Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 28 post(s) |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
35
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 21:14:20 -
[331] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Elenahina wrote:Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: Soon, we will all be the same, which will create outcry to 'let us be different', which will create need for a cash shop to sell 30 day SP boosters.
You shut your ***** mouth. NEVARRR!!! AUR for golden ammo! AUR for 30day SP booster! AUR for Lvl 90 Panda Warrior! AUR for T4 Super Star Destroyer! Whole System Mega-Doomsdays now on sale only 8000 AUR! Platinum level Uber-barges for 12000, now includes Ultra-ORE strip miners for 2000% yield! 120000 AUR pants! Want a titan, and don't want to train for one? Fly a titan on day one with the new 120mil SP bundle, comes Titan of your choice with 30 day highsec capital use certificate! Do what you want with the 15day CONCORD BRIBE pass! Let the Pandaverse reign supreme!
I have to admit, I laughed out loud at this. <3 u UAE. You know, in a bro-no-homo kind of way. |
Wadaya
Trailerpark Industries
22
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 21:21:37 -
[332] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:No that's not what most people did, stop inventing statistics unless you have some sort of proof. Most people sat in station for 2 months to learn learning skills.
You're as bad as the guy who's telling us what people, and especially WE, will and will not do if there's a change.
link |
Chaotix Morwen
Ugly Duckling Inc
23
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 22:04:01 -
[333] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:No that's not what most people did, stop inventing statistics unless you have some sort of proof. Most people sat in station for 2 months to learn learning skills.
You're as bad as the guy who's telling us what people, and especially WE, will and will not do if there's a change.
Are you familiar with the term hypocrisy? Can you provide proof that the majority of Eve players sat in a station whilst they trained the learning skills instead of out flying? |
Logan Revelore
Symbiotic Systems
42
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 22:44:27 -
[334] - Quote
Removing attribute boosting implants I can go along with, will free up those slots for more defining boosts. But I believe we should keep the current attribute system with the remap functionality.
Reward players for dedicating their training time to specific areas, if anything consider rebalancing the stat distribution on skills. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1884
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 23:04:50 -
[335] - Quote
Logan Revelore wrote:Removing attribute boosting implants I can go along with, will free up those slots for more defining boosts. But I believe we should keep the current attribute system with the remap functionality.
Reward players for dedicating their training time to specific areas, if anything consider rebalancing the stat distribution on skills. Remaps heavily favour alts, as newbies who need to actually play the character instantly and not wait six months or a year have to train across a high range of skills. (as do implants as well of course, but hey). Remapping also creates the environment where 'I need to wait for a remap to train that skill optimally, so right now I can't do what I want'. Argue over 'need/want' division all you want, but anyone with at least half a brain can see that it does create that effect, and arguments that it's just a want are just derailing it in order to keep the status quo. |
Logan Revelore
Symbiotic Systems
42
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 23:25:16 -
[336] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Logan Revelore wrote:Removing attribute boosting implants I can go along with, will free up those slots for more defining boosts. But I believe we should keep the current attribute system with the remap functionality.
Reward players for dedicating their training time to specific areas, if anything consider rebalancing the stat distribution on skills. Remaps heavily favour alts, as newbies who need to actually play the character instantly and not wait six months or a year have to train across a high range of skills. (as do implants as well of course, but hey). Remapping also creates the environment where 'I need to wait for a remap to train that skill optimally, so right now I can't do what I want'. Argue over 'need/want' division all you want, but anyone with at least half a brain can see that it does create that effect, and arguments that it's just a want are just derailing it in order to keep the status quo.
You are correct in your analysis, I however don't believe the gains of removing the attribute system are worth it. It would be removing what I feel is an important choice a player has to make.
Noone ever died from training below 2700 SP/hour. The newbies that stay in the game will cope, and the ones that leave over this would've found some other reason to leave anyway. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1884
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 00:07:30 -
[337] - Quote
Logan Revelore wrote: You are correct in your analysis, I however don't believe the gains of removing the attribute system are worth it. It would be removing what I feel is an important choice a player has to make.
Noone ever died from training below 2700 SP/hour. The newbies that stay in the game will cope, and the ones that leave over this would've found some other reason to leave anyway.
