| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 28 post(s) |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
2
   |
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:30:26 -
[1] - Quote
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. |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:51:41 -
[2] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Sounds like "it would favour me personally if they got removed". Are you using learning plants as you pvp?
Depending on how they were removed it may or may not benefit me personally. Can't speculate on what CCP would do if they did remove them.
And I sometimes do. Whether I have them in or not is usually more dependent on whether I can be bothered or remember to go buy them. At the moment I am not using any implants at all as I keep accidentally destroying clones during clone jump despite the warning box. |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:09:10 -
[3] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dave Stark wrote:and we're back to "i had to endure a bad system, so do new players".
that's really not a good justification for keeping a bad system. Not at all, it's a "for people who are willing to put in extra effort, planning and/or risk there's a 5% training bonus. For everyone who can't be bothered there isn't". People make it seem as if 2700sp/h is the base number somehow. It's not, it's the ideal number which is something entirely different. 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. |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
3
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:15:41 -
[4] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Tia Aves wrote: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. Your logic is hilariously dumb.
Sorry man there isn't even any logic attempted in your posts so I'm not going to put the effort into constructing a reply any longer than this one. |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:30:57 -
[5] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dave Stark wrote: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? What does ship loss achieve? Or losing access to a station with your stuff just because the new owners aren't your friends. What does allowing high sec ganking achieve? What does not having local in WH achieve? Those are all arbitrary game play/mechanic choices made by CCP which could easily be changed by following the "it would just be easier" logic.
These things are all mechanics which make the game more varied and interesting and therefore fun (yes even losing access to a station can provoke some diplomatic gameplay and promote interaction). Learning implants and remaps do not make the game more varied, interesting or fun. |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 13:04:09 -
[6] - Quote
Commander Spurty wrote:You guys keep talking about RISK, but really now .. is there 'RISK' in EVE any more or just 'Juicy Kill mails'? Honestly, EVE ONLINE was a lot more exciting when people cared about losing their stuff as it was hard to replace and not about being on the wrong side of a killmail. If you want to reintroduce RISK to the game, TAX all players on their assets. Got 999 Ships in your station? You got yourself 999 TAX bills to pay. Don't worry, you wont go into a negative wallet, CONCORD or some NPC will just remove your assets. True ISK Sink set. Why a TAX bill? Law of the game i suppose (if you needed a reason, this should do). Crews need feeding and paying (unless you're Amarr, I guess) Crews? But I'm a mighty pod pilot, I don't need no stinking crew! Am I making this all up? Nope. Quote:Finally, the solution evolved from the stationary defenses of all things. The Gallenteans
had employed mines for a long time with so-so results, but with the massive advances in
robotics technology taking place at this time the mines were slowly transformed into a
far deadlier object. The first drones were little more than mines with proximity
detonators and some limited moving capabilities, but soon they had advanced to the
level that a single drone almost rivaled a solo-fighterGÇÖs capabilities. The fact that drones
were many times cheaper to build than fighters and didnGÇÖt require a highly trained pilot
meant that the days of the solo-fighters were numbered. The drones reversed the tide
of the war and now the Caldari were scrambling to come up with a solution against
these new weapons. It didnGÇÖt take them that long - they simply upgraded their fighters a
bit, added some shields and extra weapons and called the new vessels frigates. Some
extra crew was also needed at first, but then the Caldari obtained capsule technology
from the Jovians some years later and could again reduce the crew to one on most
frigates. - you need more then one person to pilot just a frigate, it soon ramps up (and fast) as you go up ship sizes. - citation needed .. er http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/0911/Chronicals.pdf
so TL;DR = RISK needs to be buffed, we have too many assets nullifying Risk. Strip excess ISK and Assets by TAXATION and remove the inhibitors to RISK. Now, lets see who balks at this as all they really want is one of those 'juicy killmails'. I'm guessing you really weren't after risk at all you little liars!
This is the thread about learning implants and attributes buddy I think you must of got lost somewhere on the way here.
|
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
7
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:22:58 -
[7] - Quote
Deacon Abox wrote:Go ahead and take away something that made the game interesting and enjoyable for many of your players. Players that stayed many years through horrible balancing such as the 3 year Drake era, the Acura attribute advantage, etc. You will lose many of those veteran players by dumbing down the game. But I suppose you think you will gain more new players. Hope they stick around for you.
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.
|
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
8
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:31:55 -
[8] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:If there's a play style that you personally don't like and actually is kinda detrimental to your own play style choices, would you want that removed?
No? I don't really understand how your question is related to the thread topic. |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
8
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:40:03 -
[9] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Tia, just so you know, I'm not sure why you're being grilled for wanting a change that makes your gameplay better.
Yeah I know, and I feel like I have a pretty open mind about it to be honest. Although i'm generally for removal personally as I think it would be beneficial to the game as a whole i'd like to say that:
- My alt is training caps and is full Per/Wil mapped with +5's in, if CCP were to remove implants and attributes and give us a intermediate rate then I would lose out. I think CCP settling on an intermediate rate is much more likely than giving us the max rate.
- Generally in the last couple of months I have killed a lot more pods than I have lost. Removing learning implants would no doubt be detrimental to my KB.
So its not like its just me fighting for whatever is going to benefit me most. |
| |
|