And when I do go I am much more paranoid and avoid as much risk as possible. Making my play time less enjoyable.

If there were no learning implants I would take more risks and I would be okay with having jump clones with hardwired skill implants that I might be locked out of for a day. But I don't feel the same way about being without learning implants. If I logout in a non learning clone then I have to log back in at some point just to jump back. Where as if there were no training implants it would not matter when I HAD to log back in next.

If there were no training implants I would mess around with cheap ships in PvP.

If there were no training implants I would spend more time in dangerous space enjoying the game instead of constantly looking over my shoulder.

Wanting to maximize my training progress has made me risk averse. I still take some risks, but I know if there was a change to let me maximize training without risk, I would be willing to take more risks.

I started playing with learning skills and as such I spent the majority of my first 3 months training those up. As such I was rather gimped. Why? Because I wanted to learn to how to train things more quickly. At the same time, I also did neural remaps to speed up my time along with +4 implants. However, I truly cared how quickly I trained things because I wanted to get right into it.

Most of my friends who started playing within the last two years don't particularly care for remaps. They simply put in +4/+5 implant sets, set themselves to the most "balanced" attribute system and carry on their day so they can train what they wish at a penalty. However, they also don't really plan ahead. They train things partially and swap skills out based on what they need right then and there. Hell, I end up making some of their skill queues for them because they can't be bothered to make a skill queue that far ahead. Granted, I love making massive skill queues and have personally started working on my "10 year plan" which encompasses every skill I should train since I'm out of skills I *want* to train.

While I am a fan of the remap system because of how quickly you can train up "spec'd" skills (assuming you plan far enough ahead), it really does penalize new players who needs to train up 5, 6, or even more different attribute combinations. The younger players are never truly gaining benefits from the attribute system until after 2+ years when they have found their niche and the skill attributes to go along with it. I would still object to the removal of the attribute system because I feel it is an integral portion of the game, especially for skill training. One must plan ahead in order to gain the most benefits from skill training.

On the other hand, I support the removal of the attribute system because it allows players to train as they wish and enjoy the game. There truly is not a good answer for this and I look forward to further discussions with actual metrics as well as new ideas to replace this system.

Implants offer about a third of the benefit of remaps. The difference between +5 implants and no implants will still typically cut a month off a year of training. I wouldn't call a little under 10% a "tiny" proportion, but it's not overwhelming either.

Regarding the economic and LP implications of the idea of removing learning implants, just wanted to reinforce that this is a very significant concern that's known to the developers on the team and that they wouldn't do it without satisfying themselves that they have a solid answer for that concern.

Finally, thanks to everyone who's posting here for carrying on a substantive and constructive discussion about the idea. That kind of tone makes it a lot easier for game designers to understand and think about everyone's arguments either way, and we appreciate the thought and time everyone's brought to this.

Another idea could be:

- remove attributes and remaps, give everyone a flat training speed

- change attribute implants to just be implants that give a bonus to training speed

- have ships give training speed bonus to the skills that are listed in their "recommended certificates" page when UNDOCKED and FLYING said ships, call it "hands-on training."

This way you can either sit in station and rely on your +5 implants, or undock and rely on your ship to give you equivalent training speed bonus as you fly it, or combine the two for even faster training but if you lose the implants that's risk vs. reward.

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.

Looks like grasping at straws, throwing out any excuse whatsoever to justify removing attribute implants when the real reason is money..

The biggest reason why players no longer log into the game is the skill queue. Basically allowing long term uninterrupted skill training which encourages players to do repeating yearly subscriptions.

The removal of attribute implants turns skill training plans into a longer time sink, thus generating more income over time.

Seems we're back to the ole 'Greed Is Good' mentality again, just another way of squeezing more money out of 'The Golden Goose'.

DMC