In a binary world, you would be right, however we are not in a binary world, but the complete spectrum of grey from white to black. And on that spectrum, changes such as this will catch some people who otherwise would have left. I imagine most of those caught will be the smarter ones also who would have left because they understood that the current system actually benefits the old & rich. While the proposed newer system is simply flat.
Does it remove a tiny element of choice, maybe, but that element of choice is not part of the undocked gameplay, but part of the docked gameplay. And we should be focusing on making choices while undocked, not making all your choices before you undock and knowing things are set in stone after that.
So, to me, this thought of CCP is a step in the right direction for two reasons, as it removes a biased system that still has elements of the learning skills (PS, there is a 'slave set' skill, it's called Hull Upgrades, so the comparison between learning implants and slave implants is exactly like learning skills vs hull upgrades), and moves the focus more onto game play decisions made while in space. |
Chaotix Morwen
Ugly Duckling Inc
23
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 00:18:33 -
[338] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: (PS, there is a 'slave set' skill, it's called Hull Upgrades, so the comparison between learning implants and slave implants is exactly like learning skills vs hull upgrades).
Ahh so the "Hull upgrades" skill could not be used if you trained learning skills, oh wait it could be used as well as the learning skills, thus it is nothing like learning implants vs slave implants. |
Seven Koskanaiken
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1396
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 00:37:01 -
[339] - Quote
LordZer00 wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
The argument presented is a logical fallacy
We've already gone down the slope. The slope is a distant memory. We are now in the lodge ordering dinner and drinks. |
Black Dranzer
398
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 02:49:39 -
[340] - Quote
Fun fact: Learning skills were removed almost exactly 4 years ago. This was a significant event in the history of Eve, because it marked a turning point where the game did not change in any relevant way whatsoever and things continued to proceed exactly as they always did, except things were perhaps slightly better.
Walking in Stations as a Social Hub: Business vs Pleasure in Incarna
|
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
4472
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 03:31:22 -
[341] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:I cant find the math I believe someone has posted it. How long does it take to gain a net benefit to training speed from using +5 over +4's considering +5's take cybernetics 5.
A long time, unless you train Cybernetics 5 for other reasons (mindlinks, for example) and thus get +5s as a 'free' bonus.
Chaos. Opportunity. Destruction. Excitement... Vote #1 Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14686
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 05:25:29 -
[342] - Quote
UberFly wrote:Syn Shi wrote:Get isk and buy a character in the bizarre with the skills already trained. There is a solution.
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.
Thats not the implants fault its yours. I too am training up dread skills but rather than not play the game I am having fun.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
197
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 05:30:06 -
[343] - Quote
Viewpoint of a vet:
My characters attributes points are something I forgot even existed. The last time attribute points were even considered was the few minutes of rolling a new character for Planetary Interaction years ago, and even then the attributes were spread evenly across all attributes if I remember correctly. Giving starting characters all of the same starting attribute points would not adversely affect any game play that I am aware of.
Thinking about implants that affect the speed your character trains skills though is a different matter. People always want a way to speed up whatever it is they are doing. Having a modifier that a character can purchase in game is desirable, especially by young pilots.
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 **
When it comes to PvP, I am like a chiwawa hanging from a grizzley bears pair of wrinklies for dear life.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
979
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 08:40:45 -
[344] - Quote
Olleybear wrote: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 **
The issue is that learning speed implants are pay2advance (which is fine) but combat implants are pay2win. The majority of people (even most older players) are "lured in" by the training speed ones so they're not using their isk and slots on combat enhancers. If you remove that lure, that option, then a majority will choose combat implants which turns the game into pay2win, massively skewed towards established players and groups.
A newer pilot who lacks the income won't be able to compete with older players who (without other options) will have 10 slots of combat implants, especially if CCP would add some new ones. This idea is NOT helping new players and is NOT helping the "average Joe" compete, it's only helping the rich & established players and alliances and turns the game more P2W. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
69
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 10:01:00 -
[345] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Olleybear wrote: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 ** The issue is that learning speed implants are pay2advance (which is fine) but combat implants are pay2win. The majority of people (even most older players) are "lured in" by the training speed ones so they're not using their isk and slots on combat enhancers. If you remove that lure, that option, then a majority will choose combat implants which turns the game into pay2win, massively skewed towards established players and groups. A newer pilot who lacks the income won't be able to compete with older players who (without other options) will have 10 slots of combat implants, especially if CCP would add some new ones. This idea is NOT helping new players and is NOT helping the "average Joe" compete, it's only helping the rich & established players and alliances and turns the game more P2W.
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.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
980
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 10:09:48 -
[346] - Quote
Leannor wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Olleybear wrote: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 ** The issue is that learning speed implants are pay2advance (which is fine) but combat implants are pay2win. The majority of people (even most older players) are "lured in" by the training speed ones so they're not using their isk and slots on combat enhancers. If you remove that lure, that option, then a majority will choose combat implants which turns the game into pay2win, massively skewed towards established players and groups. A newer pilot who lacks the income won't be able to compete with older players who (without other options) will have 10 slots of combat implants, especially if CCP would add some new ones. This idea is NOT helping new players and is NOT helping the "average Joe" compete, it's only helping the rich & established players and alliances and turns the game more P2W. 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.
Because they already have enough advantages and it doesn't help the game. If you want new blood in your game, 0.0 and whatnot (because the current establishment is boring and stagnant) the last thing you should do is skew the balance MORE towards older players. I realise that it's difficult for people to not be hypocrites so I'm not surprised you made that post. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
69
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 10:21:39 -
[347] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Leannor wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Olleybear wrote: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 ** The issue is that learning speed implants are pay2advance (which is fine) but combat implants are pay2win. The majority of people (even most older players) are "lured in" by the training speed ones so they're not using their isk and slots on combat enhancers. If you remove that lure, that option, then a majority will choose combat implants which turns the game into pay2win, massively skewed towards established players and groups. A newer pilot who lacks the income won't be able to compete with older players who (without other options) will have 10 slots of combat implants, especially if CCP would add some new ones. This idea is NOT helping new players and is NOT helping the "average Joe" compete, it's only helping the rich & established players and alliances and turns the game more P2W. 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. Because they already have enough advantages and it doesn't help the game. If you want new blood in your game, 0.0 and whatnot (because the current establishment is boring and stagnant) the last thing you should do is skew the balance MORE towards older players. I realise that it's difficult for people to not be hypocrites so I'm not surprised you made that post.
by that l;ogic we should not have any T2 stuff either, as only the older players can use Paladins wioth T2 guns because they have more SP and time in the game.
Your logic is flawed.
Implants (all 10) are just another tool you can choose to use at a cost, or not.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
69
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 10:26:27 -
[348] - Quote
in fact, if pay to win is what you're on about, we should ban all faction ships which are uber, and mega expensive too. Because new players can't access them due to money, even though they have the skills.
Bye bye rattlesnake, bye bye navy apoc, ...
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
980
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 11:05:46 -
[349] - Quote
Your sperg posting shows a lot tbh.
Which part of "they already have enough advantages, lets not make it MORE skewed" don't you get? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14690
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 11:13:01 -
[350] - Quote
Leannor wrote:in fact, if pay to win is what you're on about, we should ban all faction ships which are uber, and mega expensive too. Because new players can't access them due to money, even though they have the skills.
Bye bye rattlesnake, bye bye navy apoc, ...
Why stop there? Anything over the ibis and its fittings should be removed too.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
TigerXtrm
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
1011
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 12:26:39 -
[351] - Quote
Leannor wrote: by that l;ogic we should not have any T2 stuff either, as only the older players can use Paladins wioth T2 guns because they have more SP and time in the game.
Your logic is flawed.
Implants (all 10) are just another tool you can choose to use at a cost, or not.
Please don't compare ships and modules that have plenty of alternatives to implants that have no alternatives. When push comes to shove a couple of players can gang up on a Paladin in cheap T1 ships and pound it into the ground. A couple of players can not come together to collectively boost their attributes permanently with +5 points.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
121
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 13:39:06 -
[352] - Quote
Commentus Nolen wrote:Why don't you wait and see what they are proposing. I've seen enough. I've seen how they removed "unnecessary difficulty" out of probing. Now I can scan literally everything in a ceptor. I've seen how they removed medical clones, which a) destroyed any gameplay around stations with and without cloning bay and b) suppressed the motivation to kill pods, because in many cases you just make a favor to your opponent (he can reship faster). I've seen how they removed production and research slots. Before, I should have searched for slots in a dangerous space, or built my POS (in a dangerous space too, because highsec POS was a myth). Now, I run research jobs next door to Jita. Teams? Didnt want them anyway. They removed unique Rorqual feature too. Instead of reworking it, they create confessors.
Every time they remove a feature that does actually WORK, they make the game less interesting. Arguably, reducing the game difficulty they increase their potential client base, but I dont see any boost in logged in accounts, so...
I know what they are going to propose. "We are removing attributes, because it is confusing for new players and they quit after realizing they wasted all their remaps (or after being podded by suicide ganker). We will give you something instead, the brand new clone machanics, where clones are manufactured by players, it would be awesome. And it will come Soon (TM), in about 5 years (or 10), so stay tuned!" |
Soltys
9
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 15:34:30 -
[353] - Quote
Celgar Thurn wrote:Apparently CCP/ the CSM are debating removing attribute points and the learning implants from the game. I would like to raise the following issues with this possible action:
1) This idea seems to remove an additional element of risk to undocking in New Eden. I along with probably a lot of capsuleers do not like it when they are podded and have to replace implants & hardwiring but it is a part of the game. This idea follows the recent removal of medical clones which arguably was a good idea but I don't think we needed to go further than that change.
Good idea: rebalance costs vs. sp amount of medical clones Bad idea: remove everything ! (that's what you did CCP)
What's wrong with attributes and remap points ? If there're people dumb to the point they can't comprehend it, then make "Aura" explain it properly.
Up to level 3, in most cases level 4 and quite a few cases level 5 skills (such as rank 1 - 3 skills) - attribute implants and remappings are almost meaningless - especially that people will be training skills from very different areas.
How can even anyone find it confusing ? |
bloodknight2
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
343
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 15:58:22 -
[354] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:No that's not what most people did, stop inventing statistics unless you have some sort of proof. Most people sat in station for 2 months to learn learning skills.
You're as bad as the guy who's telling us what people, and especially WE, will and will not do if there's a change.
What wadaya said was true. The first 4-5 weeks were used to train basic skills then, 1-2 weeks were used to train learning skill (usually up to lv 3-4. Rarely lv5, because, if i remember well, they were 14 days long for +1 attribute), then we were back learning the basic skills. We did NOT sat in a station for 2 months like you think (and do...). One of my alt was in a NPC corp almost all his life (has almost 85m SP now) and sorry, but i do remember reading a lot of new players who were doing lv1 missions, ratting in belt, mining with a frigate and were training the learning skill to 3-4 before going for cruiser and med guns. I'm sure i was in a BS before having the learning skill to 4.
The learning skills weren't giving a huge boost and so, learning them right away was stupid anyway. It takes 89d for a new character to learn every skills needed for dreadnought lv1. 71 days with +5 implant, 74 days with +4 and 77 days with +3 (what i almost always used). 18 days less if we had all learning skill to 5...(and a single learning skill to 5 was taking 14-16 days).
Just because you sat in a station for 2 months for training the learning skill doesn't mean all eve players did (ie : stop inventing statistics...). |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
71
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 16:32:04 -
[355] - Quote
Soltys wrote:Celgar Thurn wrote:Apparently CCP/ the CSM are debating removing attribute points and the learning implants from the game. I would like to raise the following issues with this possible action:
1) This idea seems to remove an additional element of risk to undocking in New Eden. I along with probably a lot of capsuleers do not like it when they are podded and have to replace implants & hardwiring but it is a part of the game. This idea follows the recent removal of medical clones which arguably was a good idea but I don't think we needed to go further than that change. Good idea: rebalance costs vs. sp amount of medical clones Bad idea: remove everything ! (that's what you did CCP) What's wrong with attributes and remap points ? If there're people dumb to the point they can't comprehend it, then make "Aura" explain it properly. Up to level 3, in most cases level 4 and quite a few cases level 5 skills (such as rank 1 - 3 skills) - attribute implants and remappings are almost meaningless - especially that people will be training skills from very different areas. How can even anyone find it confusing ?
I hate to say it, but is this finally the americanisation effect? Dumbing it down so the mythical stupid can play it? If so, ... they're mythical. Don't dumb it down. If you do, you remove what attracted people to the game. The complexity of EVE is it's biggest virtue.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
71
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 16:33:57 -
[356] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Commentus Nolen wrote:Why don't you wait and see what they are proposing. I've seen enough. I've seen how they removed "unnecessary difficulty" out of probing. Now I can scan literally everything in a ceptor. I've seen how they removed medical clones, which a) destroyed any gameplay around stations with and without cloning bay and b) suppressed the motivation to kill pods, because in many cases you just make a favor to your opponent (he can reship faster). I've seen how they removed production and research slots. Before, I should have searched for slots in a dangerous space, or built my POS (in a dangerous space too, because highsec POS was a myth). Now, I run research jobs next door to Jita. Teams? Didnt want them anyway. They removed unique Rorqual feature too. Instead of reworking it, they create confessors. Every time they remove a feature that does actually WORK, they make the game less interesting. Arguably, reducing the game difficulty they increase their potential client base, but I dont see any boost in logged in accounts, so... I know what they are going to propose. "We are removing attributes, because it is confusing for new players and they quit after realizing they wasted all their remaps (or after being podded by suicide ganker). We will give you something instead, the brand new clone machanics, where clones are manufactured by players, it would be awesome. And it will come Soon (TM), in about 5 years (or 10), so stay tuned!"
don't forget they remove things the work ... and then introduce stupid stuff like 'teams' that don't work.
They really should listen to the saying 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it!'. If you want to fix something? Fix the PI animation which has been bugged for years, that should keep you quiet for a while, and do something useful for a change!
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
71
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 16:34:44 -
[357] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Leannor wrote:in fact, if pay to win is what you're on about, we should ban all faction ships which are uber, and mega expensive too. Because new players can't access them due to money, even though they have the skills.
Bye bye rattlesnake, bye bye navy apoc, ... Why stop there? Anything over the ibis and its fittings should be removed too.
E-freeking-xactly.
Thankyou. :)
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
71
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 16:36:31 -
[358] - Quote
TigerXtrm wrote:Leannor wrote: by that l;ogic we should not have any T2 stuff either, as only the older players can use Paladins wioth T2 guns because they have more SP and time in the game.
Your logic is flawed.
Implants (all 10) are just another tool you can choose to use at a cost, or not.
Please don't compare ships and modules that have plenty of alternatives to implants that have no alternatives. When push comes to shove a couple of players can gang up on a Paladin in cheap T1 ships and pound it into the ground. A couple of players can not come together to collectively boost their attributes permanently with +5 points.
you do realise that there are grades of implants, right?
cheap ones, that are plus 1, more expensive that are plus five, mega expensive ones that have extras, ... then there are the T2 varieties ...
there is a massive range ... that people progress along ... "just like everything else in the game" ...
Ie, there is a very good reason why i compared them to ships. the comparison is valid.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
71
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 16:41:06 -
[359] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Leannor wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Olleybear wrote: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 ** The issue is that learning speed implants are pay2advance (which is fine) but combat implants are pay2win. The majority of people (even most older players) are "lured in" by the training speed ones so they're not using their isk and slots on combat enhancers. If you remove that lure, that option, then a majority will choose combat implants which turns the game into pay2win, massively skewed towards established players and groups. A newer pilot who lacks the income won't be able to compete with older players who (without other options) will have 10 slots of combat implants, especially if CCP would add some new ones. This idea is NOT helping new players and is NOT helping the "average Joe" compete, it's only helping the rich & established players and alliances and turns the game more P2W. 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. Because they already have enough advantages and it doesn't help the game. If you want new blood in your game, 0.0 and whatnot (because the current establishment is boring and stagnant) the last thing you should do is skew the balance MORE towards older players. I realise that it's difficult for people to not be hypocrites so I'm not surprised you made that post.
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.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
197
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 16:52:52 -
[360] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote: The issue is that learning speed implants are pay2advance (which is fine) but combat implants are pay2win. ... If you remove that lure, that option, then a majority will choose combat implants which turns the game into pay2win, massively skewed towards established players and groups.
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.
When it comes to PvP, I am like a chiwawa hanging from a grizzley bears pair of wrinklies for dear life.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |