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) |
Celgar Thurn
Department 10
155
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 16:47:57 -
[1] - Quote
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.
2) This change would be another kick in the pants to the missions system, mission/LP revenue and various career sub-options such as selling ore for storyline missions etc. I would argue that too many revenue ideas have been removed or made uneconomic already.
3) I feel this is another case of dumbing down of the game. Are we eventually going to get to a point where EVE Online is like many other MMOs where items are just collected within the game and nothing gets destroyed ?
I invite comments and ask whether people feel the attribute point & implants are a nice complication within the game or whether we should throw the baby out with the bathwater. |
Dradis Aulmais
By Light and Banner's Fallen
661
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 16:57:54 -
[2] - Quote
In before the lock
CSM 10: Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle, Jenshae chrioptera
Do No Vote For: Tora Bushido, Bobmon
|
Sharise Dragonstar
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
29
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 16:59:31 -
[3] - Quote
Although I don't personally like implants I agree with Celgar that it would be a bad implamentation. The medical clone change was fine. Eve needs risk to be Eve else it becomes just another run of the mill MMO.
|
Memphis Baas
78
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:01:13 -
[4] - Quote
My opinion is: of all the things that they can do to get people to PVP more even if they don't want to, it's not one of the worst.
I would undock more if there were no attribute implants to worry about. I would also train differently if all the skills trained at whatever max rate we have when properly remapped. And I'm a carebear, so the PVP'ers would have an increasingly target-rich environment.
Yes, the game is changing, and it remains to be seen whether it's ultimately for the good or the bad. CCP does go ahead and do whatever they want, so basically we can complain about changes but ultimately we can't really prevent them.
Quote: Eve needs risk to be Eve else it becomes just another run of the mill MMO.
Oh, it has a ways to go yet, considering that you don't lose your armor when you die in most current MMO's. |
Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1904
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:04:06 -
[5] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:I would undock more if there were no attribute implants to worry about. There's an easy way to achieve this right now.
At OP, tbh, I'm less interested in whether there is a good argument for removing implants/attributes, and more interested in how moronic an argument is actually being put forward.
You might be able to write a thesis on how the game would be better overall without them, but that would be irrelevant to whether or not "wah wah I'm afraid to lose implants" is a good argument (spoiler: it isn't).
Witty Image - Stream
Not Liking this post hurts my RL feelings and will be considered harassment
|
Memphis Baas
78
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:07:32 -
[6] - Quote
Yes there is, but like it or not, there is an advantage of keeping your implants, compared to going without them in your head. And there is a disadvantage too.
And what they're proposing is a buff, not a nerf. We get the effect of the implants, and we lose the boredom of sitting in station and can do whatever we want. |
Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1904
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:15:26 -
[7] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Yes there is, but like it or not, there is an advantage of keeping your implants, compared to going without them in your head. And there is a disadvantage too. Yes, I do like it. Since that's pretty much the entire basis of the game. If you take away the disadvantages of everything, there is no game left.
Memphis Baas wrote:And what they're proposing is a buff, not a nerf. We get the effect of the implants, and we lose the boredom of sitting in station and can do whatever we want. You can already do whatever you want. The only thing creating boredom is you.
Witty Image - Stream
Not Liking this post hurts my RL feelings and will be considered harassment
|
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:16:01 -
[8] - Quote
Why don't you wait and see what they are proposing.
Implants are not going away, in fact if they removed the learning boost and tweak the faction implants to make them more worthwhile to use at the higher levels would add more depth to the game.
Attaching skill learning speed to how much you can afford to pay just hurts the new player who does not have 10 Jump clones and billions of to work with.
Instead of stressing about the proposed change, why don't you give some ideals on how to make implants more valuable for players too want to use other then speeding up leaning. |
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
3653
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:22:23 -
[9] - Quote
I think the skill learning system serves two fundamental purposes:
1. Feed players content slowly (years) to keep them hooked
2. Favor character customization and differentiation
Attribute implants aren't really necessary for neither, so it doesn't matter much if they will be removed.
Make space glamorous!
Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
|
Orlacc
742
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:23:28 -
[10] - Quote
If what has been done to exploration is any example, I bet this happens. A lot of funds were wasted developing vaporware and the need for same is likely enormous. The orders are likely "get and retain new subs." At all costs.
And of course they are removing the mission refusal penalties for the "only PVE" crowd.
Oh well, I have seen other things I enjoy changed to the point where I stopped enjoying them. Sad though.
"Measure Twice, Cut Once."
|
|
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:27:47 -
[11] - Quote
Orlacc wrote:
And of course they are removing the mission refusal penalties for the "only PVE" crowd.
Please link. |
Memphis Baas
78
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:30:28 -
[12] - Quote
I don't own this game. All I have is a license to access this game's servers with its client. CCP doesn't owe me anything for being a player. Any time and effort I put in this game is a waste of my life.
Therefore CCP retains the right to change anything they want, including shutting down the servers for good when this becomes unprofitable, and they don't owe me anything.
Like any game.
|
Asura Vajrarupa
Anarchist Industrial Syndicate of Metropolis
24
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:33:23 -
[13] - Quote
Celgar Thurn wrote:This idea seems to remove an additional element of risk to undocking in New Eden.
But other types of implants will remain, so there is still risk. I would be fine with it if they added more implants that affected ships and ship combat, among the other things that non-learning implants affect.
I don't think this is dumbing down at all. I think this is more to the tune of moving away from oven mits chess.
Ignorance is the cause of suffering.
|
TigerXtrm
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
1004
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 17:39:22 -
[14] - Quote
I've never really liked attribute points. It adds an (in my opinion) unnecessary level of complexity to the skill system which is already pretty complex on its own. Unnecessary complexity doesn't make the game harder, it just makes it more annoying. And just like learning skills back in the day, having implants is not a question of having a choice. You either do it or you miss out. They work exactly the same as the learning skills, except the investment is ISK instead of time (sp). Learning skills were taken out for a reason, so I can't blame CCP for looking at attributes and going 'hmmmm, we should really do something about this'.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
15969
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 18:04:45 -
[15] - Quote
Crumplecorn wrote:Memphis Baas wrote:I would undock more if there were no attribute implants to worry about. There's an easy way to achieve this right now. At OP, tbh, I'm less interested in whether there is a good argument for removing implants/attributes, and more interested in how moronic an argument is actually being put forward. You might be able to write a thesis on how the game would be better overall without them, but that would be irrelevant to whether or not "wah wah I'm afraid to lose implants" is a good argument (spoiler: it isn't).
There is a false notion that the two proposals must be linked.
It is quite possible to believe, as I do, that attributes are bad and should be hated and that learning implants are still a viable concept.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=391378
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Snagletooth Johnson
Aliastra Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 18:55:23 -
[16] - Quote
This just in;
Space Panda's confirmed!
News at 11
|
Jandice Ymladris
Aurora Arcology
1295
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 19:21:37 -
[17] - Quote
From what I get, they're not removing the implants. What does seem likely is the removal of the attribute implants, making the usage of the non-attribute implants in slots 1 to 5 more viable & valuable.
One could of course claim you should have multiple clones, depending on the task you got them for, but ultimatly, this leads to people only having 2 clones at most, a PvP clone & a learning implant clone for everything else. Removal of the attribute implants could diversify the implants people use. Because right now, not using attribute implants doesn't make sense in most situations.
Gallente Presidential elections have begun!
Arek'Jaalan needs YOU!
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
61
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 19:45:54 -
[18] - 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.
2) This change would be another kick in the pants to the missions system, mission/LP revenue and various career sub-options such as selling ore for storyline missions etc. I would argue that too many revenue ideas have been removed or made uneconomic already.
3) I feel this is another case of dumbing down of the game. Are we eventually going to get to a point where EVE Online is like many other MMOs where items are just collected within the game and nothing gets destroyed ?
I invite comments and ask whether people feel the attribute point & implants are a nice complication within the game or whether we should throw the baby out with the bathwater. Removing attribute points and the learning implants from the game. Im For It !
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1729
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 19:48:42 -
[19] - Quote
Orlacc wrote:If what has been done to exploration is any example, I bet this happens. A lot of funds were wasted developing vaporware and the need for same is likely enormous. The orders are likely "get and retain new subs." At all costs.
And of course they are removing the mission refusal penalties for the "only PVE" crowd.
Oh well, I have seen other things I enjoy changed to the point where I stopped enjoying them. Sad though. Its going to be CU then NGE of SWG all over again |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6124
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 19:59:44 -
[20] - Quote
Jandice Ymladris wrote:From what I get, they're not removing the implants. What does seem likely is the removal of the attribute implants, making the usage of the non-attribute implants in slots 1 to 5 more viable & valuable.
One could of course claim you should have multiple clones, depending on the task you got them for, but ultimatly, this leads to people only having 2 clones at most, a PvP clone & a learning implant clone for everything else. Removal of the attribute implants could diversify the implants people use. Because right now, not using attribute implants doesn't make sense in most situations.
I was just thinking this when I read the OP. If some implants are removed, then that only frees up room for other implants.
We should not be surprised if the attribute modifiers get moved into other existing or new implants. That would mix things up a bit.
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
|
Hengle Teron
Just Another Corp XIV
34919
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 20:02:22 -
[21] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:My opinion is: of all the things that they can do to get people to PVP more even if they don't want to, it's not one of the worst. I would undock more if there were no attribute implants to worry about. I would also train differently if all the skills trained at whatever max rate we have when properly remapped. And I'm a carebear, so the PVP'ers would have an increasingly target-rich environment. Yes, the game is changing, and it remains to be seen whether it's ultimately for the good or the bad. CCP does go ahead and do whatever they want, so basically we can complain about changes but ultimately we can't really prevent them. Quote: Eve needs risk to be Eve else it becomes just another run of the mill MMO.
Oh, it has a ways to go yet, considering that you don't lose your armor when you die in most current MMO's. that's only your excuse
if they remove that risk you will find another excuse why to avoid pvp |
Orlacc
742
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 20:17:38 -
[22] - Quote
Commentus Nolen wrote:Orlacc wrote:
And of course they are removing the mission refusal penalties for the "only PVE" crowd.
Please link.
CSM meeting notes is where I think I saw it.
Being discussed. But I am sure it will be implemented sooner than later.
"Measure Twice, Cut Once."
|
BuckStrider
Nano-Tech Experiments
513
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 21:43:56 -
[23] - 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.
2) This change would be another kick in the pants to the missions system, mission/LP revenue and various career sub-options such as selling ore for storyline missions etc. I would argue that too many revenue ideas have been removed or made uneconomic already.
3) I feel this is another case of dumbing down of the game. Are we eventually going to get to a point where EVE Online is like many other MMOs where items are just collected within the game and nothing gets destroyed ?
I invite comments and ask whether people feel the attribute point & implants are a nice complication within the game or whether we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Miner please calm down.
Mine smart. Mine safe. Purchase your mining permit today...... www.minerbumping.com
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3717
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 22:41:19 -
[24] - Quote
I have removed a rule breaking post .
The Rules: 5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
571
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 23:32:33 -
[25] - Quote
Yes, remove attributes and attribute implants.
Also remove all other implants. Also remove boosts.
Then engaging a ship comes down to the ships, their fittings, and the players' skills, none of this additional garbage. |
Sugar Smacks
State War Academy Caldari State
30
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 23:55:28 -
[26] - Quote
I just dont see implants going anywhere personally.
Its this whole level of money that gets removed from the game constantly or as some call an isk sink.
Attribute points, well thats up to them, but lets hope they add something other than just taking away. |
Serene Repose
2128
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 00:30:59 -
[27] - Quote
Exaggerate much? Learning implants? Incentive to mission?? Did you strain hard to come up with this post?
Treason never prospers. What is the reason?
Why, if it prospers, none dare call it "treason."
|
Vyl Vit
1020
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 00:35:32 -
[28] - Quote
RUMOR...in the subject line....point of the OP...RUMOR...(bears repeating) RUMOR???
Okay. I'll say it. This move would be so radical and would flush so much investment by so many thousands of players down the toilet, that it may be wise to hold off on SPECULATION and RUMOR (there, I said it again). Should CCP be actually planning such a move, I think they'd run it past us first...like months in advance, just because of the SHOCK involved.
RUMOR? FORUM...RUMOR??
HINT HINT
Anyone with any sense has already left town.
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
494
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 01:56:57 -
[29] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote:Yes, remove attributes and attribute implants.
Also remove all other implants. Also remove boosts.
Then engaging a ship comes down to the ships, their fittings, and the players' skills, none of this additional garbage. Why not remove skills? Everyone has the same set of skills, none of that additional garbage. Why not remove fits as well? Every ship does exactly the same thing. Prefit with weapons, prop mods, and other default capabilities. None of that additional garbage. Why not remove all except one ship? Then it's just player skills, none of that other distracting crap. Why not remove the sandbox entirely? Then we can make it one-on-one, and only then can we truly see who shines above the rest.
Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
494
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 01:57:51 -
[30] - Quote
Vyl Vit wrote:RUMOR...in the subject line....point of the OP...RUMOR...(bears repeating) RUMOR??? Okay. I'll say it. This move would be so radical and would flush so much investment by so many thousands of players down the toilet, that it may be wise to hold off on SPECULATION and RUMOR (there, I said it again). Should CCP be actually planning such a move, I think they'd run it past us first...like months in advance, just because of the SHOCK involved. RUMOR? FORUM...RUMOR?? HINT HINT It's in the CSM notes, so it's not really a rumor. It's "CCP/CSM is talking about this, let's talk about the implications."
Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
|
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1882
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 02:02:27 -
[31] - Quote
Vyl Vit wrote:RUMOR...in the subject line....point of the OP...RUMOR...(bears repeating) RUMOR??? Okay. I'll say it. This move would be so radical and would flush so much investment by so many thousands of players down the toilet, that it may be wise to hold off on SPECULATION and RUMOR (there, I said it again). Should CCP be actually planning such a move, I think they'd run it past us first...like months in advance, just because of the SHOCK involved. RUMOR? FORUM...RUMOR?? HINT HINT Amazingly Learning Implants are very easy to compensate people for. Additionally there is no reason they would need to spend months running it past us. It's a very simple and obvious result that would happen, not complex at all. Peoples reactions in terms of risk taking is a little harder. But certainly some people would PvP a little more. Clone removal appears to have had a minor up tick after all. |
Celgar Thurn
Department 10
156
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 09:50:09 -
[32] - Quote
I'm still personally against the idea of removing attribute/learning implants and the ability to target attributes so learning can be done quicker.
Several people have noted that if/when the attribute/learning implants are removed from the game that we will have more slots available to use to increase other in-game capabilities. The trouble with this is 'powercreep' so inevitably the strengths of the hardwiring would have to be halved to compensate. Then we would be paying probably double the ISK on hardwiring and/or implants to get back to where we are atm. Similar to what happened with industry where we had decent skills to alleviate 'waste' which were changed and 'teams' were brought in. Paying twice for the same thing.
So I would say if we were to lose the learning implant slots then it would be better to just have five slots for the hardwirings and lose the ten slot option. |
Celgar Thurn
Department 10
156
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 09:52:36 -
[33] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Vyl Vit wrote:RUMOR...in the subject line....point of the OP...RUMOR...(bears repeating) RUMOR??? Okay. I'll say it. This move would be so radical and would flush so much investment by so many thousands of players down the toilet, that it may be wise to hold off on SPECULATION and RUMOR (there, I said it again). Should CCP be actually planning such a move, I think they'd run it past us first...like months in advance, just because of the SHOCK involved. RUMOR? FORUM...RUMOR?? HINT HINT Amazingly Learning Implants are very easy to compensate people for. Additionally there is no reason they would need to spend months running it past us. It's a very simple and obvious result that would happen, not complex at all. Peoples reactions in terms of risk taking is a little harder. But certainly some people would PvP a little more. Clone removal appears to have had a minor up tick after all.
We have jump clones to alleviate risk already. With the new skills the changeover time is reduced. With the medical clones gone now I don't see a real problem. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
31954
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 09:58:50 -
[34] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote:Yes, remove attributes and attribute implants.
Also remove all other implants. Also remove boosts.
Then engaging a ship comes down to the ships, their fittings, and the players' skills, none of this additional garbage. Remove all ships except 1. Modules too.
Just 1 ship and a single fit in the game.
Exciting stuff.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Ferni Ka'Nviiou
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1481
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 10:01:55 -
[35] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Unezka Turigahl wrote:Yes, remove attributes and attribute implants.
Also remove all other implants. Also remove boosts.
Then engaging a ship comes down to the ships, their fittings, and the players' skills, none of this additional garbage. Remove all ships except 1. Modules too. Just 1 ship and a single fit in the game. Exciting stuff. Velator4Lyfe |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
671
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 10:11:33 -
[36] - Quote
The impression I got was absolutely nothing was said about learning implants. Sure, attributes may be going the way of the dodo (and possibly good riddance), but that doesn't mean implants have to (just change them to a % training time on certain skill categories, and voila).
I do love how at the slightest whiff of a change the posters who get a dose of the greedy. You can see which posters have got star filled eyes, fully expecting everyone to be upgraded to the training speed of fully-specialised remaps with +5s as standard. Personally, I hope for a more "average" levelling out if something where to occur, give the average guy (who runs with +3s maybe 50% of the time, and occasionally trains a skill off-remap) a nice buff, but the forever-docked in full +5s get a speed nerf. |
Genevieve Bluecoat
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 10:12:43 -
[37] - Quote
Sugar Smacks wrote:I just dont see implants going anywhere personally.
Its this whole level of money that gets removed from the game constantly or as some call an isk sink.
Since many implants are earned through mission rewards, there is no isk removed from the game when they are created as objects. The only time implants act as an isk sink is where the implant is acquired from a Loyalty Point store in which isk is used as part of the purchase price. As such, they're not particularly effective isk sinks and I would suspect this is not a major reason to keep them.
Clone costs were a much more effective isk sink, and those were removed. |
Genevieve Bluecoat
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 10:14:36 -
[38] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:The impression I got was absolutely nothing was said about learning implants. Sure, attributes may be going the way of the dodo (and possibly good riddance), but that doesn't mean implants have to (just change them to a % training time on certain skill categories, and voila).
But this change would be completely pointless. If attributes are removed then it just means they're being glossed over and game play remains unaltered - and people would still feel obliged to buy these implants early in place of, you know, having fun.
|
Nalia White
Tencus
62
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 11:27:58 -
[39] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote:Yes, remove attributes and attribute implants.
Also remove all other implants. Also remove boosts.
Then engaging a ship comes down to the ships, their fittings, and the players' skills, none of this additional garbage.
that's the right mindset for playing eve right there folks!
we should even remove all the graphics and stuff. who needs more than a dot and two lines on each side to play video games? |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 11:44:00 -
[40] - Quote
Just as lazy carebears start "wouldn't it be better if we'd just remove [action that requires 3 braincells] or [allowing random people into your mission] or [forced PVP] threads, other lazy risk averse people start "wouldn't it be better if we'd remove implants and attributes, we'd surely start pvping more". And they always try to sell it as "it would be better for the game" while they actually mean "it would be better for me, because I'm lazy". It's always obvious, it's always hilarious.
Attributes are FINE and allow you to make choices, choices which have pros and drawbacks; if you choose to focus your attribs then you choose to not train fast outside that focus. If you don't like that then don't choose a focussed remap. A simple case of "actions have consequences" and the more consequences you remove from the game, the less it remains EVE.
People want to have their cake and eat it, and they'll come up with amazingly "well thought out " (lol) reasonings and logical posts as to why they should be allowed exactly that. NO! |
|
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1938
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 12:17:40 -
[41] - Quote
Solops Crendraven 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.
2) This change would be another kick in the pants to the missions system, mission/LP revenue and various career sub-options such as selling ore for storyline missions etc. I would argue that too many revenue ideas have been removed or made uneconomic already.
3) I feel this is another case of dumbing down of the game. Are we eventually going to get to a point where EVE Online is like many other MMOs where items are just collected within the game and nothing gets destroyed ?
I invite comments and ask whether people feel the attribute point & implants are a nice complication within the game or whether we should throw the baby out with the bathwater. Removing attribute points and the learning implants from the game. Im For It !
I agree. Get rid of that nonsense. I'll still use various hardwiring so there would still be a risk with some of my clones. I'm certain that I would undock much more often in risky situations, especially using my higher sp clones. |
Memphis Baas
82
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 12:28:51 -
[42] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:And they always try to sell it as "it would be better for the game" while they actually mean "it would be better for me, because I'm lazy".
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?
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 12:49:32 -
[43] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:And they always try to sell it as "it would be better for the game" while they actually mean "it would be better for me, because I'm lazy".
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?
That is such a fringe situation it's not even funny and probably made up. |
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
340
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 12:58:11 -
[44] - Quote
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.
Gregor Parud wrote: That is such a fringe situation it's not even funny and probably made up.
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.
Ransoms are accepted in Isk, Mods, Ships, and Dolls.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 13:12:40 -
[45] - Quote
Winter Archipelago wrote: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. Gregor Parud wrote: That is such a fringe situation it's not even funny and probably made up.
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.
It's the same with remaps. You're not being penalised if you use a well rounded attrib remap but you get a bonus if you go for a focussed one. So you just answered that one yourself.
So, the main reason to completely change the game and lose "choices have consequences" is because some random alts will have it easier? How is that in any way a valid reason. |
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 13:18:15 -
[46] - Quote
If it aint broke, dont fix it (or in this case stuff around with it). There are other things that need attention in EVE. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
674
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 13:32:46 -
[47] - Quote
please no... I would rather have learning skill books back then have them make this change.
-á-á- remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not-á "afk" cloaking-á-
[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
|
Red Teufel
Mafia Redux
416
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 13:33:16 -
[48] - Quote
I think it will just give more gameplay options for the players. CCP is removing the bull with the intent to give you better options and more content. So don't be upset. The good bit is about to happen when sov is revamped. I expect some crazy fun in null soon. |
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 13:56:54 -
[49] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:I think it will just give more gameplay options for the players. CCP is removing the bull with the intent to give you better options and more content. So don't be upset. The good bit is about to happen when sov is revamped. I expect some crazy fun in null soon.
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. |
Celise Katelo
State War Academy Caldari State
57
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 14:21:35 -
[50] - Quote
Please no take my Implants ...
On another note... I don't mind if they remove the learning stats, but i do love my High-grade Crystal set, still need to collect the other sets at some point. Collection ***** thats me & likes all things bling
EVEBoard ...Just over 18million skill points, each skill was chosen for a reason. I closed my eyes & clicked another skill to train... "BINGO...!!!" ... "This time i got something usefull"
|
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 14:21:40 -
[51] - Quote
Incestuous Criticism wrote:Red Teufel wrote:I think it will just give more gameplay options for the players. CCP is removing the bull with the intent to give you better options and more content. So don't be upset. The good bit is about to happen when sov is revamped. I expect some crazy fun in null soon. 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.
You read that all wrong, what he actually said was "this will make it a lot easier for me, fck the game. I want things easy, without effort and instant. I just tried to make it sound as if I had a valid reason". |
72inches
Trans Secunda Nulli Secunda
4
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 16:11:41 -
[52] - Quote
Celise Katelo wrote:...i do love my High-grade Crystal set, still need to collect the other sets at some point. Collection ***** thats me & likes all things bling
The 'collector motif' that exists in many mmo playstyles is the reason i suspect implants will not be removed from the game as its a valid support to the genre.
I would really enjoy the earlier rumours (this was a loooong time ago) of them being able to be salvaged from a corpse comes true one day that would be awesome.
|
Shayla Sh'inlux
Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi
50
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 16:40:55 -
[53] - Quote
I've suggested years ago to remove learning implants because all they do is make people more risk-averse.
PvP is blobby and gank-based for many reasons, and learning implants are one of those reasons. Yes, you can function perfectly without, but fact is that using them gives you a non-insignificant bonus in the only thing in Eve that you cannot get with isk - skillpoints. In general, people will use learning implants and are thus risk-averse.
The same thing for remaps. While I concur the current system is a TON better than the original one, you still lock people into training a certain subset of skills for a year at the time, unless they want to penalize themselves for cross-training. Especially with higher ranked skills, the difference in training time is not measured in hours, but in days. In a game where skillpoints basically cost money is it strange that most people will want to get the most sp/hr they can possibly get?
The best thing that could happen, IMO, is:
- Remove all attributes altogether. They make no sense, do not have any effect on what your character can do and how well he or she can do it. They only determine how long it takes before he or she can do it. They are basically only in the game because every MMO/RPG has them, but unlike in those games, a PvP trained character does not do more damage because he has a higher perception and a trader character does not pay less market fees because his charisma is high.
- Make training speed static. Maybe just set it at whatever the current max is with +5 implants, or use a nice and round number like 2500 SP/hour (that is about what you get with +3's). Make it impossible to increase this training speed (except for maybe the new player implant) so that everyone trains at the same speed and every skill trains at the same speed.
- Remove attribute implants. 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.
There. Better game.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 16:57:44 -
[54] - Quote
Shayla Sh'inlux wrote:I've suggested years ago to remove learning implants because all they do is make people more risk-averse.
Shayla Sh'inlux wrote: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.
Ah right, so you want to remove learning implants because it makes ppl risk averse and replace... them... with other implants which... somehow don't make people risk averse.
Are you really sure you're not lying and just want a flat learning speed without having to deal with bad choices in regards to your own remaps, or perhaps want almost full learning speed without the risk? Because your logic makes no sense. |
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
85
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 17:18:56 -
[55] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:My opinion is: of all the things that they can do to get people to PVP more even if they don't want to, it's not one of the worst. I would undock more if there were no attribute implants to worry about. I would also train differently if all the skills trained at whatever max rate we have when properly remapped. And I'm a carebear, so the PVP'ers would have an increasingly target-rich environment. Yes, the game is changing, and it remains to be seen whether it's ultimately for the good or the bad. CCP does go ahead and do whatever they want, so basically we can complain about changes but ultimately we can't really prevent them. Quote: Eve needs risk to be Eve else it becomes just another run of the mill MMO.
Oh, it has a ways to go yet, considering that you don't lose your armor when you die in most current MMO's.
You can create a clone with no implants and go pvp all you want now. Or join a corp with a ship replacement program....but I am sure there will always be a reason why not to pvp. Just accept pvp is not your thing. Its a sandbox, all play styles are welcome.
Those who want to pve are doing so. Those that want to pvp are doing so. Those that like to do both are doing so.
But no amount of change will force those who want to pve to pvp. All it would do is force CCP to make changes to try and entice which would just **** off the pvp'rs. Which is funny because the change was made to get pve players to pvp like the pvp players want.
Puts on TinFoil Hat of Conspiracy: This sounds more like an agenda to try lower training time by linking new player/carebear retention to it...aka carebears avoid pvp because of implants. |
Mag's
the united
18827
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 17:32:31 -
[56] - Quote
Can anyone point to the source of this rumour please? I've just skimmed through CSM 9 2014 minutes, but couldn't see it there. Although I may have missed it, of course.
**Destination SkillQueue:- **
It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3093
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 17:40:51 -
[57] - Quote
Implant slots 1 through 5 will still be used, just used for implant sets. As they are quite expensive, death will still have meaning.
CCP is sensitive to the three "creeps": power creep (new ships and modules making old ones irrelevant), cost creep (inflation) and complexity creep (expansions slowly make the game more complex and less accessible to new players). Removing the attribute system allows introduction of complexity elsewhere, in a future expansion.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 17:58:20 -
[58] - Quote
Complexity...... so what you are trying to say is that EVE is to complex for new players.
So how did you go starting at EVE, Im sure at one stage you were a new player. Was it implants that you found difficult, or maybe the plethora of modules and different fits that were possible. Maybe you couldn't find your way out of your starting system, didn't know how to mine.
If having implants as part of this game that boosts training times (because they wont get rid of skills) or increase damage, speed etc is to complex then OMG, it is starting to prove a theory I have... "There are too many dumb people in this world"
So instead of taking out implants and dumbing it down lets look at the real issue. New player experience. Explaining and helping a new player with the different levels of complexity. Yes I am an ALT. My main belongs to a null-sec corp and joining a corp was the best thing I did because expereince players said, if your going to die, don't worry about implants.
Yes clone up, put a set of implants in a clone that when I am holidays can sit there and train some skills faster.
In relation to people being risk adverse. Did a quick look at zkillboard. Just on the first page that I look at there were 11 pod kills. Null-sec had 6 all with no implants (because most people who fly null-sec are smart, they know they die and generally don't worry) Low-sec had 8 pod kills 3 with implants and 5 with no implants High-sec had 1 pod kill with implants
Now that was just a quick look and from what I could see there were a crap load of pod kills.
|
Nevase Prometeus
University of Caille Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 18:20:49 -
[59] - Quote
In my point of view I think the best way is CCP should make some options for each players to decide their play style. Nobody should told anybody that this style of playing is right this style is wrong. If CCP still hold on theier concept that EVE is a sandbox game.They should give that decisions for players to decide.
But Sandbox concept is not let players doing anything they want without any responsibity. I just hope CCP might keep EVE in terms of responsibilty to any enjoyments should not come from another players's tear and sadness . Enjoyments from that is like bullying . I think no one like to be Bullied so CCP might looking for that kind of fun with cautious.May be like make option for players who just need only PVE and don't want to PVP. When player declare themself that they don't want to PVE another players should understood and respect not to violate their rights. If anyone violate that it sound like violate in anothers player rights or humanrights too.
|
Hengle Teron
Just Another Corp XIV
35098
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 18:26:18 -
[60] - Quote
oh look, it's that B word again |
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
934
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 18:30:47 -
[61] - Quote
Nevase Prometeus wrote:In my point of view I think the best way is CCP should make some options for each players to decide their play style. Nobody should told anybody that this style of playing is right this style is wrong. If CCP still hold on theier concept that EVE is a sandbox game.They should give that decisions for players to decide.
But Sandbox concept is not let players doing anything they want without any responsibity. I just hope CCP might keep EVE in terms of responsibilty to any enjoyments should not come from another players's tear and sadness . Enjoyments from that is like bullying . I think no one like to be Bullied so CCP might looking for that kind of fun with cautious.May be like make option for players who just need only PVE and don't want to PVP. When player declare themself that they don't want to PVE another players should understood and respect not to violate their rights. If anyone violate that it sound like violate in anothers player rights or humanrights too.
:getout: |
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 18:46:28 -
[62] - Quote
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. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 18:48:06 -
[63] - Quote
Commentus Nolen wrote: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.
You can do that just fine, by choosing an all round remap. |
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 18:48:08 -
[64] - Quote
Like the lyrics from one of my favourite songs...
We could live For a thousand years But if I hurt you I'd make wine from your tears
I have come to see since 2009 when I started playing, EVE is one big tear vat. It does not matter what you do it is all about the tears. From getting killed in High-sec by those that can't be bothered doing real pvp in null-sec. Gankers, war decs, even skimming the market to out do another player by 0.01 isk
Having someone that has nothing to do but camp your WH all day for just one kill. EVE constantly is about out doing someone else collecting those tears.
Is it a complex game, Yes indeed it is, these are the things that make EVE, EVE |
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 18:50:38 -
[65] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Commentus Nolen wrote: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. You can do that just fine, by choosing an all round remap.
What is an "all round" remap? |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 18:51:28 -
[66] - Quote
for combat perc/int |
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:10:54 -
[67] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:for combat perc/int
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.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:19:24 -
[68] - Quote
Commentus Nolen wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:for combat perc/int 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.
What, you mean to say that you can't have everything at the same time? "What if I trained Amarr ships and now you buff Gallente, that's not fair because I will have to train up Gallente now. CCP should remove all factions and keep just one" is the same dumb, non-effort logic.
|
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:28:33 -
[69] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Commentus Nolen wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:for combat perc/int 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. What, you mean to say that you can't have everything at the same time? "What if I trained Amarr ships and now you buff Gallente, that's not fair because I will have to train up Gallente now. CCP should remove all factions and keep just one" is the same dumb, non-effort logic.
No it is not the same thing since training these ships still use the same attributes. God just more of the same non-effort arguments. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:31:55 -
[70] - Quote
It's EXACTLY the same thing: "I made a choice a while ago and now I want to come back on that choice. I don't care if it's good for the game or not, I just want my instant gratification NAO and want CCP to change the game so that I can't make choices anymore, while at the same time also making it super easy by upping the base stats to (near) max current options".
|
|
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
38
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:31:55 -
[71] - Quote
Incestuous Criticism wrote:If it aint broke, dont fix it (or in this case stuff around with it).
Actually it is broken. Remapping and planning year long skill plans around them wasn't an intended game mechanic. It used to be you created your character and that was it, no attribute changes allowed. So if you wanted an industrial character you picked the attributes and if you wanted to be combat focused, too bad.
That was changed to make it so character creation wasn't a lock in, but now we have a meta of re-maps and optimizing skill training around it. This pretty much requires 3rd party tools, is a PITA for newer players who have no idea what they want to focus on and is pretty unfun when you're Per/Wil focused and need to wait 10 months to train that Int/Mem skill you'd really like to have sooner rather than later.
So yeah, attributes probably needs to go away. It's an old mechanic that doesn't add much to the current game. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:37:12 -
[72] - Quote
Dracones wrote:Incestuous Criticism wrote:If it aint broke, dont fix it (or in this case stuff around with it).
Actually it is broken. Remapping and planning year long skill plans around.
No one is forcing you to do this, you can play just fine without ever remapping or by remapping to an all round decent option. You just want the full advantage without having to give it any thought or without there being possible downsides to the choices you make.
|
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:41:54 -
[73] - Quote
Ok lets look at what the minutes actually contain as this whole time it hasn't been mentioned.
"Removal of attributes was also mentioned, but the idea is still in quite an early stage. It's something they want to do as it's on the level as learning skills, so that people don't have to get locked into training skills in a non-optimal order for use in order to train at the optimal speed. There is still some discussion around what would possibly be done with learning implants (keep them, flat bonus, something else). There are also questions as to what the rate would be with the changes. Ali brought up some feedback that some veteran players like the space it gives you to optimize your character, but overall supports removing attributes. There was also the point of learning implants disincentive PVP, especially in null and WH."
OK looking at removing attributes seems to be on the cards and in its early stages. It would be great to keep the implants available to increase training time so that when you go AFK for an extended holiday it is always great to log back in and have some of those long skills trained.
Maybe have a x2, x3 or x4 training speed implant.
Learning implants disincentive PVP, what ever. If people don't PVP because of a learning implant then they are doing it wrong. Have a clone that does that for you and you can PVP all you want. |
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
501
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:44:31 -
[74] - Quote
Remove and reimburse learning implants and give everyone +5 to all attributes, sure.
Don't remove remaps though. Those do provide meaningful choices and reward those who plan their training out instead of doing things impulsively.
Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
|
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:45:55 -
[75] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:It's EXACTLY the same thing: "I made a choice a while ago and now I want to come back on that choice. I don't care if it's good for the game or not, I just want my instant gratification NAO and want CCP to change the game so that I can't make choices anymore, while at the same time also making it super easy by upping the base stats to (near) max current options".
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.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:49:43 -
[76] - Quote
Commentus Nolen wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:It's EXACTLY the same thing: "I made a choice a while ago and now I want to come back on that choice. I don't care if it's good for the game or not, I just want my instant gratification NAO and want CCP to change the game so that I can't make choices anymore, while at the same time also making it super easy by upping the base stats to (near) max current options".
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.
Ah yes, they're holding back the game. It's all for the betterment of the GAME. It's not about you wanting it easy... |
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
38
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 20:01:29 -
[77] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote: No one is forcing you to do this, you can play just fine without ever remapping or by remapping to an all round decent option. You just want the full advantage without having to give it any thought or without there being possible downsides to the choices you 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. |
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 20:17:03 -
[78] - Quote
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. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 20:19:24 -
[79] - Quote
Dracones wrote:Gregor Parud wrote: No one is forcing you to do this, you can play just fine without ever remapping or by remapping to an all round decent option. You just want the full advantage without having to give it any thought or without there being possible downsides to the choices you 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.
THINK OF THE NEWBIES! Malcanis' law applies here just fine. Besides, if it's "just 10-15%" as you put it then it doesn't really matter at all, does it.
It's all excuses, it's people who want to min-max without the min part. Nothing more, nothing less, and any "logic" or "reasoning" once could come up with is just a "I don't like consequences to my choices and I would like to have MOAR without any drawbacks" while trying to mask it as "nonono, it's better for the game, it's for the newbies don't you see".
And the more people try to concoct these hilarious :reasons: the more hilarious it becomes.
fact 1: no one is forced to remap fact 2: one can remap to a generally ok option that fits a chosen play style fact 3: new players have 3 remaps to toy with, that's more than enough fact 4: this is EVE, where your choice may have consequences fact 5: people don't like consequences and will make up stories about how the game would be better off without them
|
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1939
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 20:25:36 -
[80] - Quote
Dracones wrote:Gregor Parud wrote: No one is forcing you to do this, you can play just fine without ever remapping or by remapping to an all round decent option. You just want the full advantage without having to give it any thought or without there being possible downsides to the choices you 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.
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. |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 20:26:20 -
[81] - Quote
Commentus Nolen wrote: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.
Attributes affect how fast you can learn skills. All skills have 2 attribs, a main one and a secondary one. The higher your attribs are the faster you'll train skills that make use of those attribs.
Generally attribs are kinda grouped into skill pools. Gunnery, missiles and ship skills use perc and willpower. Most tanking and support ship skills are int/mem. Production related stuff is mostly mem and int. So you can see that, generally, one can make informed decision for their attribs based on what type of skills/play style they're looking for.
OR, one can just ignore it altogether, remap to a "decently good for everything, but with low charisma" remap and just stop bothering with it. EVE is not about skill points, it's not about having goals that lay ahead 2 years. It's about doing what you want to do (Most things in EVE can be done on low SP, people just have this minmax addiction where it has to be perfect).
So, you're fine to simply ignore it all and enjoy the game, you're fine to find a generally logical remap and leave it at that. You're also fine to go full min-max, but that means that along with the max you also have to agree to the min. And this is the crux of this whole debate, people want the max but aren't prepared for the min, so they come up with amazing solutions that (amazingly) always includes upping attribs to (near) max, while having no min at all. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 20:27:51 -
[82] - Quote
Solhild wrote: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.
What are the chances you're out of remaps and your training plan runs out in 2-4 month, and you want to switch attribs then? So you're rallying for CCP to remove them completely and hope it'll be done before your plan runs out? |
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 20:32:55 -
[83] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Commentus Nolen wrote: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. Attributes affect how fast you can learn skills. All skills have 2 attribs, a main one and a secondary one. The higher your attribs are the faster you'll train skills that make use of those attribs. Generally attribs are kinda grouped into skill pools. Gunnery, missiles and ship skills use perc and willpower. Most tanking and support ship skills are int/mem. Production related stuff is mostly mem and int. So you can see that, generally, one can make informed decision for their attribs based on what type of skills/play style they're looking for. OR, one can just ignore it altogether, remap to a "decently good for everything, but with low charisma" remap and just stop bothering with it. EVE is not about skill points, it's not about having goals that lay ahead 2 years. It's about doing what you want to do (Most things in EVE can be done on low SP, people just have this minmax addiction where it has to be perfect). So, you're fine to simply ignore it all and enjoy the game, you're fine to find a generally logical remap and leave it at that. You're also fine to go full min-max, but that means that along with the max you also have to agree to the min. And this is the crux of this whole debate, people want the max but aren't prepared for the min, so they come up with amazing solutions that (amazingly) always includes upping attribs to (near) max, while having no min at all.
Thank you for the information. |
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
39
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 20:48:25 -
[84] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:[quote=Dracones][quote=Gregor Parud] fact 4: this is EVE, where your choice may have consequences
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.
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
63
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 20:55:20 -
[85] - Quote
Incestuous Criticism wrote:If it aint broke, dont fix it (or in this case stuff around with it). There are other things that need attention in EVE. Its Broke
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 20:55:46 -
[86] - Quote
Dracones wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:[quote=Dracones][quote=Gregor Parud] fact 4: this is EVE, where your choice may have consequences
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.
Remaps were added because the standard attribs were a) bad and b) gave you no options. And now you want to remove options again?
Learning skills were removed because they didn't add any gameplay and would force someone who chose to go for them to do nothing for 2 months. Quite different from what we have here; people aren't "doing nothing" with the current system whether they ignore the remaps or go for a min/max one. So, those changes aren't a precedent for these.... ideas.
"quality of life" is not the same as "lol @ effort and consequences", HTFU. |
bloodknight2
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
333
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 21:31:03 -
[87] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:And they always try to sell it as "it would be better for the game" while they actually mean "it would be better for me, because I'm lazy".
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?
God...
You stay docked in a station in EMPIRE because you fear being podded? You know...empire...know as high security where it is impossible to anchor a bubble...
The only way to lose a pod in empire are : -being AFK -autopilote in empire...in a pod -not warping after losing his ship
You are for this change because you lost a pod in empire last month because YOU did not spam "warp" like YOU should have done.
And let's be honest, tons and tons of new players are PVPing with implants. Even with the change, you would still stay docked.
|
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
39
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 21:34:03 -
[88] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote: Remaps were added because the standard attribs were a) bad and b) gave you no options. And now you want to remove options again?
Pre-remap you had options. I choose to make this character industrial and when I wanted a combat character I choose to make one with attributes focused on that. These were meaningful choices with hard consequences, which you claim to love(BTW, both of these characters still have 3 bonus remaps).
Removing attribute doesn't have to skunk options. There's no reason why learning implants couldn't focus on specific skill categories. A 10% Drones Learning Boost implant is a lot easier to understand some arcane combination of memory and perception. You can even make learning implants more interesting in other ways. Imagine Federation Navy implants from faction warfare LP stores that focus on Gallente ships and hybrid turrets. Or rare faction learning implants that focus on capital skills. Wormhole sleepers might drop implants that are related to learning T3 ships and systems.
|
Mag's
the united
18828
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 21:39:09 -
[89] - Quote
Nevase Prometeus wrote:In my point of view I think the best way is CCP should make some options for each players to decide their play style. Nobody should told anybody that this style of playing is right this style is wrong. If CCP still hold on theier concept that EVE is a sandbox game.They should give that decisions for players to decide.
But Sandbox concept is not let players doing anything they want without any responsibity. I just hope CCP might keep EVE in terms of responsibilty to any enjoyments should not come from another players's tear and sadness . Enjoyments from that is like bullying . I think no one like to be Bullied so CCP might looking for that kind of fun with cautious.May be like make option for players who just need only PVE and don't want to PVP. When player declare themself that they don't want to PVE another players should understood and respect not to violate their rights. If anyone violate that it sound like violate in anothers player rights or humanrights too.
Great post, would read again.
**Destination SkillQueue:- **
It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
65
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 21:46:05 -
[90] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Nevase Prometeus wrote:In my point of view I think the best way is CCP should make some options for each players to decide their play style. Nobody should told anybody that this style of playing is right this style is wrong. If CCP still hold on theier concept that EVE is a sandbox game.They should give that decisions for players to decide.
But Sandbox concept is not let players doing anything they want without any responsibity. I just hope CCP might keep EVE in terms of responsibilty to any enjoyments should not come from another players's tear and sadness . Enjoyments from that is like bullying . I think no one like to be Bullied so CCP might looking for that kind of fun with cautious.May be like make option for players who just need only PVE and don't want to PVP. When player declare themself that they don't want to PVE another players should understood and respect not to violate their rights. If anyone violate that it sound like violate in anothers player rights or humanrights too.
Great post, would read again. sounds reasonable. Let me read this again just to make sure.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
|
Wadaya
Trailerpark Industries
21
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 21:46:25 -
[91] - Quote
I may be way off base here, but removing attributes and having everyone train at the same rate. How does that even help any.?
All in all it seems just like it's a setup for offering "bonus xp runes" like the cash shops in f2p games somewhere down the road.
This is Eve, choices are supposed to matter. It even says so in all the game trailers, and now you want to remove consequences? Some people can't even remap because 8 years ago they chose to roll a character with 3 base charisma, and if you remap you are forced to add 2 to charisma because the lowest stat you can have is 5. People can live with it. No one is forcing anyone to buy implants, I know many people who don't even fit them.
This game is supposed to be harder and more complex than most games. Quit trying to dumb it down, it won't bring in more players, it will just keep alienating the ones you have left. |
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
573
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 21:48:44 -
[92] - Quote
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. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 22:06:32 -
[93] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote: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.
COD is that way ---------> |
Logan Revelore
Symbiotic Systems
42
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 22:17:06 -
[94] - Quote
I'm of opinion that removing implants is a bad idea. You balance your learning speed vs. other implants that give more practical stats.
I do like the set implants, perhaps give us a +5 version of those.
But don't remove attribute implants, and certainly do not remove attributes all together. It's an important decision when you sit down to decide on next year's attribute mapping. |
Memphis Baas
86
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 22:38:37 -
[95] - Quote
They should make Aura pipe up with "Excellent decision made, sir/madam. Excellent!" whenever you "sit down" to make this "important decision."
They should also make Aura snicker whenever you queue an off-plan skill. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
15974
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 22:46:34 -
[96] - Quote
Dracones wrote:Gregor Parud wrote: Remaps were added because the standard attribs were a) bad and b) gave you no options. And now you want to remove options again?
Pre-remap you had options. I choose to make this character industrial and when I wanted a combat character I choose to make one with attributes focused on that. These were meaningful choices with hard consequences, which you claim to love(BTW, both of these characters still have 3 bonus remaps). Removing attribute doesn't have to skunk options. There's no reason why learning implants couldn't focus on specific skill categories. A 10% Drones Learning Boost implant is a lot easier to understand some arcane combination of memory and perception. You can even make learning implants more interesting in other ways. Imagine Federation Navy implants from faction warfare LP stores that focus on Gallente ships and hybrid turrets. Or rare faction learning implants that focus on capital skills. Wormhole sleepers might drop implants that are related to learning T3 ships and systems.
That's a pretty neat idea
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
65
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 22:48:17 -
[97] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote: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 agree If it wasnt for this worthless time sink i wouldve unsubscribed months ago .Bottom Line Removing Implants, Skills, and atributes will be good for our Pocket Books. I would rather use isk to buy ships and fly them right away and get into the fight than wait around training skills for implants.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
574
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 23:10:17 -
[98] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Unezka Turigahl wrote: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. COD is that way --------->
I'm pretty sure most shooters these days also string players along with skills and unlockable weapons and such. The masses are easily placated if you meter out a pellet for them every now and then. Yum, artificial achievement! |
Eojek
Starlight Moly
51
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 23:32:03 -
[99] - Quote
If I have my learning implants removed from the game, which I paid for in terms of time and effort, I would like to be able to learn just as quickly as if I had the implants. I would also expect to be compensated for the cost of those same implants. |
Lexia Nova
CybinSect
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 23:38:18 -
[100] - Quote
Honestly as a player that has kept an eye on EVE for many years, I have been surprised recently on CCP`s desire to change EVE in many ways.
In some respect this is a much needed thing for the game. For instance, I was surprised to find out on return to the game that different levels of skill clone had gone! One of the bigger parts of the game removed that I did not expect but it probably was a good thing. Older players can now fly cheap small ships without fear of losing a 200, 300m+ clone just to keep the skillpoints in.
That being said, I am worried about CCP gutting too much of the risk / planning / investment aspects of the game too much further as if we make things too comfortable... EVE is slowly losing its harshness and key decision making that the game is so renown for.
So overall I will watch this space and see what happens. |
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
65
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 23:53:14 -
[101] - Quote
Eojek wrote:If I have my learning implants removed from the game, which I paid for in terms of time and effort, I would like to be able to learn just as quickly as if I had the implants. I would also expect to be compensated for the cost of those same implants. Fair Enough And reasonable. Everybody will be Happy the New Players will get what they want and the Veterans will make alot of Plex.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
DaReaper
Net 7
1715
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 23:55:36 -
[102] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:Orlacc wrote:If what has been done to exploration is any example, I bet this happens. A lot of funds were wasted developing vaporware and the need for same is likely enormous. The orders are likely "get and retain new subs." At all costs.
And of course they are removing the mission refusal penalties for the "only PVE" crowd.
Oh well, I have seen other things I enjoy changed to the point where I stopped enjoying them. Sad though. Its going to be CU then NGE of SWG all over again
I keep hearing this... and its not been true thus far. People claimed wormhole change would kill eve.. hasn;t. People claimed pheobe changes would kill eve... hasn't. Hell people claimed isboxer changes would kill eve... 25 days later i have not noticed a huge drops in subs.. so hasn't
Stop making stupid claims and wait and see what ccp might do with something. This is the time to voice your feedback as to why a change might be bad and how to fix it, or how a change could be good but made better
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
Tear Jar
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
303
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 00:12:26 -
[103] - 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.
2) This change would be another kick in the pants to the missions system, mission/LP revenue and various career sub-options such as selling ore for storyline missions etc. I would argue that too many revenue ideas have been removed or made uneconomic already.
3) I feel this is another case of dumbing down of the game. Are we eventually going to get to a point where EVE Online is like many other MMOs where items are just collected within the game and nothing gets destroyed ?
I invite comments and ask whether people feel the attribute point & implants are a nice complication within the game or whether we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.
The problem with attribute implants is they punish you for living in null sec(or low sec to a lesser extent) but it's a trivial cost for a high sec mission runner.
I would prefer a monthly fee for the bonus. |
Talonikus
The Scope Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 02:08:01 -
[104] - Quote
The attributes themselves are useless. If you want to make PvP easier to understand, don't have 8 types of ammo for each turret type. That's just crazy :p |
The Connoisseur
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
21
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 02:21:05 -
[105] - Quote
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, and 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 live by such in order to skill up at a decent rate. |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
66
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 02:28:13 -
[106] - Quote
I say More Killing and Less Skilling.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
1110
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 02:45:16 -
[107] - Quote
You are reacting to outputs. If they decide to remove implants then they are reacting to inputs. Maybe people should ask the question, "What information does CCP and the CSM have that would make them consider this?"
Think about it, the proposal would eliminate a consumable that burns isk. I am sure they would not consider this lightly.
This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
67
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 02:58:25 -
[108] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:You are reacting to outputs. If they decide to remove implants then they are reacting to inputs. Maybe people should ask the question, "What information does CCP and the CSM have that would make them consider this?"
Think about it, the proposal would eliminate a consumable that burns isk. I am sure they would not consider this lightly. Of course they wouldnt take this Lightly.They would do this as last resort . I wouldnt expect Them to shoot themselves in the Foot.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Tear Jar
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
303
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 05:14:11 -
[109] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:You are reacting to outputs. If they decide to remove implants then they are reacting to inputs. Maybe people should ask the question, "What information does CCP and the CSM have that would make them consider this?"
Think about it, the proposal would eliminate a consumable that burns isk. I am sure they would not consider this lightly.
The effect on lp and isk can be solved. CCP deals with isk inflation and deflation all the time. It shouldn't prevent the removal of attribute implants. |
Trey Kutoi
The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Spaceship Samurai
39
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 06:06:05 -
[110] - Quote
I screw around with +3s and hardwirings in lowsec because it doesn't really matter. |
|
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
273
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 07:09:06 -
[111] - Quote
The argument of "risk/reward" is different when it comes to skill implants. Rewards as it applies to ships, modules and non-learning implants is of a temporary nature. If a player does not risk the more expensive ship, module or non-learning implant they are not affected at a later date. If a player does not risk the more expensive learning implant though - or chooses to use something like Slaves - they receive permanent repercussions for that decision.
~ Bookmarks in overview
~ Fleet improvements
|
Paynus Maiassus
Capital Munitions
223
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 07:52:56 -
[112] - Quote
I like the current implant system and remapping.
If you want to get people to PvP with more clones, you could just remove the fact that you lose implants when you are podded. So your new clone wakes up with all it's implants.
This would still kill the implant economy, so I am not sure I am exactly for it. But it is an example of how the 'problem' of learning implants (discouraging PvP) could be circumvented without dumbing down the game.
I like attributes, remaps, implants - to include learning implants.
I do PvP. I do hate getting podded in an expensive clone. I still don't want learning implants to be removed.
I will not rage quit if they are removed. It's a tertiary issue overall. I don't think removing them will all the sudden make Eve players start PvPing. I also don't think removing them will ruin the game. It's really much ado about nothing. But just to put my two cents in, removing attributes, remapping, and learning implants will cost Eve some flavor. If it's problematic, replace it with something equally flavorful and not problematic. Don't just get rid of them. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
202
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 07:59:24 -
[113] - Quote
If they remove learning implants now, what will happen to hardwire ones after? The arguments: "they are too expensive, new players can't afford them, we won't pvp when having them" are wrong from the begining. +5 implants (without attribute changing) add few days to the longest skills training, they have no impact on lowest level skill, which is most desire for new players. If players don't want to pvp in expensive learning implants they won't do it with hardwire ones. The problem is not the implants, it's the price of them. Also let's not forget we have more than one clone. Most of all CCP need to take a look at training mechanism, number of neural remaps etc.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 08:02:09 -
[114] - Quote
The Connoisseur wrote: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.
There is no SP rat race, it's only an SP rat race if you want it to be or perceive it that way. What you're saying is nothing other than "we should all start at lvl 90, the levelling system is a rat race and frankly it's not important. The only important thing is the end game because I'm one of those people who want to min-max, but without the min and I just don't understand how one could do well without being maxed out". |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
1295
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 08:19:11 -
[115] - 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: .
My thoughts on this.
No.
My in depth explanation - OH HELL NO. Attributes are there for a reason. Variety. Each attribute has a reason. Charimsa social/fleet. Intelligence - operations, and perception how to use the bloody thing. Implants are there to make up for our short comings when we want to focus on something but realize oh wait i need to hurry and do this.
So yeah, my thoughts leave them in.
Why Can't I have a picture signature.
Also please support graphical immersion, bring back the art that brought people to EvE online originaly.
|
LordZer00
The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Spaceship Samurai
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 09:02:20 -
[116] - Quote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
The argument presented is a logical fallacy |
Trajan Unknown
Running with Dogs Nerfed Alliance Go Away
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 09:09:24 -
[117] - Quote
Tear Jar 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.
2) This change would be another kick in the pants to the missions system, mission/LP revenue and various career sub-options such as selling ore for storyline missions etc. I would argue that too many revenue ideas have been removed or made uneconomic already.
3) I feel this is another case of dumbing down of the game. Are we eventually going to get to a point where EVE Online is like many other MMOs where items are just collected within the game and nothing gets destroyed ?
I invite comments and ask whether people feel the attribute point & implants are a nice complication within the game or whether we should throw the baby out with the bathwater. The problem with attribute implants is they punish you for living in null sec(or low sec to a lesser extent) but it's a trivial cost for a high sec mission runner. I would prefer a monthly fee for the bonus.
Well plus 5-¦s can be stored in a trainingsclone and if you can-¦t afford to lose +4-¦s well, use +3-¦s the difference isn-¦t that crazy. I burned through 3billions in implants since I went to nullsec. Avoiding being stupid (my case) and your implants will be relatively safe. Last but not least you should be wealthy in null-sec. So if you don-¦t be a - excuse me - killboard ***** it doesn-¦t matter to use and once in a while lose +3-¦s or +4-¦s. To finish this, I don-¦t think +5-¦s are worth it except you are planning something like training into capitals/super caps.
|
Fu Qjoo
Pangalactic Frontline Supply Agency
38
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 09:19:45 -
[118] - Quote
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? |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 09:32:37 -
[119] - Quote
Fu Qjoo wrote: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?
Start a thread on how we all really should start in titans, fitted and ready, without even having to board them. Sure, they'll have to adapt the career tutorial to "blap these NPC dreads" but it'll be worth it.
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
69
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 09:33:46 -
[120] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:My opinion is: of all the things that they can do to get people to PVP more even if they don't want to, it's not one of the worst. I would undock more if there were no attribute implants to worry about. I would also train differently if all the skills trained at whatever max rate we have when properly remapped. And I'm a carebear, so the PVP'ers would have an increasingly target-rich environment. Yes, the game is changing, and it remains to be seen whether it's ultimately for the good or the bad. CCP does go ahead and do whatever they want, so basically we can complain about changes but ultimately we can't really prevent them. Quote: Eve needs risk to be Eve else it becomes just another run of the mill MMO.
Oh, it has a ways to go yet, considering that you don't lose your armor when you die in most current MMO's.
don't have implants then ... or have a local clone without them ...
for those that have spent billions on implants, I hope they will be getting recompensed!
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
|
Chal0ner
Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi
117
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 10:21:52 -
[121] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:I would undock more if there were no attribute implants to worry about.
Memphis Baas wrote:and we lose the boredom of sitting in station and can do whatever we want.
Yes, I absolutely see how this is CCPs fault. (I was being ironic)
As someone said, your boredom has nothing to do with EVE, CCP or game mechanics.
|
Chal0ner
Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi
117
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 10:27:43 -
[122] - Quote
Nalia White wrote:Unezka Turigahl wrote:Yes, remove attributes and attribute implants.
Also remove all other implants. Also remove boosts.
Then engaging a ship comes down to the ships, their fittings, and the players' skills, none of this additional garbage. that's the right mindset for playing eve right there folks! we should even remove all the graphics and stuff. who needs more than a dot and two lines on each side to play video games?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNAdtkSjSps
|
Louise Beethoven
Hedion University Amarr Empire
128
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 10:41:35 -
[123] - Quote
Do it CCP, remove attribute points. However everyone should get 2,700sp/h training across the board, it's the only fair way to do it. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
69
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 10:59:41 -
[124] - Quote
Louise Beethoven wrote:Do it CCP, remove attribute points. However everyone should get 2,700sp/h training across the board, it's the only fair way to do it.
and historical purchases from the last 6months, or so (where benifit form isk spent has not been seen properly), should be refunded pro rata.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
149
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 11:06:08 -
[125] - Quote
About time and I hope they wipe the learning implants at the same time, they are as good for the game as the old learning skills were... I can't wait to use pirate implants again but without the SP/h penalty.
Just give us a flat 2700SP/h going in to a pool like Dust where we then just can dish out the SP to skills whenever we fancy.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
273
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 13:19:47 -
[126] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:The Connoisseur wrote: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. There is no SP rat race, it's only an SP rat race if you want it to be or perceive it that way. What you're saying is nothing other than "we should all start at lvl 90, the levelling system is a rat race and frankly it's not important. The only important thing is the end game because I'm one of those people who want to min-max, but without the min and I just don't understand how one could do well without being maxed out". Not we should all start at lvl 90. We should all progress to lvl 90 at the same pace.
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).
~ Bookmarks in overview
~ Fleet improvements
|
Deck Cadelanne
Exigent Circumstances CAStabouts
128
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 13:39:15 -
[127] - Quote
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:
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).
Now wait one damned second...that might actually kind of sort of partially...make sense.
Limited duration/value SP training rate boosts for new characters ought to help with retention.
Getting rid of learning implants, maybe...but you need to leave attributes as variable and occasionally re-mappable. People are not identical, so players ought to have some choice on what aspects of their character to enhance relative to others.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
The Connoisseur
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
24
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 14:16:06 -
[128] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:The Connoisseur wrote: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. There is no SP rat race, it's only an SP rat race if you want it to be or perceive it that way. What you're saying is nothing other than "we should all start at lvl 90, the levelling system is a rat race and frankly it's not important. The only important thing is the end game because I'm one of those people who want to min-max, but without the min and I just don't understand how one could do well without being maxed out".
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-to-win barriers, and that is what it currently is. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 14:25:32 -
[129] - Quote
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:The Connoisseur wrote: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. There is no SP rat race, it's only an SP rat race if you want it to be or perceive it that way. What you're saying is nothing other than "we should all start at lvl 90, the levelling system is a rat race and frankly it's not important. The only important thing is the end game because I'm one of those people who want to min-max, but without the min and I just don't understand how one could do well without being maxed out". 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).
- we all should get isk at the same rate too! No matter what you do, which choices you make, we all should get the same isk/hour. Older players had enough time to make isk so it's really for the benefit of new players that we all have the same income.
- this whole racial ships thing is just terrible, if I train another race than you then that's just not cool, lets remove races and only have one left so we all train the same one. Older players had the time to train all four of them, new players haven't yet and it's just not fair that.
- everyone should be able to moon mine the cool moons, I mean older players have had the time to make friends something new players still have to do, this is clearly not fair and it would just be easier for new players if they could moon mine.
- why can older players have the really cool ships (super caps are awesome yo), have all the friends and have had the time to conquer 0.0. Clearly this is not fair on new players, why can't they fly Titans. I'd say we remove all T2 ships, all capitals and remove corporations., alliances and whatnot. These are all unfair advantages older players have been able to build up over time which newbies obviously haven't yet.
ALL PROGRESS AND CHOICES IN A SANDBOX MMO ARE CLEARLY A PLOT TO KEEP THE NEWBIES FROM PLAYING THE GAME!
Oh wait, no. People can make choices just fine, they can choose to optimise min-max or they can choose not to; they'll still do fine.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
953
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 14:28:19 -
[130] - Quote
The Connoisseur wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:The Connoisseur wrote: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. There is no SP rat race, it's only an SP rat race if you want it to be or perceive it that way. What you're saying is nothing other than "we should all start at lvl 90, the levelling system is a rat race and frankly it's not important. The only important thing is the end game because I'm one of those people who want to min-max, but without the min and I just don't understand how one could do well without being maxed out". 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.
No, it doesn't reward that because.... that person isn't actually playing the game and having fun. QED.
People can choose, play the game without worrying too much about how you're not maxing your sp/h and having fun doing so OR play the min max game and... do nothing for a while. How is that not balanced? |
|
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
341
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 14:29:29 -
[131] - Quote
I have removed a couple off-topic posts. Please stay on topic.
Quote:27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster.
ISD Decoy
Lieutenant Commander
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 14:42:03 -
[132] - Quote
[quote=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).[/quote]
You know what boo hoo. I maybe older than you, I have been in the work force longer and get paid more, but you know what thats not right. Therefore employers should change the conditions so that when you start you should immediately catchup to me.
Are you serious of course when you start a game years after everyone else you are going to be behind the eight ball. Do they need to change the game so that you can be the same within a year or so as to someone that has played for many years.
And guess what, there are plenty of older players that still get killed and podded by a noob. |
The Connoisseur
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
24
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 14:48:00 -
[133] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:The Connoisseur wrote: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. There is no SP rat race, it's only an SP rat race if you want it to be or perceive it that way. What you're saying is nothing other than "we should all start at lvl 90, the levelling system is a rat race and frankly it's not important. The only important thing is the end game because I'm one of those people who want to min-max, but without the min and I just don't understand how one could do well without being maxed out". 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). - we all should get isk at the same rate too! No matter what you do, which choices you make, we all should get the same isk/hour. Older players had enough time to make isk so it's really for the benefit of new players that we all have the same income. - this whole racial ships thing is just terrible, if I train another race than you then that's just not cool, lets remove races and only have one left so we all train the same one. Older players had the time to train all four of them, new players haven't yet and it's just not fair. - everyone should be able to moon mine the cool moons, I mean older players have had the time to make friends something new players still have to do, this is clearly not fair and it would just be easier for new players if they could moon mine. - why can older players have the really cool ships (super caps are awesome yo), have all the friends and have had the time to conquer 0.0. Clearly this is not fair on new players, why can't they fly Titans. I'd say we remove all T2 ships, all capitals and remove corporations., alliances and whatnot. These are all unfair advantages older players have been able to build up over time which newbies obviously haven't yet. ALL PROGRESS AND CHOICES IN A SANDBOX MMO ARE CLEARLY A PLOT TO KEEP THE NEWBIES FROM PLAYING THE GAME! Oh wait, no. People can make choices just fine, they can choose to optimise min-max or they can choose not to; they'll still do fine.
Do you realize that every response you give is a strawman/slippery slope and has nothing to do with what we are talking about?
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
151
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 14:52:38 -
[134] - Quote
Incestuous Criticism wrote:You know what boo hoo. I maybe older than you, I have been in the work force longer and get paid more, but you know what thats not right. Therefore employers should change the conditions so that when you start you should immediately catchup to me.
Are you serious of course when you start a game years after everyone else you are going to be behind the eight ball. Do they need to change the game so that you can be the same within a year or so as to someone that has played for many years.
And guess what, there are plenty of older players that still get killed and podded by a noob. After nearly 9 years and 190m+ SP I still say go for it, the attributes, learning skills and learning implants were a bad idea from day one.
Even if new players were given 50m SP I wouldn't be worried, it is the experience and reputation that counts in EVE.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Memphis Baas
88
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 14:55:02 -
[135] - Quote
Louise Beethoven wrote:Do it CCP, remove attribute points. However everyone should get 2,700sp/h training across the board, it's the only fair way to do it.
Why not make the server-side calculations and the newbie tutorials a lot simpler, and just give 1 point per second (3600/h). |
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:02:39 -
[136] - Quote
If CCP determine that the attributes are old and redundent then great. All for it. Lets not stand in the way of progress. But to say lets remove them because it is too complex for new players to grasp and it is unfair, well then there are many things that will need to change about EVE because guess what... it is a complex game. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
954
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:14:25 -
[137] - Quote
The Connoisseur wrote:Do you realize that every response you give is a strawman/slippery slope and has nothing to do with what we are talking about?
They're all similar to your "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".
I'll agree that my list is silly, just as your logic is in this regard. That's the point.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
954
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:17:04 -
[138] - Quote
Olive branch time:
We remove implants, we remove remaps. BUT, we don't get compensated for the loss of training speed through increased base attribs. So they stay 19-20 attrib points.
That way everyone has the same learning speed and all is fine. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
674
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:20:43 -
[139] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Louise Beethoven wrote:Do it CCP, remove attribute points. However everyone should get 2,700sp/h training across the board, it's the only fair way to do it. Why not make the server-side calculations and the newbie tutorials a lot simpler, and just give 1 point per second (3600/h).
Would you like a free supercap, some faction modules, and a T2 BPO or two with that insane handout?
|
Chaotix Morwen
Ugly Duckling Inc
23
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:32:27 -
[140] - Quote
Why is everybody obsessed with removing choices from this game? Learning implants have always given people the choice of risk vs reward, you people are essentially asking for the reward without the risk. Also im sick of this new player experience stuff, "oh weve got to look after the poor pathetic newbies." Well stuff them, theyve had enough handouts, why not let more experienced/wealthy players skill faster as a reward for not being weak? Let us keep our learning implants, gives something for the newie to aspire to.
Btw by the time your so desperate for cutting down your skill que you have more than enough isk to get the +5s and lose em several times over. |
|
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
444
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:36:12 -
[141] - Quote
Can't believe this is actually being talked about. Have unintended consequences and ripple effects been thought out? It would affect the rationale for jump clones for instance. Why would anyone even bother to grind standings to get jump clones anymore (yes I know there are other ways to get jump clones)?
This game is trending toward easy mode. Rather dangerous trend imo. But then maybe income is hurting and the company keeps trying to get more new players by WoWing etc. It won't work because every established game encounters a new player timidity in the face of a perception of huge advantage for older players. If you construct a game with no advantage for longer play it loses vets on the other end as well.
The better approach to getting new players would be figuring out how to free up the space in the game. Then every new player can dream of a 40 acre and a mule homestead, free of the prospect of being squished by a 16-ton weight of a cap ship fleet. The current options are servitude to some Napoleonic Neckbeard/ Bot Lord, with the hope that you might lick the right asses and get a Lieutenancy and some even newer scrubs to command on his behalf.
CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
|
bloodknight2
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
335
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:37:02 -
[142] - Quote
I had to learn learning skill to learn faster. They removed those skills and gave everyone +5 attributes. I had to keep my clone up-to-date because getting podded would mean losing SP. CCP removed this also. Most ships were useless until CCP rebalanced them.
Right now, Eve online is more noobs friendly than ever and yet, people still whine because they want the game even "easier"? What's next, free isk every 5min so you don't have to run missions to buy your pvp ships?
I am against the removal of attribute points, but i wouldn't mind if CCP was giving us 2 or 3 remap per year. I'm trainning a new alt (began yesterday) for running mission. I know it sucks, but i won't be able to use it before a good 2-3 months. It sucks, but that's eve online and that's why i love this game. |
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
151
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:39:15 -
[143] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Olive branch time:
We remove implants, we remove remaps. BUT, we don't get compensated for the loss of training speed through increased base attribs. So they stay 19-20 attrib points.
That way everyone has the same learning speed and all is fine. 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.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
40
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:40:08 -
[144] - Quote
Incestuous Criticism wrote: But to say lets remove them because it is too complex for new players to grasp and it is unfair, well then there are many things that will need to change about EVE because guess what... it is a complex game.
There's a different between needless complexity and depth of gameplay. The depth of ship building is a good thing in Eve, but needing to use tools like Pyfa and EFT shows a problem. In that case the devs are working on making the in game tool work more like EFT.
Evemon and skill planners indicates that another area of the game has a problem. Now they could port that functionality into the game or they could look into whether or not the core system needs work. With ship building the core system is pretty solid, except for a few areas which is one reason why they're doing a module tiercide. But on the attributes front it may make more sense to scrap the existing system and put in something that's still provides options for specialization but is a lot clearer than combinations of two attributes equaling some formula of SP/hour.
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
151
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:44:25 -
[145] - Quote
Chaotix Morwen wrote:Why is everybody obsessed with removing choices from this game? Learning implants have always given people the choice of risk vs reward, you people are essentially asking for the reward without the risk. I'll bet you loved the choice given back when we had learning skills to train as well.
It isn't about risk, it is about a stupid mechanic that shouldn't have been added to start with. I would happily replace my +5s with highgrade pirate implants if it wasn't for the SP/h penalty currently imposed.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1523
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:44:29 -
[146] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Memphis Baas wrote:Louise Beethoven wrote:Do it CCP, remove attribute points. However everyone should get 2,700sp/h training across the board, it's the only fair way to do it. Why not make the server-side calculations and the newbie tutorials a lot simpler, and just give 1 point per second (3600/h). Would you like a free supercap, some faction modules, and a T2 BPO or two with that insane handout?
Do I get a free alt for the super too since I am not trained/willing to "spacecoffin" this toon?
:D |
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:57:53 -
[147] - Quote
Dracones wrote:Incestuous Criticism wrote: But to say lets remove them because it is too complex for new players to grasp and it is unfair, well then there are many things that will need to change about EVE because guess what... it is a complex game.
There's a different between needless complexity and depth of gameplay. The depth of ship building is a good thing in Eve, but needing to use tools like Pyfa and EFT shows a problem. In that case the devs are working on making the in game tool work more like EFT. Evemon and skill planners indicates that another area of the game has a problem. Now they could port that functionality into the game or they could look into whether or not the core system needs work. With ship building the core system is pretty solid, except for a few areas which is one reason why they're doing a module tiercide. But on the attributes front it may make more sense to scrap the existing system and put in something that's still provides options for specialization but is a lot clearer than combinations of two attributes equaling some formula of SP/hour.
I agree third party tools to decide what to do should be a in game thing. Granted that. But why is it so difficult to think that in order to train Gunnery faster you need to have high Perception and Willpower.
I see these little things no different that in order to be a fighter pilot you need strong in Maths and Physics.
To be an artist you need to be strong in (i dont know tree hugging and cardigan wearing - no offence to any artist reading this, it is an in joke with my daughter - she is my artist.)
So why is it to complex to have the same philosphy in game. |
Soldarius
Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent
1056
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 16:08:31 -
[148] - Quote
Pretty much anything you want to train you can train to a fairly good level (4) without having to resort to remaps or even worry about attributes, with the exception of certain skills locked behind high multiplier level 5 prerequisites, ie Black Ops Battleships or Titans.
Personally, I only remap when I want to train all the skills with those attributes to 5, specifically specializations. Otherwise, imo it is not worth the remap to shave 18 hours off of the 30 days required to get a bunch of skills to 4.
I see no reason to remove learning implants.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
40
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 16:11:49 -
[149] - Quote
Incestuous Criticism wrote: I agree third party tools to decide what to do should be a in game thing. Granted that. But why is it so difficult to think that in order to train Gunnery faster you need to have high Perception and Willpower.
I see these little things no different that in order to be a fighter pilot you need strong in Maths and Physics.
So with Perception/Willpower how much faster do you train Gunnery when they're 25/23 vs 23/21? Or if they're 23/25? Also many times the attributes used aren't really that obvious. Most of the time they're grouped along certain lines(perception/willpower, int/memory) but all that does is make it so certain attributes are better than others(ex/ Cha being a dump stat).
It's really a legacy mechanic from back when they "locked in" the type of character you were(combat, indy, etc) at creation. If you're not locking in people anymore there's probably a much better way to let people temporarily specialize, like plugging in Math and Physic implants while you train to be a fighter pilot.
Doing that lets you make what's going on more obvious(Fighter Training Implant +10%) and also let's you open up more options for letting people specialize/optimize rather than just the 5 attributes. This especially would hold true if the specialization was done via implants because then you can add/remove them into the game via the drop tables. They'd no longer be a hard coded/inflexible game mechanic.
|
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 16:25:46 -
[150] - Quote
"So with Perception/Willpower how much faster do you train Gunnery when they're 25/23 vs 23/21? Or if they're 23/25?" Yes granted there isnt much of a noticable difference, so maybe instead of removing it make it so that if you do select a higher level of attribute it is worth it.
"It's really a legacy mechanic from back when they "locked in" the type of character you were(combat, indy, etc) at creation. If you're not locking in people anymore there's probably a much better way to let people temporarily specialize, like plugging in Math and Physic implants while you train to be a fighter pilot."
But I guess this is one point that I struggle with, why lock people in. Because you know what sometimes there are consequences for your actions. To many people dont want to have consequences for an action. You can't just try and be a pilot, it is something you have to decide. Granted you can start the training and if you decide you dont like it, then you change, but you cant just change at a drop of a hat. There is some planning and possible re-training.
I like having the attributes, I think they should be in game but make them more specific and meaningful, plus with attribute enhancers, if you want to fly a Black Ops, then you focus on that ship, if you want to be a Mackinaw Pilot then you focus on that and map your attributes accordingly to give to the fastest possible way to train.
Maybe then allow for remaps sooner than a year bcause lets face it, flying a Mackniaw for a year can be a bit of a drag, you might suddenly wake up and get the taste for PVP. Oh wait thats right they are suppose to make people PVP adverse. |
|
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
282
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 16:26:35 -
[151] - Quote
They wont remove implants |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
954
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 16:57:34 -
[152] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Olive branch time:
We remove implants, we remove remaps. BUT, we don't get compensated for the loss of training speed through increased base attribs. So they stay 19-20 attrib points.
That way everyone has the same learning speed and all is fine. 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.
They can't catch up, older players will get SP at the same rate regardless of what that rate is. But isn't that what people in this thread want? Equality?
I thought this thread was about not giving older, more wealthy players, and advantage so I'm sure everyone will agree to a no remaps, no implants solution, regardless of the base attribs as it creates equality? What's wrong with the base 19-20 attribs? |
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
151
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 17:16:18 -
[153] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:I thought this thread was about not giving older, more wealthy players, and advantage so I'm sure everyone will agree to a no remaps, no implants solution, regardless of the base attribs as it creates equality? What's wrong with the base 19-20 attribs? 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.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Black Dranzer
393
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 17:24:08 -
[154] - Quote
Ahh, politics.
Okay, here's what's going to happen. Attributes, remaps, and attribute implants are going to die. Regular combat implants are going to remain, but they're probably going to be rebalanced a bit to compensate for some of the missing holes.
SP will become a flat SP/H based on the current maximum, or something very close to it. In addition, expect a balancing pass for implants. They might take the opportunity to rework the bonuses a bit, but overall the system should remain superficially the same: Stick chips in your head for fighty power, get podded and lose the fighty power. Circle of life. Expect compensation in the form of LP for any implants that go missing.
I know all this because I have over a decade of studying MMOs in general and EVE in particular, and also because I have the cognitive ability required to whistle and **** at the same time.
The core of it is this: Due to a combination of tradition and greed, MMO companies like to keep you from being max level too quickly. They put up walls between newbie level and maxed out character level. Eve's skill system is different from the leveling systems you see in most MMOs, but the fundamental drive is the same.
What isn't the same, however, is the methodology. Eve's designers originally made the brilliant observation that the goal of the "grind" is too keep people from getting powerful too quickly. That is, it's a delay. It's about time. So why not make the progression system in Eve purely a question of waiting? It's a simple system, and you don't force people to do **** they don't want to in order to advance.
But see, here's the kicker. In most MMOs, progression speed is not a universal constant. There's no real hard cap on how fast you can hit 100 in WoW. I mean, in practice there is, but it's a soft sort of cap. In Eve, it's really hard and fast. But there's still some minor variance. Implants, attributes, remaps.
CCP wants to kill that variance.
Why?
Because it is a dominating force. You can always say "I'll level faster". You can always say "I'll grind more missions" or "I'll mine more Veldspar". But you can't say "I'll create more time". You can't magic any extra hours out of your ass. Which means if people are given the choice of "make the most of my only hard limited resource" or "do literally anything else", you better believe they're going to go with sitting in a station with a head full of +5s. It's the same logic that caused learning skills to get vaporized way back when, and it's just as relevant now as it was back then.
This is why the system is bad. This is why it's going to die. This is why the game will be better for it.
No, your precious hardcore sandbox is not going away. Nobody's getting free Titans in their inbox. This is not the beginning of the end, it's another step in the endless refining process. Embrace the change and realize it'll result in better living for everybody.
Or cry loudly. It doesn't make a lot of difference.
Walking in Stations as a Social Hub: Business vs Pleasure in Incarna
|
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
85
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 17:38:21 -
[155] - Quote
Black Dranzer wrote:Ahh, politics.
Okay, here's what's going to happen. Attributes, remaps, and attribute implants are going to die. Regular combat implants are going to remain, but they're probably going to be rebalanced a bit to compensate for some of the missing holes.
SP will become a flat SP/H based on the current maximum, or something very close to it. In addition, expect a balancing pass for implants. They might take the opportunity to rework the bonuses a bit, but overall the system should remain superficially the same: Stick chips in your head for fighty power, get podded and lose the fighty power. Circle of life. Expect compensation in the form of LP for any implants that go missing.
I know all this because I have over a decade of studying MMOs in general and EVE in particular, and also because I have the cognitive ability required to whistle and **** at the same time.
The core of it is this: Due to a combination of tradition and greed, MMO companies like to keep you from being max level too quickly. They put up walls between newbie level and maxed out character level. Eve's skill system is different from the leveling systems you see in most MMOs, but the fundamental drive is the same.
What isn't the same, however, is the methodology. Eve's designers originally made the brilliant observation that the goal of the "grind" is too keep people from getting powerful too quickly. That is, it's a delay. It's about time. So why not make the progression system in Eve purely a question of waiting? It's a simple system, and you don't force people to do **** they don't want to in order to advance.
But see, here's the kicker. In most MMOs, progression speed is not a universal constant. There's no real hard cap on how fast you can hit 100 in WoW. I mean, in practice there is, but it's a soft sort of cap. In Eve, it's really hard and fast. But there's still some minor variance. Implants, attributes, remaps.
CCP wants to kill that variance.
Why?
Because it is a dominating force. You can always say "I'll level faster". You can always say "I'll grind more missions" or "I'll mine more Veldspar". But you can't say "I'll create more time". You can't magic any extra hours out of your ass. Which means if people are given the choice of "make the most of my only hard limited resource" or "do literally anything else", you better believe they're going to go with sitting in a station with a head full of +5s. It's the same logic that caused learning skills to get vaporized way back when, and it's just as relevant now as it was back then.
This is why the system is bad. This is why it's going to die. This is why the game will be better for it.
No, your precious hardcore sandbox is not going away. Nobody's getting free Titans in their inbox. This is not the beginning of the end, it's another step in the endless refining process. Embrace the change and realize it'll result in better living for everybody.
Or cry loudly. It doesn't make a lot of difference.
Get isk and buy a character in the bizarre with the skills already trained. There is a solution.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
954
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 17:49:28 -
[156] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:I thought this thread was about not giving older, more wealthy players, and advantage so I'm sure everyone will agree to a no remaps, no implants solution, regardless of the base attribs as it creates equality? What's wrong with the base 19-20 attribs? 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.
No, your logic is flawed. I thought this was about evening the playing field, removing implants and remaps? Regardless of what everyone's SP/h will be set to, newbies will never catch up to older players so given that it really doesn't matter what the sp/h is.
Or... could it be... just perhaps... that this isn't at all about equality, but about how you and everyone else want 2700SP/h without any of the downsides? That this whole "nonono, it's better for the game and the newbies, THINK OF THE NEWBIES!" is just a lie?
SAY IT AINT SO!
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
69
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 17:52:01 -
[157] - Quote
Black Dranzer wrote:Ahh, politics.
Okay, here's what's going to happen. Attributes, remaps, and attribute implants are going to die. Regular combat implants are going to remain, but they're probably going to be rebalanced a bit to compensate for some of the missing holes.
SP will become a flat SP/H based on the current maximum, or something very close to it. In addition, expect a balancing pass for implants. They might take the opportunity to rework the bonuses a bit, but overall the system should remain superficially the same: Stick chips in your head for fighty power, get podded and lose the fighty power. Circle of life. Expect compensation in the form of LP for any implants that go missing.
I know all this because I have over a decade of studying MMOs in general and EVE in particular, and also because I have the cognitive ability required to whistle and **** at the same time.
The core of it is this: Due to a combination of tradition and greed, MMO companies like to keep you from being max level too quickly. They put up walls between newbie level and maxed out character level. Eve's skill system is different from the leveling systems you see in most MMOs, but the fundamental drive is the same.
What isn't the same, however, is the methodology. Eve's designers originally made the brilliant observation that the goal of the "grind" is too keep people from getting powerful too quickly. That is, it's a delay. It's about time. So why not make the progression system in Eve purely a question of waiting? It's a simple system, and you don't force people to do **** they don't want to in order to advance.
But see, here's the kicker. In most MMOs, progression speed is not a universal constant. There's no real hard cap on how fast you can hit 100 in WoW. I mean, in practice there is, but it's a soft sort of cap. In Eve, it's really hard and fast. But there's still some minor variance. Implants, attributes, remaps.
CCP wants to kill that variance.
Why?
Because it is a dominating force. You can always say "I'll level faster". You can always say "I'll grind more missions" or "I'll mine more Veldspar". But you can't say "I'll create more time". You can't magic any extra hours out of your ass. Which means if people are given the choice of "make the most of my only hard limited resource" or "do literally anything else", you better believe they're going to go with sitting in a station with a head full of +5s. It's the same logic that caused learning skills to get vaporized way back when, and it's just as relevant now as it was back then.
This is why the system is bad. This is why it's going to die. This is why the game will be better for it.
No, your precious hardcore sandbox is not going away. Nobody's getting free Titans in their inbox. This is not the beginning of the end, it's another step in the endless refining process. Embrace the change and realize it'll result in better living for everybody.
Or cry loudly. It doesn't make a lot of difference. You couldnt Have Said this any better And The Faster this Happens even more the Better. however Veterens should be Compensated.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
954
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 18:02:57 -
[158] - Quote
Black Dranzer wrote:Ahh, politics.
Nice try, but it's just a shill.
Removing implants and remaps does not in any way diminish or remove this "problem" (ps, there is no problem). It's all just clueless people trying their best to convince others of how sincere they are. Newbies do not get into a better position if remaps or implants get removed.
All that gets removed is possible risk and consequences to choices, which is of course what bad EVE players want.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
954
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 18:07:48 -
[159] - Quote
Solops Crendraven wrote:Black Dranzer wrote:Ahh, politics. You couldnt Have Said this any better And The Faster this Happens even more the Better. however Veterens should be Compensated.
It's funny how a quick facts check shows both of you to be amazingly inept at EVE, yet you somehow try to portray yourselves as being capable of knowing what's best for the game.
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
675
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 18:07:50 -
[160] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Memphis Baas wrote:Louise Beethoven wrote:Do it CCP, remove attribute points. However everyone should get 2,700sp/h training across the board, it's the only fair way to do it. Why not make the server-side calculations and the newbie tutorials a lot simpler, and just give 1 point per second (3600/h). Would you like a free supercap, some faction modules, and a T2 BPO or two with that insane handout? Do I get a free alt for the super too since I am not trained/willing to "spacecoffin" this toon? :D
Two at least (you'll need a cyno alt). And since you asked nicely they should throw in a pony too.
EDIT: Not throw! Nicely place down in front of you, and give it a pat and a carrot, this post in no way endorses cruelty to animals |
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
70
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 18:26:09 -
[161] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote:Black Dranzer wrote:Ahh, politics. You couldnt Have Said this any better And The Faster this Happens even more the Better. however Veterens should be Compensated. It's funny how a quick facts check shows both of you to be amazingly inept at EVE, yet you somehow try to portray yourselves as being capable of knowing what's best for the game. 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 Losses 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 me Ive thought about it)whatever CCP knows exactly what they are doing they know how to keep us addicted.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
954
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 18:37:01 -
[162] - Quote
Solops Crendraven wrote: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.
You just went full ******, never go full ******. Your hilariously dumb "caps on everything", which is just you being attention *****, and what you... typed gives an overall feeling of you being clueless on the game.
Also, you showcased just brilliantly as to why you're just a hypocrite liar. You're not in this "for the betterment of the game" or "think of the newbies", it's just you being selfish and want this for personal reasons which mostly have to do with your warped idea of how SP is important, and how you want to speed up training without downsides to get to your personal goals asap.
You can stop the charade, no one's buying it. |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
70
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 19:48:02 -
[163] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote: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. You just went full ******, never go full ******. Your hilariously dumb "caps on everything", which is just you being attention *****, and what you... typed gives an overall feeling of you being clueless on the game. Also, you showcased just brilliantly as to why you're just a hypocrite liar. You're not in this "for the betterment of the game" or "think of the newbies", it's just you being selfish and want this for personal reasons which mostly have to do with your warped idea of how SP is important, and how you want to speed up training without downsides to get to your personal goals asap. You can stop the charade, no one's buying it. I dont expect everyone to agree thats Foolish I actually enjoy the challenge.However How is your Post "betterment Of The Game"Whats wrong with speeding Up The game and getting Rid of SP?Is That so Selfish,Brilliant perhaps. a Hyprocrite Liar Im Not.. This will even the playing field New Players and Veterans a like (Old Players will be compensated ) that is more than fair.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
151
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 19:53:04 -
[164] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:I thought this thread was about not giving older, more wealthy players, and advantage so I'm sure everyone will agree to a no remaps, no implants solution, regardless of the base attribs as it creates equality? What's wrong with the base 19-20 attribs? 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. No, your logic is flawed. I thought this was about evening the playing field, removing implants and remaps? Regardless of what everyone's SP/h will be set to, newbies will never catch up to older players so given that it really doesn't matter what the sp/h is. Or... could it be... just perhaps... that this isn't at all about equality, but about how you and everyone else want 2700SP/h without any of the downsides? That this whole "nonono, it's better for the game and the newbies, THINK OF THE NEWBIES!" is just a lie? SAY IT AINT SO! No it isn't, what I'm saying is that it would be stupid to have new players train slower than we did. Even if you give new players 5000SP/h I still will run out of trainable skills before they catch up. They will never catch up to the people starting a decade earlier. However that isn't a good reason to make them suffer two decades for the same progress though.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
954
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:05:02 -
[165] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:They will never catch up to the people starting a decade earlier.
Exactly, so it doesn't matter what you do or change. Also, how is this a problem?
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1528
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:11:22 -
[166] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:They will never catch up to the people starting a decade earlier. Exactly, so it doesn't matter what you do or change. Also, how is this a problem?
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. |
Shizuken
Venerated Stars
351
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:14:13 -
[167] - Quote
Well, I would be disappointed but my main question would be, if the attributes are to be fixed, and attribute implants removed, will the default SP per hour be lower, the same, or higher?
I actually appreciate being able to spend money to train faster. It doesn't keep me from PvP at all really, jump clones are easy to get. PvP for its own sake doesn't interest me much anyway, it is wasteful and uninteresting. |
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:14:24 -
[168] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:They will never catch up to the people starting a decade earlier. Exactly, so it doesn't matter what you do or change. Also, how is this a problem? 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.
Im sorry, how do you think it will take player Y 1.5 years + something to train the same skill. Maybe they just need to make better decisions. I have got skills in parts where I think, bugger I wish I didnt train that. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
954
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:17:25 -
[169] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:They will never catch up to the people starting a decade earlier. Exactly, so it doesn't matter what you do or change. Also, how is this a problem? 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.
Why not? How does it make sense to say "well, implants and remaps suck" and then go "if you change attribs, don't forget to add enough to make up for the fact we don't have implants and remaps anymore and please, assume max efficiency of course". These people who post in this thread are all posting for the betterment of the game dontyouknow, to make everyone equal so that newbies aren't left out of the loop.
It has nothing at all to do with how these folks want the benefits of remaps and implants without the downsides of losing the implants and sometimes having to train off-remap. I mean, that's what they keep saying. It also has nothing to do with how they think that skill points is a race, and that it somehow matters.
If you care about a distant long goal, put in the effort and risk to get there faster. If you aren't willing to do that then you'll get there slower. How is that "bad for the game"? |
Brigadine Ferathine
Volition Cult The Volition Cult
36
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:24:04 -
[170] - Quote
I mean the risk for newer players is MUCH higher with the implant system because we need the speed boost. A set of BASIC +4's runs about 130million. That is insane. Older players don't need that boost. Why make noobs take more risk than older players? It is backwards logic. |
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
676
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:24:31 -
[171] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote: Why not? How does it make sense to say "well, implants and remaps suck" and then go "if you change attribs, don't forget to add enough to make up for the fact we don't have implants and remaps anymore and please, assume max efficiency of course". These people who post in this thread are all posting for the betterment of the game dontyouknow, to make everyone equal so that newbies aren't left out of the loop.
It has nothing at all to do with how these folks want the benefits of remaps and implants without the downsides of losing the implants and sometimes having to train off-remap. I mean, that's what they keep saying. It also has nothing to do with how they think that skill points is a race, and that it somehow matters.
If you care about a distant long goal, put in the effort and risk to get there faster. If you aren't willing to do that then you'll get there slower. How is that "bad for the game"?
Yeah, it is kinda funny the posters argueing that naturally the default value should be the same as a perfect remap with +5's implanted. Not self-motivated, not a bit .
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
70
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:38:27 -
[172] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:I thought this thread was about not giving older, more wealthy players, and advantage so I'm sure everyone will agree to a no remaps, no implants solution, regardless of the base attribs as it creates equality? What's wrong with the base 19-20 attribs? 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. No, your logic is flawed. I thought this was about evening the playing field, removing implants and remaps? Regardless of what everyone's SP/h will be set to, newbies will never catch up to older players so given that it really doesn't matter what the sp/h is. Or... could it be... just perhaps... that this isn't at all about equality, but about how you and everyone else want 2700SP/h without any of the downsides? That this whole "nonono, it's better for the game and the newbies, THINK OF THE NEWBIES!" is just a lie? SAY IT AINT SO! No it isn't, what I'm saying is that it would be stupid to have new players train slower than we did. Even if you give new players 5000SP/h I still will run out of trainable skills before they catch up. They will never catch up to the people starting a decade earlier. However that isn't a good reason to make them suffer two decades for the same progress though. I agree that is why new player start playing and give up its boring and tedious. I know I am three years into the game I will never catch up.I just cant get out because I invested so much time and money .the issue is veterans dont want to get rid of it because they invested 10 years of there lives it understandable to protect that however In my proposal you will be compensated thats pretty generous whats wrong with that?
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
955
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:41:26 -
[173] - Quote
Don't breed. |
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:47:33 -
[174] - Quote
[/quote] No it isn't, what I'm saying is that it would be stupid to have new players train slower than we did. Even if you give new players 5000SP/h I still will run out of trainable skills before they catch up. They will never catch up to the people starting a decade earlier. However that isn't a good reason to make them suffer two decades for the same progress though.[/quote] I agree that is why new player start playing and give up its boring and tedious. I know I am three years into the game I will never catch up.I just cant get out because I invested so much time and money .the issue is veterans dont want to get rid of it because they invested 10 years of there lives it understandable to protect that however In my proposal you will be compensated thats pretty generous whats wrong with that? [/quote]
Really, so plugging in implants is boring and tedious, having attributes behind the scene that you very rarely play with is boring and tedious.
Then you must find PI the same, just a farmville clicking, WH travel the same because you have to constantly scan down wholes etc, same thing over and over again. Then PVP, OMG, what happens when you dont get a fight, perhaps you have to travel 20 jumps just to find a target. FFS no one is making you play and don't let the door hit you in the arse as you walk out. |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
70
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:48:07 -
[175] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:Black Dranzer wrote:Ahh, politics.
Okay, here's what's going to happen. Attributes, remaps, and attribute implants are going to die. Regular combat implants are going to remain, but they're probably going to be rebalanced a bit to compensate for some of the missing holes.
SP will become a flat SP/H based on the current maximum, or something very close to it. In addition, expect a balancing pass for implants. They might take the opportunity to rework the bonuses a bit, but overall the system should remain superficially the same: Stick chips in your head for fighty power, get podded and lose the fighty power. Circle of life. Expect compensation in the form of LP for any implants that go missing.
I know all this because I have over a decade of studying MMOs in general and EVE in particular, and also because I have the cognitive ability required to whistle and **** at the same time.
The core of it is this: Due to a combination of tradition and greed, MMO companies like to keep you from being max level too quickly. They put up walls between newbie level and maxed out character level. Eve's skill system is different from the leveling systems you see in most MMOs, but the fundamental drive is the same.
What isn't the same, however, is the methodology. Eve's designers originally made the brilliant observation that the goal of the "grind" is too keep people from getting powerful too quickly. That is, it's a delay. It's about time. So why not make the progression system in Eve purely a question of waiting? It's a simple system, and you don't force people to do **** they don't want to in order to advance.
But see, here's the kicker. In most MMOs, progression speed is not a universal constant. There's no real hard cap on how fast you can hit 100 in WoW. I mean, in practice there is, but it's a soft sort of cap. In Eve, it's really hard and fast. But there's still some minor variance. Implants, attributes, remaps.
CCP wants to kill that variance.
Why?
Because it is a dominating force. You can always say "I'll level faster". You can always say "I'll grind more missions" or "I'll mine more Veldspar". But you can't say "I'll create more time". You can't magic any extra hours out of your ass. Which means if people are given the choice of "make the most of my only hard limited resource" or "do literally anything else", you better believe they're going to go with sitting in a station with a head full of +5s. It's the same logic that caused learning skills to get vaporized way back when, and it's just as relevant now as it was back then.
This is why the system is bad. This is why it's going to die. This is why the game will be better for it.
No, your precious hardcore sandbox is not going away. Nobody's getting free Titans in their inbox. This is not the beginning of the end, it's another step in the endless refining process. Embrace the change and realize it'll result in better living for everybody.
Or cry loudly. It doesn't make a lot of difference. Get isk and buy a character in the bizarre with the skills already trained. There is a solution. The Bazaar Its really Expensive And They Dont always have what You looking for and you gotta watch out for scams or you out 100billion in Isk.. HoweverCCP should have a in game store to buy toons at more reasonable prices.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1529
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:49:07 -
[176] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Gregor Parud wrote: Why not? How does it make sense to say "well, implants and remaps suck" and then go "if you change attribs, don't forget to add enough to make up for the fact we don't have implants and remaps anymore and please, assume max efficiency of course". These people who post in this thread are all posting for the betterment of the game dontyouknow, to make everyone equal so that newbies aren't left out of the loop.
It has nothing at all to do with how these folks want the benefits of remaps and implants without the downsides of losing the implants and sometimes having to train off-remap. I mean, that's what they keep saying. It also has nothing to do with how they think that skill points is a race, and that it somehow matters.
If you care about a distant long goal, put in the effort and risk to get there faster. If you aren't willing to do that then you'll get there slower. How is that "bad for the game"?
Yeah, it is kinda funny the posters argueing that naturally the default value should be the same as a perfect remap with +5's implanted. Not self-motivated, not a bit .
It does not need to be perfect remap with +5s speed but I don't think it should be worst remap speed either. Just set it at whatever is the average and be done with it since at the end of the day, the best train speed had to use the 2 free remap so that would not be a good example either I guess. I obvioulsy didn't put enough word in my previous post as I really don't think it should be similar speed to what was achieve with perfect remap and implants.
I think a fixed SP/hours is better for newbie than variable but dependant on doing research on a game they played all of 6 hours over 2 days when they downloaded the game to try it out. |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
70
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:52:29 -
[177] - Quote
Incestuous Criticism wrote:Quote "I agree that is why new player start playing and give up its boring and tedious. I know I am three years into the game I will never catch up.I just cant get out because I invested so much time and money .the issue is veterans dont want to get rid of it because they invested 10 years of there lives it understandable to protect that however In my proposal you will be compensated thats pretty generous whats wrong with that?"
Really, so plugging in implants is boring and tedious, having attributes behind the scene that you very rarely play with is boring and tedious.
Then you must find PI the same, just a farmville clicking, WH travel the same because you have to constantly scan down wholes etc, same thing over and over again. Then PVP, OMG, what happens when you dont get a fight, perhaps you have to travel 20 jumps just to find a target. FFS no one is making you play and don't let the door hit you in the arse as you walk out. Now That would be Boring.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Chaotix Morwen
Ugly Duckling Inc
23
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:54:51 -
[178] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Chaotix Morwen wrote:Why is everybody obsessed with removing choices from this game? Learning implants have always given people the choice of risk vs reward, you people are essentially asking for the reward without the risk. I'll bet you loved the choice given back when we had learning skills to train as well. It isn't about risk, it is about a stupid mechanic that shouldn't have been added to start with. I would happily replace my +5s with highgrade pirate implants if it wasn't for the SP/h penalty currently imposed.
The learning skills werent a choice, there wasnt the pick between SP, ship efficency or cost, it was just spend time for bonuses. With implants you can have learning implants, pirate implants or nothing at all, 3 choices which you can intermix as you wish. With choice comes risk. Just because you struggle with choices doesnt mean its a stupid mechanic.
Are you seriously saying you wont use pirate implants for the sake of 1.5 sp/m? Does that meager little sp gain mean so much as to gimp your ships? |
Incestuous Criticism
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:55:30 -
[179] - Quote
I know here is a crazy thought. Lets just wipe out all skills points and allow all players to start again. Then that way we can redo our skills that have been wasted on stuffed that we should have pt more thought into when we first started playing the game because I think it is unfair that new players have their hand held more than me.
Every time subscriptions reach an extra 1000 then every player should get an allocated skill point because we are getting more players on board this so called boring game....
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
70
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 21:02:31 -
[180] - Quote
Incestuous Criticism wrote:I know here is a crazy thought. Lets just wipe out all skill points and allow all players to start again. Then that way we can redo our skills that have been wasted on stuff that we should have put more thought into when we first started playing the game because I think it is unfair that new players have their hand held more than me. Every time subscriptions reach an extra 1000 then every player should get an allocated skill point because we are getting more players on board this so called boring game.... 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"
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
955
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 21:09:56 -
[181] - Quote
Solops Crendraven wrote:Incestuous Criticism wrote:I know here is a crazy thought. Lets just wipe out all skill points and allow all players to start again. Then that way we can redo our skills that have been wasted on stuff that we should have put more thought into when we first started playing the game because I think it is unfair that new players have their hand held more than me. Every time subscriptions reach an extra 1000 then every player should get an allocated skill point because we are getting more players on board this so called boring game.... 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"
Fortune favours the smart, it wouldn't help you. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1529
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 21:18:08 -
[182] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote:Incestuous Criticism wrote:I know here is a crazy thought. Lets just wipe out all skill points and allow all players to start again. Then that way we can redo our skills that have been wasted on stuff that we should have put more thought into when we first started playing the game because I think it is unfair that new players have their hand held more than me. Every time subscriptions reach an extra 1000 then every player should get an allocated skill point because we are getting more players on board this so called boring game.... 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" Fortune favours the smart, it wouldn't help you.
It would help me as I would not ahve caldari freighter IV but vOv... |
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2128
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 21:22:59 -
[183] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote:Yes, remove attributes and attribute implants.
Also remove all other implants. Also remove boosts.
Then engaging a ship comes down to the ships, their fittings, and the players' skills, none of this additional garbage.
Remove ship fitting as well. Just have prefitted, unchangable ships.
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
70
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 23:04:44 -
[184] - Quote
Kiandoshia wrote:Unezka Turigahl wrote:Yes, remove attributes and attribute implants.
Also remove all other implants. Also remove boosts.
Then engaging a ship comes down to the ships, their fittings, and the players' skills, none of this additional garbage. Remove ship fitting as well. Just have prefitted, unchangable ships. I agree!
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
341
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 23:31:48 -
[185] - Quote
Quote:2. Be respectful toward others at all times.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.
27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster. I have removed an off-topic and disrespectful post. Please review our forum rules before posting.
ISD Decoy
Lieutenant Commander
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd Ferguson Alliance
274
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 00:29:57 -
[186] - Quote
Please just give us all the skills at V so that we never have to log in again and be done with it already! tia |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
70
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 01:29:38 -
[187] - Quote
AkJon Ferguson wrote:Please just give us all the skills at V so that we never have to log in again and be done with it already! tia 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.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
The Connoisseur
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
25
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 01:44:02 -
[188] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:The Connoisseur wrote:Do you realize that every response you give is a strawman/slippery slope and has nothing to do with what we are talking about?
They're all similar to your "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". I'll agree that my list is silly, just as your logic is in this regard. That's the point.
Uh, I think you meant to quote someone else because I didn't say what was in that quote and never even mentioned buying a character on the bazaar. Check next time before posting pls. |
Black Dranzer
395
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 02:21:24 -
[189] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:It's funny how a quick facts check shows both of you to be amazingly inept at EVE, yet you somehow try to portray yourselves as being capable of knowing what's best for the game. 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.
Walking in Stations as a Social Hub: Business vs Pleasure in Incarna
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
955
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 02:45:51 -
[190] - Quote
Solops Crendraven wrote:AkJon Ferguson wrote:Please just give us all the skills at V so that we never have to log in again and be done with it already! tia 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 see you're adopting the itrollu.jpg tactic. |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
955
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 02:50:54 -
[191] - Quote
Black Dranzer wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:It's funny how a quick facts check shows both of you to be amazingly inept at EVE, yet you somehow try to portray yourselves as being capable of knowing what's best for the game. 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.
You talk a lot but there's not much really happening, you can try and use as much smoke and mirrors as you want to but that doesn't change the fact that it's obvious why you want these changes and thus why you're trying to smooth talk people into accepting the idea.
This is a gem btw: "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"
So with that being the case as you put it, why remove them if it's not a problem? |
Provence Tristram
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
87
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 03:00:05 -
[192] - Quote
This would be a horrendous change. This isn't world of warcraft. There's streamlining, and there's attempting to idiot-proof a product that thrives on the existence of idiots. One is a noble pursuit, while the other is an exercise in futility which will ultimately DESTROY THE GAME. |
Black Dranzer
396
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 03:14:59 -
[193] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:You talk a lot but there's not much really happening, you can try and use as much smoke and mirrors as you want to but that doesn't change the fact that it's obvious why you want these changes and thus why you're trying to smooth talk people into accepting the idea. 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.
Gregor Parud wrote:This is a gem btw: "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"
So with that being the case as you put it, why remove them if it's not a problem? 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.
Walking in Stations as a Social Hub: Business vs Pleasure in Incarna
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
955
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 03:24:55 -
[194] - Quote
Black Dranzer wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:You talk a lot but there's not much really happening, you can try and use as much smoke and mirrors as you want to but that doesn't change the fact that it's obvious why you want these changes and thus why you're trying to smooth talk people into accepting the idea. 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.Gregor Parud wrote:This is a gem btw: "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"
So with that being the case as you put it, why remove them if it's not a problem? 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.
Perhaps it's because... people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? I realise this may be a radical idea. And no the majority of people opt to NOT sit in stations with +5, if that were the case nothing much would happen in space. I don't know if you've been paying attention at all but people actually undock, some with +5 others without them.
So again, lots of :words: but no actual facts other than the obvious "I'm trying my utter best to sell this idea, because it suits me personally".
|
Black Dranzer
396
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 03:34:21 -
[195] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:I don't know if you've been paying attention at all but people actually undock, some with +5 others without them. Yes, because they've crossed the threshold.
It's like this. If you can afford to lose your +5s, it becomes a question of isk risk vs SP reward. You take the SP reward because it's SP.
If you can't afford to lose your +5s, it becomes a question of SP risk vs isk reward. You choose not to risk the SP because, again, it's SP.
If a person is undocking with +5s in their head, that means they're either rich, stupid, or very very careful.
Walking in Stations as a Social Hub: Business vs Pleasure in Incarna
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
774
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 03:34:50 -
[196] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh?
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.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1743
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 03:44:09 -
[197] - Quote
Learning implants are awful. This is nothing to do with PvP risk - I routinely fly with mid-grade pirate sets. The problem is that they make you choose between learning efficiency and PvP efficiency, which has a flow-on effect of reducing PvP. They should be removed from the game entirely.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
bloodknight2
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
340
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 03:49:20 -
[198] - Quote
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:I mean the risk for newer players is MUCH higher with the implant system because we need the speed boost. A set of BASIC +4's runs about 130million. That is insane. Older players don't need that boost. Why make noobs take more risk than older players? It is backwards logic.
Cry moar.
You DO NOT NEED +4 implant. In fact, i have billions of isk and still buy +3 to my alt because the price for +1 attribute doesn't worth it in my opinion.
Next, removing faction modules because the poor noobs like you cannot afford buying mods worth hundreds of millions for only a small bonus? Removing skill hardwirings giving +5% to something because the new player cannot afford one?
130m isn't a lot. 130m is around 2 time cheaper than a fully fit BS. 130m is what you can make in 4-5h when you are quite new to this game. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
820
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 04:40:57 -
[199] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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. If I am likely to lose the pod, I wear no hardwires and might have some learning implants in, by happenstance as there is a limit to how many jump clones one can have.
If there are no learning implants and only higher stats, I will wear no hardwires and just bank the ISK.
CSM Ten movement for change.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
777
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 04:42:46 -
[200] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:If I am likely to lose the pod, I wear no hardwires and might have some learning implants in, by happenstance as there is a limit to how many jump clones one can have.
If there are no learning implants and only higher stats, I will wear no hardwires and just bank the ISK.
Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning?
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6132
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 05:03:44 -
[201] - Quote
If I may, the reasoning might well be "stats". Since implants are on kill/loss mails now, and I see them on killboards, it can hurt muh stats if I get popped in a 20 million ISK ship, which is no big deal, but there goes a billion ISK in implants (for sake of argument) in the time it takes for the instaloki to hit it (one second).
So I think it would, based on what I have observed for years, that those who fight with implants will simply use the slots for something else - adding to the point that removing learning factor implants might help PVPers - and those who do not will continue not to and nothing changes for them.
I say move the attributes to implant sets as extra bonuses to existing PVP oriented sets so that PVPers who take more risk with implants get more bonus from that.
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1479
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 05:22:32 -
[202] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning?
I personally usually fly without hardwires, the exception being when I maybe need a couple of extra percent powergrid or CPU.
Usually I just fly around with 2x +3s in for whichever attributes I am polarised mapped to, which for the past couple of years has been perception / willpower. That is a sign in itself that the learning system at the moment is terribad. I am locked into a perc/will mapping because that is the only logical choice to make for the skills that I want to learn. Should there be a new skill that requires int/mem for example, I have my +5s to rely on, but I am still going to be heavily penalised by my only-sensible-choice mapping.
I keep a full set of mid grade slaves in one clone, and I think one of my alts has scanning implants somewhere or another, but these rarely see fun combat because for flying anything short of a carrier I can still be blobbed off the field in seconds and podded in a bubble and for the amount of ISK I have available, it's just not a good choice.
Would I increase my use of hardwires if I no longer had to replace a couple of +3s / +4s every time?
No, I doubt it. Granted there are some which are more generic that may be more tempting, such as gunnery damage multipliers and tracking speed, but if I then want to fly something else (which as a regular NPSI pilot is not unusual) then those particular hardwires may not be up to the job giving me a choice of jump cloning if possible, tearing out my hardwires and replacing them, or flying with ineffective hardwires and still the loss if I lose them.
Chances are if we didn't have to worry about attribute implants, I'd forgo the hardwires entirely and spend the 25 to 50m it costs me each time on an entirely new cruiser, or half a dozen frigs. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3152
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 05:35:36 -
[203] - Quote
i was never a fan of learning implants.
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
4461
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 05:38:30 -
[204] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
Learning implants grant a bonus that persists after they are destroyed, hence I prioritize them over other options when filling my head with implants.
I have a +5 learning clone (for when I am not actively seeking PVP or do not expect my clone to be at risk), a +4 learning clone with cruiser-oriented hardwirings and a +3 'ganking clone' with implants oriented toward Catalyst suicide ganking (also used for any operations in WH or null).
In each of these, I spend at least 4 times as much on the stat implants as on hardwirings, and I expect this would not change.
If I was involved in nullsec fleetfights, I would plug in two +3 implants (relevant to the skill I am training during the op), and the highest impact cheap hardwirings, unless my ship and/or the operation warranted slaves, crystals, halos, virtues or some other bling. (I don't presently fly anything valuable enough to justify those implants).
So to answer your question - I would spend considerably less on implants if learning implants are removed.
To throw a question back at you. Are learning implants a significant LP sink in the economy? A set of +5s is a lot of LP that someone has spent. What economic implications would removing that sink have?
Chaos. Opportunity. Destruction. Excitement... Vote #1 Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14652
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 05:43:28 -
[205] - Quote
Learning implants are fine. You don't need them and losing them is just risk vs reward at work.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
4461
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 05:46:29 -
[206] - Quote
Oh and to clarify my position.
I think the attribute allocation/remap system is unnecessary baggage that adds nothing to the game, and encourages rookies to delay training essential skills for them to function in combat *right now* because they are remapped away from them.
I think that destructible implants which speed up training of certain classes of skills, and that offer a wide variety of risk vs reward options (dirt cheap +1s, fairly priced +3s, legitimately expensive +5s) add to the game. However, the present implementation provides a significant incentive to stay in areas of space where you are unlikely to lose pods (i.e. low and high).
I don't have the solution overall.
Chaos. Opportunity. Destruction. Excitement... Vote #1 Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
|
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
41
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 05:54:27 -
[207] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning?
I use learning implants, but not other ones. To me the learning implants feel like I really need to have them in or I'm gimping myself full time. With other implants if I don't have them I'm only gimping myself for that small fraction of real life time I may be doing that activity.
Combat implants might only be working 1 hour of the week. Fitting implants might benefit me a few hours out of the week. But learning implants are working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. So it's absolutely insane to not spend 20, 30 or 50 mil on a set when I can earn that in a couple hours of playing.
They're sort of a necessary evil. I don't mind the cost of them. There's a real risk vs reward choice in flying with them. But I don't get all excited over buying and installing them. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14654
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 06:27:41 -
[208] - Quote
Dracones wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning?
I use learning implants, but not other ones. To me the learning implants feel like I really need to have them in or I'm gimping myself full time. With other implants if I don't have them I'm only gimping myself for that small fraction of real life time I may be doing that activity. Combat implants might only be working 1 hour of the week. Fitting implants might benefit me a few hours out of the week. But learning implants are working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. So it's absolutely insane to not spend 20, 30 or 50 mil on a set when I can earn that in a couple hours of playing. They're sort of a necessary evil. I don't mind the cost of them. There's a real risk vs reward choice in flying with them. But I don't get all excited over buying and installing them.
Just because you want them does not mean you need them. I want to fly my megathron in every fleet I enter and that requires rather expensive implants. Both of us are making a choice.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
320
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 06:28:23 -
[209] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
Hardwirings may benefit me in a fight where the margins are thin -- in other words, when I've done something wrong and haven't stacked the field.
Learning implants benefit me whether I get into any fight at all, or dont.
So, yes, the value of learning implants is greater than the value of hardwirings. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1744
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 06:32:25 -
[210] - Quote
The problem with learning implants is that they don't contribute to in game activities. Having them active means you are less likely to be doing something else which other people can interact with. So when I'm in my +5 learning I'm not in my snakes, or industry, or whatever else.
Encouraging people into learning clones rather than 'interacting' clones is bad game design.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14654
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 06:33:20 -
[211] - Quote
Zappity wrote:The problem with learning implants is that they don't contribute to in game activities. Having them active means you are less likely to be doing something else which other people can interact with. So when I'm in my +5 learning I'm not in my snakes, or industry, or whatever else.
Encouraging people into learning clones rather than 'interacting' clones is bad game design.
Thats not the implants that entirely down to you.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
11457
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 06:49:22 -
[212] - Quote
Attributes themselves aren't especially relevant.
But removing implants is just not a good idea. They are a big aspect of risk vs reward, the more you have in your head the more you stand to benefit, but the more you might lose.
Implants should stay, that shouldn't even be in question.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Grookshank
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
43
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 06:59:19 -
[213] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
Because - at least for low SP players who are not utterly poor - SP is more valuable than ISK or anything else really. Not spending ISK on learning implants if you can somehow afford them, is a huge mistake imho. When I get podded in combat, I plug in new learning implants asap, I doubt I would do the same with hardwirings. |
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
377
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 07:00:23 -
[214] - Quote
I enjoy the planning aspects of attributes and learning bonuses from implants, and they are major factors in character development which already is pretty shallow area in this game.
I've never seen any good reasoning for their removal and can't support this direction.
If you think newbies need some help, make better tutorials and monthly remaps for the first year.
Please don't dumb down the gameplay. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
205
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 07:12:13 -
[215] - Quote
Zappity wrote:The problem with learning implants is that they don't contribute to in game activities. Having them active means you are less likely to be doing something else which other people can interact with. So when I'm in my +5 learning I'm not in my snakes, or industry, or whatever else.
Encouraging people into learning clones rather than 'interacting' clones is bad game design. Then CCP must change the implants, not just removing them. If we have more diversity in learning implants that can also boost skills there won't be a problem what to choose. Also price is insane sometimes, far more than ships hulls. Scanning set is worth about 2 bilions? Watch me how i fly in covop with it...It's same as high SP character and cheap frig before the clone changes. I'm always flying with learning +4 with rest of slots occupied by skills hardwires. Benefit from +4 will always stay in the pod, even if destroyed.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
|
Temba Mapindazi
13
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 08:26:13 -
[216] - Quote
It seems like CCP is once again at dumbing down the game. It is their game so I do not argue their right or ability to do so. I do question their motive and execution.
I wonder if CCP has an educator or a corporate trainer on staff? I know at one time they did employ an economist to help them keep their in game economy on the right track. Perhaps a great deal of the difficult learning curve of EVE could be resolved if experienced educators or trainers instead of talented game designers and programmers took a shot at revamping tutorials and perhaps made some online tutorials to supplement game play for newbies.
Getting the hang of how to fit your ship is never really explained anywhere in game that I have found, and that is pretty darn important. So taking out stuff to make the game more accessible to newer players might not be the best idea.
Perhaps a better more effective way to teach and indoctrinate new players in the ways of New Eden is what is required.
So I say before you strip away anymore of the game we like, try seeing if you can make what you already have more accessible and user friendly.
A combat pilot must have two goals to survive, -á#1 get the first shot in every fight , #2 get the last shot in every fight!
|
Luscius Uta
125
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 09:10:43 -
[217] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:
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.
Considering that they are the only type of implants who can be effective even when you are logged off, I'd say that learning implants are significantly more valuable than others. Furthermore, if I don't have plugged them in, my skill tranining time is significantly reduced and I consider SP to be the most valuable resource in EVE. That makes learning implants mandatory for my clones, which is not the case for non-learning implants.
I'm not fat, I'm just over-tanked!
|
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
378
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 09:15:06 -
[218] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:
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.
Considering that they are the only type of implants who can be effective even when you are logged off, I'd say that learning implants are significantly more valuable than others. Furthermore, if I don't have plugged them in, my skill tranining time is significantly reduced and I consider SP to be the most valuable resource in EVE. That makes learning implants mandatory for my clones, which is not the case for non-learning implants.
Then again, it's really a matter of perspective- SP isn't valuable per se, and training time without implants is normal, plugging them in simply increases it.
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
152
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 09:49:42 -
[219] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote:The problem with learning implants is that they don't contribute to in game activities. Having them active means you are less likely to be doing something else which other people can interact with. So when I'm in my +5 learning I'm not in my snakes, or industry, or whatever else.
Encouraging people into learning clones rather than 'interacting' clones is bad game design. Thats not the implants that entirely down to you. True but why promote a feature that makes people chose inactivity for a large percentage of the playerbase? If the option for attribute implants didn't exist people wouldn't get themselfs locked in "in the wrong clone" in the first place.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
956
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 09:51:34 -
[220] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
The problem is choice, or the removal thereof. I don't care about pod value.
This isn't about "streamlining" anymore, this is becoming "lets remove choices that may have consequences because players told us they don't like consequences". Some people choose to train fast, others choose to train slightly slower but at a lower cost per pod loss. Again others might go for pirate implants because that suits what they're doing at that moment. EVE is about making choices, pro active ones, to adapt and overcome the situation at hand.
See, the logic of "well doesn't every want to train fast, we mighty as well make it baseline" is of course something most people will agree to for their own personal benefit, not because it's good for the game or fitting for the game. If you'd ask people "would you want to start new characters with 100 bil isk" you'd probably get the same percentage of positive answers as you get to this change. That's how much value you should put on test groups like that: none at all.
On top of that, the logic of "lets remove them because everyone wants to use them anyway" can also easily apply to Slave implants. everyone wants to have those, might as well remove them and make it baseline. Everyone wants to scan faster, might as well make it baseline. Everyone wants snakes, might as well make them baseline. It's such a terrible logic it's beyond words.
Removing learning skills made good sense, they were terrible in a "you won't be playing the game for the first 2 months" and while technically they were of course choices realistically they were not, at some point you'd "choose" to train them resulting in zero "useful SP gain". No learning skills = good luck with that. Medical clone removal was logical, they didn't give one any sort of choice that would benefit players in different ways. No medical clone upgrade = good luck with that. Learning implants are not in that same realm, they ARE choices. One of many actually, all competing for the same slots and that is a GOOD thing because it forces the player to intelligent decisions based on his situation, which can have consequences. Even more so with the ease of jump clones there literally is no valid reason other than "many players told us they don't like to have to make choices".
I can see various reasons why one would want to ponder on removing learning skills:
- make missions, a main source for learning implants, less important and worthwhile. Easily solved by making implants drop from exploration, there's already precedents for this - open up those implant slots for funky other options. Making more and funky implants does not somehow mean that others need to be removed, it just means players have more options. More options = good, less options = bad - players are non-effort, lazy and really don't like how there's risk or planning involved in things. I doubt this will need explanation |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
956
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 09:52:34 -
[221] - Quote
Then we get to the whole "it's better for the newbies" logic, which is inherently false. "newbies can't pay for implants and as such this benefits older, richer players" looks like it makes sense but it doesn't. It's actually the other way round. Lets say a newbie grabs a Rifter and goes solo pvping, he runs into another Rifter flown by a much older player. He's already at an SP disadvantage (which doesn't necessarily mean he'll lose), what are the chances the older player will have slave implants (assuming a plated Rifter) if learning implants got removed? So now that newbie isn't only battling SP and experience, but now also combat related implants. And this translates to bigger scenarios as well: "haves" will be much more powerful in combat/trading/whatever than "not haves", now guess why capable 0.0 groups want to remove learning implants.
Malcanis' law applies: it would benefit older/richer players more than new players because suddenly older ones are not held back anymore by their "need" to train fast, they can pile on the advantages in form of implants. Training SP faster doesn't affect actual current gameplay, it just affects progress towards some (probably lulzy) long term goal.
So here's the reasons why people will tell you that learning implants need to go:
- "I hate risk". This is EVE, gtfo - "I don't like having to make choices". GTFO - "I think that # skill points are all important". They're not and if you feel they are they you have the choice of using implants for it - "it'll help newbies". It won't, it'll actually help older richer players because suddenly they're not held back anymore and can go full combat implants that DO affect actual current performance
All of those are selfish, short term good long term bad choices because that's what most players will opt for. (for an explanation on that I'd refer you to Richard Bartles' "Why virtual worlds are designed by newbies", it's a must read for game designers).
TL;DR: People want learning implants gone for the wrong reasons, mostly selfish and hidden agenda ones. Removing choice is a) bad and b) allows older players to go crazy on implants that WILL affect current gameplay scenario and WILL give them the upper hand |
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
152
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 09:57:31 -
[222] - Quote
Chaotix Morwen wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Chaotix Morwen wrote:Why is everybody obsessed with removing choices from this game? Learning implants have always given people the choice of risk vs reward, you people are essentially asking for the reward without the risk. I'll bet you loved the choice given back when we had learning skills to train as well. It isn't about risk, it is about a stupid mechanic that shouldn't have been added to start with. I would happily replace my +5s with highgrade pirate implants if it wasn't for the SP/h penalty currently imposed. The learning skills werent a choice, there wasnt the pick between SP, ship efficency or cost, it was just spend time for bonuses. With implants you can have learning implants, pirate implants or nothing at all, 3 choices which you can intermix as you wish. With choice comes risk. Just because you struggle with choices doesnt mean its a stupid mechanic. Are you seriously saying you wont use pirate implants for the sake of 1.5 sp/m? Does that meager little sp gain mean so much as to gimp your ships? It's the same argument, you didn't have to do the learning skills, sure would be silly long term if you didn't get them trained but no one forced you. Same with the attribute implants. Not to mention the attribute implants were added to make up for the bad learning skill mechanic in the first place.
Up until recently high grade implants were +3 not +4. That 3SP/m would total to 11m SP for the 7 years I have had +5's plugged in.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
152
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 10:01:17 -
[223] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Qn'qura Zalas Zula
Aeon Ascendant
14
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 10:06:05 -
[224] - Quote
The learning implants are hardly engaging though. More people would no doubt be using entire low/mid grade pirate sets instead for the stats. Myself amongst them.
Proper Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
956
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 10:07:56 -
[225] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote: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.
And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops?
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14660
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 10:16:26 -
[226] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:
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.
Considering that they are the only type of implants who can be effective even when you are logged off, I'd say that learning implants are significantly more valuable than others. Furthermore, if I don't have plugged them in, my skill tranining time is significantly reduced and I consider SP to be the most valuable resource in EVE. That makes learning implants mandatory for my clones, which is not the case for non-learning implants.
Warp speed implants are mandatory for me due to my activities. I have never used any skill implants so no, you dont need them you just want them.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Edward Olmops
DUST Expeditionary Team Good Sax
242
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 10:18:27 -
[227] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
1) Learning implants are mandatory for me. For some reason, maximizing Skill Points has been very important to me from day one. This has not changed even though I realized after like 2 years that having a million more or less practically has no relevant impact e.g. on one specific fight. So my pods will ALWAYS have learning implants. I mostly use +5/+4 to be ISK efficient, but due to clone limitations, I might happen to use a clone with 5 learning implants (one +5, 4x +4). 2) I used to jump into empty pods for doing dangerous stuff like nullsec roams etc, but over time I realized that with my given playstyle I do only lose 1-3 pods a year - thus the whole risk thing is highly overrated in my case. In lowsec or highsec you normally don't lose pods anyway, so it comes down to nullsec/WHs and bubbles. And I do NOT go on daily roamings and/or suicide attacks there all the time. And even if I do, I find I die much less than I would have estimated in advance. Also, ISK is less an issue after several years of playing. 3) I am much more sloppy when it comes to skill hardwirings. Skill hardwirings are so specific and there are so many that in virtually every situation I will be stuck in a clone with the wrong implants. Plus, they are hard to get in remote lowsec or nullsec. Hardwirings for fittings are even more annoying: once you commit yourself to a fitting that needs an implant you will find yourself even more often either lacking the hardwiring OR being stuck in a clone with useless hardwirings. So, although they might give an edge, I mostly don't use skill hardwirings OR restrict myself to cheap and very generic ones (+5% speed for example - that is useful on any ship) Exceptions would be special situations like the AT or the like where you know what is coming and every bit counts.
Conclusion: To me, implants are no significant part of any risk/reward considerations. If learning implants were to be removed and everything else stayed the same, the average value of my pod would decrease significantly. That would have no big impact on my behaviour, because I do not lose many pods and I do not avoid risks because of implants. However, it would be more comfortable in regards to flexibility of skill training. |
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
152
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 10:50:18 -
[228] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote: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. And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops? 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.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14661
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 10:54:12 -
[229] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote: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. And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops? 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.
Thats a myth anyway.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
957
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 10:55:47 -
[230] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote: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. And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops? 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.
But they can't catch up, not in the current situation nor in the suggested one. All it'll do is allow you to not "have to" choose learning implants and instead use lol implants which will give you a massive benefit DURING their progress. In short; drop the pretence that you're doing this "for the good of newbies, so they can advance faster". You just want to soothe your OCD to a point where you will allow yourself to drop learning implants in favour of combat ones, because it would give you more advantages. |
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
152
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 11:01:58 -
[231] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote: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. And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops? 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. But they can't catch up SP wise (not that this matters), not in the current situation nor in the suggested one. All it'll do is allow you to not "have to" choose learning implants and instead use lol implants which will give you a massive benefit DURING their progress. In short; drop the pretence that you're doing this "for the good of newbies, so they can advance faster". You just want to soothe your OCD to a point where you will allow yourself to drop learning implants in favour of combat ones, because it would give you more advantages. I'm just saying they should progress at the same pace we have done up until now, not slower (which your 1800SP/h suggest).
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
152
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 11:04:27 -
[232] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote: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. And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops? 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. Thats a myth anyway. 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?
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
957
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 11:09:50 -
[233] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote: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?
You realise that that post was sarcastic, to see who'd bite on it? To see who'd go "yes well equality is fine and all and I'll use it as my official reason to support the changes but I'm not really into it for the equality. I just want really fast, zero consequence skill training".
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14662
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 11:12:04 -
[234] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:baltec1 wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote: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. And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops? 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. Thats a myth anyway. 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?
You can only put so much SP into a single ship. You are effective in pvp at 30 minutes old.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
517
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 11:20:53 -
[235] - Quote
That's not really a good rationale for locking everyone at 1800 sp/hr.
Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14662
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 11:30:50 -
[236] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:That's not really a good rationale for locking everyone at 1800 sp/hr.
Im against binning SP implants. The whole argument for removing them is a hollow one.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Warp to Cyno.
4267
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 12:07:25 -
[237] - Quote
pay attention to my opinion as it's the important one, i didn't read any of the others because they're not as extremely important as mine
ok you all listening now good
i see a certain level of learning implants as practically mandatory. we can't gain time spent training on a character through any method than waiting out that time. it's therefore an incredibly valuable resource, and when presented with a multiplier for that time in the form of learning implants you'd be silly for not wearing the reasonably-priced ones as often as you're able
if we see that the vast majority of characters are wearing skill implants, it's probable that they're pretty much considered a 'must have'. ofc i can't see this, someone with access to the data'd have to look. i don't like must-haves in a game, they're just a few extra clicks i have to do, something i need to earn before i can get going to the fun bit. it's got the gameplay value of a checkbox you have to click before undocking
in eve ofc we know the value we're risking can plausibly affect our willingness to engage but i don't really care or know about that in this case, especially as i never really left lowsec
i'd have a look at what level implants the largest proportion of characters have equipped. if, for example, a huge number of characters have +3 implants, i think that'd indicate that the price:benefit ratio made these a must-fit, and that the price:benefit of +4s was at a nicer spot in comparison
since i don't like must-fits, i'd take action to remove the 'must' bit. i'd then make +4s into +1s, leave them where they are in terms of rarity, sit back and see what happens
removing learning implants deffo ain't dumbing down the game and if it decreases mission rewards to an unhealthy level we can think of something cool to add to the loyalty point stores to replace the implants so that doesn't really matter
i won't read any replies because they're unimportant if they're not by me love benny |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Warp to Cyno.
4267
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 12:13:00 -
[238] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:i won't read any replies because they're unimportant if they're not by me love benny i just realised this'd mean i wouldn't be able to read the tremendous amount of praise gd will doubtless lay upon me for being so great
therefore all reading have my permission to mail their appreciations for my posting directly to me provided their appreciations are in the form of fabulous and expensive gifts |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14662
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 12:14:08 -
[239] - Quote
Why is it people are forever confusing what they want with what they need? You dont need these implants.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Warp to Cyno.
4267
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 12:17:29 -
[240] - Quote
didn't need to upgrade your clone when you died neither did you
but you did |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
961
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 12:24:06 -
[241] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:didn't need to upgrade your clone when you died neither did you
but you did
Losing SP can mean losing access to ships or modules. Technically you could stop training and do fine. Nice try at being witty btw, it's not really working. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Warp to Cyno.
4267
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 12:32:19 -
[242] - Quote
the point was actually about the difference between a practical need and an actual need and protesting baltec's simple and absolute classification of learning implants as a non-need
that's the thing about top-level posting there's layers of meaning it's like poetry except i'm not a wanker |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
676
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 12:32:28 -
[243] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:If I am likely to lose the pod, I wear no hardwires and might have some learning implants in, by happenstance as there is a limit to how many jump clones one can have.
If there are no learning implants and only higher stats, I will wear no hardwires and just bank the ISK. Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning?
Hardwires are massively situational, and unless you are flying the same ship day-in, day-out, you will need half a dozen clones to have the right hardwire combinations.
In one of my currently deployed-at hangers, I have a Harpy, a Hawk, an Apocalypse, a Tengu, a Huginn, a Celestis, an Archon, and an Ishtar. I need a 3% PG hardwire to fly the Apoc, but not any of the other ships. Amoungst them there are five shield ships, and three armour, two that use railguns, two light missiles, one lasers, one projectiles, and two predominently drones. Four ships sig-tank and rely on maneouverability, the rest couldn't care less, while the carrier could probably benefit from some warp speed. What hardwire configuration would you wear for that mess (especially since its a deployment, at most I can have two clones to use due to the inability to store two JCs in one station)? Whereas learning implants still carry a benefit regardless of the ship (in fact I wear Genvolutions since that solves the Apocs problem, but its still a slight waste in the other hulls) |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
676
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 12:56:43 -
[244] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote: i'd have a look at what level implants the largest proportion of characters have equipped. if, for example, a huge number of characters have +3 implants, i think that'd indicate that the price:benefit ratio made these a must-fit, and that the price:benefit of +4s was at a nicer spot in comparison
since i don't like must-fits, i'd take action to remove the 'must' bit. i'd then make +4s into +1s, leave them where they are in terms of rarity, sit back and see what happens
That's the point, what is the reality of the situation?
I will bet a large number of the placard-waving "implants must go" crowd inserted +5s in their first week, and have never let go (a lass above literally said that was the case for her), but how many people truly do this? How many people have ever injected a +5? Bear in mind the Cybernetics requirement might mean some characters physically can't (in fact, thats an interesting and easily figured stat for CCP, what % of characters has Cybernetics 5?) And how long do the players who have a +5 clone actually spend in it? Ask the same for +4's, even +3's (given the free Genvolutions that got handed out, this will likely be a high %, but even then, how many owners spend what % of time wearing them). In fact, how many characters have never worn an implant outside the occasional +1s and +2s that came from a mission reward? (or not even that much, again an easy stat to discover, what percentage of characters do not even have Cybernetics injected at all?)
I can only speak for myself. When I started (mid 2009, so nearly 6 years now) I had done my research and dropped a PLEX first week to buy a set of +5's. I wore those pretty-much continuously until I left highsec (even while a part of RvB, foolish me) which was mid-2010. Granted, I had a 3-month hiatus in that year, so I had probably 9 months of continuous +5 usage. From then, til I lost my +5's in a "foolish incident" in the middle of the eviction of IT from Fountain (so, 6 months later maybe) I probably only spend a third to a quarter of my time in a +5 clone, the rest in +3's. By that time I had been weaned off the breast, and I never replaced them, and have probably spent equal time in +3's, and implantless. Hell, I haven't trained a skill on this character for the past four months (a same account alt needed a few skills, and I was on the verge of a clone upgrade, so was happy to stall til the recent clone change). So when you look at it, of my 5 and a half years, I've spent maybe a year in +5's, 2 years in +3's, 2 implantless, and half a year either unsubscribed or not training for other reasons. And I'll freely admit I wouldn't be surprised if a third to a quarter of that time was spent learning skills off-remap (that's life when a doctrine change kicks in).
How typical am I? I will admit I don't know, but I would bet anything I'm a lot more closer to the norm than Mrs "wore +5s since day one and never trained a skill off-remap". |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Warp to Cyno.
4267
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:06:04 -
[245] - Quote
i've always had +3s in. i reckon +3s are probably what's 'standard', if there is one. cheap enough that a rookie can afford them, really. getting +4s'd make me question if i really needed them |
Memphis Baas
93
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:19:21 -
[246] - Quote
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.
|
Chaotix Morwen
Ugly Duckling Inc
23
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:20:59 -
[247] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Chaotix Morwen wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Chaotix Morwen wrote:Why is everybody obsessed with removing choices from this game? Learning implants have always given people the choice of risk vs reward, you people are essentially asking for the reward without the risk. I'll bet you loved the choice given back when we had learning skills to train as well. It isn't about risk, it is about a stupid mechanic that shouldn't have been added to start with. I would happily replace my +5s with highgrade pirate implants if it wasn't for the SP/h penalty currently imposed. The learning skills werent a choice, there wasnt the pick between SP, ship efficency or cost, it was just spend time for bonuses. With implants you can have learning implants, pirate implants or nothing at all, 3 choices which you can intermix as you wish. With choice comes risk. Just because you struggle with choices doesnt mean its a stupid mechanic. Are you seriously saying you wont use pirate implants for the sake of 1.5 sp/m? Does that meager little sp gain mean so much as to gimp your ships? It's the same argument, you didn't have to do the learning skills, sure would be silly long term if you didn't get them trained but no one forced you. Same with the attribute implants. Not to mention the attribute implants were added to make up for the bad learning skill mechanic in the first place. Up until recently high grade implants were +3 not +4. That 3SP/m would total to 11m SP for the 7 years I have had +5's plugged in.
It isnt the same argument. Learning skills once trained stuck with you, you never had to think of them again, the only cost was time. There are no alternatives to them, and there is no downside to having them, this is no choice. Learnng implants cost you your implant slots 1-5, which can be used for other things, get a crystal set for 15% boost to your rep rate or get that extra 1.5 sp/m with the learning implants? This is choice.
After 7 years you care about 11m sp? This is sounding more and more like a case of you wanting the +5 sp at no cost, heres the thing, this game was built upon consequences. Upon risk vs reward. If you want the reward, take the risk, fly with your +5s and enjoy the game. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
964
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:22:08 -
[248] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote: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.
And then there's people who see through the bullshit and care about the actual result of removing them. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5717
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:29:02 -
[249] - Quote
Celgar Thurn wrote:2) This change would be another kick in the pants to the missions system, mission/LP revenue and various career sub-options such as selling ore for storyline missions etc. I would argue that too many revenue ideas have been removed or made uneconomic already
Attribute implants are not particularly profitable. There are many things that are more profitable, including high end hardwirings (as opposed to high end implants).
Removing attribute implants does not mean that pirate implants would go away: they would simply lose the attribute bonuses. Your high-grade slave implants would still provide a significant boost to armour.
Celgar Thurn wrote:3) I feel this is another case of dumbing down of the game. Are we eventually going to get to a point where EVE Online is like many other MMOs where items are just collected within the game and nothing gets destroyed ?
"Dumbing down" would imply that there are benefits provided by attribute points and learning implants beyond the ability to stroke one's e-peen over the trimming of a 2-year-long training plan by four days, part of which includes stacking all the Per/Wil skills together and then stacking the Int/Mem skills together, then leaving the character to "cook" for two-years-less-four-days.
That is not actually playing the game.
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?
Day 0 Advice for New Players
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
964
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:32:35 -
[250] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote: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?
Nothing is forcing you to do so.
|
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
153
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:37:52 -
[251] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:How typical am I? I will admit I don't know, but I would bet anything I'm a lot more closer to the norm than Mrs "wore +5s since day one and never trained a skill off-remap". Ok just to prove I didn't do min/maxing from day one:
Quote: This char was designed to have as even stats as possible so the attributes with advanced learning level 4 and +5 implants is as follow:
Charisma 24 Intelligence 24 Perception 23 Memory 24 Willpower 24
Any skill not using perception is done at 2178 SP/h with the worst case scenario at 2112 SP/h. Add another 90/60 SP/h if all the advanced learning is pushed to level 5.
Source
This was ofcourse long before learning skills were removed and neural remaps were introduced. Also seems I only waited a year and not two before going from +4 to +5's on this character. After all the +5 implants back in 2006 cost around 2 years worth of game time each so well out of reach. Thankfully CCP tweaked the availability.
But sure, I'm not the highest SP Gallente Jin-Mei in game without a reason and the Achura I created (and later sold) is still in the top 5 among them.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5719
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:42:54 -
[252] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Mara Rinn wrote: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?
Nothing is forcing you to do so.
And yet people do.
Why is that?
Day 0 Advice for New Players
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9505
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:44:43 -
[253] - Quote
The real truth is that people like to make excuses (even to themselves) about what they do. for some reason, some people who aren't pvp minded choose to think "if it's just easier/more accessible/less costly I would pvp".
Developers across games (not just EVE) deliver on this all the time, only to see the exact same people find a new excuse, because it wasn't the cost or something keeping them from pvping, it was them (the player and that player's true preferences) that kept them out of pvp.
Look at all the things CCP has added to the game in the last 2 years that damn near no one uses despite the fact that use of those itmes would solve the problems they complain about. Mobil micro jump drives, scan inhibitors, cyno jammers, anchor rigs, target lock breakers and so on and not even including the already existing stuff like ecm, ecm bursts, smartbombs, nuets, warp core stabs etc etc. CCp could put in a "win" button that ejects everyone but you from the server and they'd still complain lol.
If CCP is gonna remove learning implants, they should do it for the right reasons (ie they can deliver better gameplay options without them, lie it was with learning skills) and not the wrong reasons ("hey, if we remove these things, people will pvp their backsides off!!"). |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
964
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:45:40 -
[254] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Mara Rinn wrote: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?
Nothing is forcing you to do so. And yet people do. Why is that?
Because they choose to to play Skill Training Online, the rest of us just plays the game... as they choose. Why should we alter the game in a tremendous way, resulting in even less advantages for newbies, just because some of us decide to play by not playing?
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5719
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:47:52 -
[255] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Because they choose to to play Skill Training Online, the rest of us just plays the game... as they choose. Why should we alter the game in a tremendous way, resulting in even less advantages for newbies, just because some of us decide to play by not playing?
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")
Day 0 Advice for New Players
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14668
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:53:26 -
[256] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Mara Rinn wrote: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?
Nothing is forcing you to do so. And yet people do. Why is that?
Greed.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
153
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:55:23 -
[257] - Quote
Chaotix Morwen wrote:It isnt the same argument. Learning skills once trained stuck with you, you never had to think of them again, the only cost was time. There are no alternatives to them, and there is no downside to having them, this is no choice. Learnng implants cost you your implant slots 1-5, which can be used for other things, get a crystal set for 15% boost to your rep rate or get that extra 1.5 sp/m with the learning implants? This is choice.
After 7 years you care about 11m sp? This is sounding more and more like a case of you wanting the +5 sp at no cost, heres the thing, this game was built upon consequences. Upon risk vs reward. If you want the reward, take the risk, fly with your +5s and enjoy the game. The options with learning skills were the same as the current options for learning implants. You had the option to ship spin for two months or train ship skills and actually have fun in game. Now that everyone picked the ship spinning route explains why we no longer have those skills in game. However with the learning implants it is the same choice again for people, do they want to have fun or progress faster in safety?
Personally I don't care what happens with the learning implants as long as they flatten the attributes. It would just be a good opportunity to get both fixed at once.
And yes I'm glad i didn't miss out on those 11m+ SP.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
601
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:56:00 -
[258] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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 am buying what i need few experienced pilots buy more than they need if these are removed no i'm not going to buy 50mill worth of other implants i will simply keep the isk in my wallet where it can't be lost
Fuel block colors
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
205
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:58:20 -
[259] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Removing attribute implants does not mean that pirate implants would go away: they would simply lose the attribute bonuses. Your high-grade slave implants would still provide a significant boost to armour. Then anybody who want to remove attribute implants will have same argument for pirate implants. "We don't want do undock because the cost of them". If they don't undock now they won't with pirate sets. Cost matter here. Not only: "we don't have options here, so let's just remove them". Last one is easy to solve.
Mara Rinn wrote: ..."Dumbing down"...
Dumbing down as less oportunities to train my character. Just merge attributes bonuses with skill bonuses like in pirate sets and we will have problem solved. One part of the problem is training system in EvE. We have to plan our skill training ahead, with only one remap of skill per year. When i started to play EvE i was feeling like i'm being forced to choose my path for next few months. I don't even know if i will be playing this game then. We are slave to our SP's.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
964
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 13:58:44 -
[260] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Because they choose to to play Skill Training Online, the rest of us just plays the game... as they choose. Why should we alter the game in a tremendous way, resulting in even less advantages for newbies, just because some of us decide to play by not playing?
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")
No, as stated earlier it will completely affect balance. Here's why.
There isn't much performance difference between combat/ship skills at lvl 4 or 5 and as such the "supervet vs newer player" isn't so much a battle of SP as it's capped by skill level and thus skill points are actually a balancing factor, in favour of newbies. The only thing that more SP gives you is more diversity in ships and choices, but in a 1v1 combat scenario this extra SP does nothing at all. Newbies have learning implants to "catch up" and vets have learning implants to diversify thus those implants are, again, a balancing factor in favour of the newbie because it doesn't affect actual scenarios, just long term goals.
On top of that, if the logic is "newbies can't really pay for learning implants while older players can" then if they get removed this changes into "newbies can't pay for slaves/snakes/etc while older players can". Resulting in a shift from a "skill point battle" (which as stated isn't that much of a gap) into a "lol slave/snake/etc" battle, which is a massive gap.
Newbies are NOT helped by removing learning implants, doing so will backfire and cause richer players/groups to gain an advantage through combat implants.
So with that reason debunked all that's left is "because I like non-effort, non-risk bonuses". Which is not a valid rason. |
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5721
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 14:16:46 -
[261] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Newbies have learning implants to "catch up" and vets have learning implants to diversify thus those implants are, again, a balancing factor in favour of the newbie because it doesn't affect actual scenarios, just long term goals.
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.
There's no point having medium gunnery skills until you can fly a cruiser, for example. With attributes and remaps gone, there is no pressure to "catch up" with the veteran players by remapping and logging out for two years. So the newer players can simply train the support skills to fly a mediocre frigate, then skill up to fly a mediocre cruiser, then focus on support skills. All the while, they'll be actually playing the game.
CCP could even enhance training speed (like they did for rookie pilots in their sub-1.5M SP period at one point, which later changed to "Cerebral Accelerators"). That's how you provide a benefit to rookie pilots, by addressing the "catching up with vets" issue directly.
Gregor Parud wrote:On top of that, if the logic is "newbies can't really pay for learning implants while older players can" then if they get removed this changes into "newbies can't pay for slaves/snakes/etc while older players can". Resulting in a shift from a "skill point battle" (which as stated isn't that much of a gap) into a "lol slave/snake/etc" battle, which is a massive gap.
The people who are afraid of losing their +5s are typically the ones who never got into the kinds of incomes where they'd be using Slave Implants. They're addicted to the learning speed, because they're min-maxers. The people who do have the kinds of incomes where they can afford to take high-grade Slaves into combat also don't care about SP because they can just buy the characters they want. If you have ISK, you don't need to train Racial Titan 5, you just buy the character that already has it trained.
Gregor Parud wrote:Newbies are NOT helped by removing learning implants, doing so will backfire and cause richer players/groups to gain an advantage through combat implants.
Richer players already have that advantage. Removing learning implants isn't going to change that particular advantage.
Removing attributes and learning implants still leaves the way open for Cerebral Accelerators to help newbies "catch up" with skill training. Even better since there will be no neural remaps the Cerebral Accelerators are effectively twice as useful.
Day 0 Advice for New Players
|
Nilk Deninard
Only Fools and Horses
6
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 14:26:13 -
[262] - Quote
To the Devs, my reasons behind not wearing learning implants.
When I got hook by EvE I was less than a week old and I received an email from Spaceship Samurai inviting me to 0.0, the email was well written and I accepted the offer. From that point on it was GÇÿfrownedGÇÖ on to fly with any implants due to the Alliance killboard statistics and after my newb implants ran out I very rarely (like once or twice) have ever plugged them in.
The above reason was also applicable to the other few corps/alliances I have flown with.
I now live in a WH with a few good friends with our own corp, but still I do not use learning implants for the reasons of my stats (to be honest I find KB stats a very poor metric but thatGÇÖs another topic that has been bashed to death and IGÇÖm not going there). I just cannot seem to re-train myself away from this teaching and probably never will.
I donGÇÖt care either way as it hasnGÇÖt bothered me that I have just trained at normal speed for most of my time, in fact I spent the ISK that I would of probably lost on a higher SP Character.
TLDR; For me itGÇÖs not risk v reward, is risk v KB stats, that to me is why itGÇÖs wrong.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
964
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 14:30:08 -
[263] - Quote
Quote: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.
No, they don't. The point of going int/mem and then later on perc/wil is to train (pretty much) all the relevant skills before remapping, no sane person will go int/mem just to get some support skills up to a slightly decent level. As such that strategy is only for people who think REALLY long term and as such agree to short term uselessness. Simply put; alts
Anyone who actually plays the game (new players, single account players) will follow a more logical overall perc/int or similar. Those people aren't going full OCD "these all skills first", they're actually playing the game (gasp). So if you take away the "must get everything to lvl 5" then the training time loss from not going 2 remaps but instead going an overall remap is actually really low. About 5-10%.
Alts and long term players will choose those 5-10% but that's more OCD than actually logically useful. People who just enjoy playing the game won't notice a difference. |
Memphis Baas
94
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 14:40:18 -
[264] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Look at all the things CCP has added to the game in the last 2 years that damn near no one uses.
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.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
964
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 14:41:15 -
[265] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:The rest of your stuff is a whole lot of "what if" that has no bearing on the (f)actual current situation, nor would it change anything. those extra implants affect extra... regardless of removing of learning implants or not. 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?
Because you're training for a Hell. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
964
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 14:48:53 -
[266] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Look at all the things CCP has added to the game in the last 2 years that damn near no one uses. 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.
So which is it.
"woe is me, building up a character is risky because of +5, I better stay docked. We should remove the risk for people who have OCD and plan 17 years ahead" or "lets make the game a better experience for people who actually play the game, and at least try to not have Malcanis' law fck it all up".
The first one isn't doing anything, isn't a content creator and isn't an active contributor to the sandbox. Simply put, I don't give 2 fcks about those (as ironic as that is). The second one to me sounds like the way to go, removing learning implants is NOT the solution to this, it'll backfire as explained. |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1683
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 14:54:12 -
[267] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
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.
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
964
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 14:56:40 -
[268] - Quote
Aryth wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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. 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.
Would this give you an advantage in a fight over newer players who lack the disposable income for them? And would that advantage be more than the 5-10% higher SP you'd have in case you'd had it invested in learning implants? |
Edward Olmops
DUST Expeditionary Team Good Sax
243
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:03:22 -
[269] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote: How typical am I? I will admit I don't know, but I would bet anything I'm a lot more closer to the norm than Mrs "wore +5s since day one and never trained a skill off-remap".
EDIT: Right, I went full-nerd and did some basic maths. 8765.81 hours/year, and removing unsubbed and unskilling time, I have been skilling for approx 5 years exact. Looking at my current sp (92mil and some change), it comes out that I've averaged 2106 sp/h over my characters life.
Started in August '09 and just passed the 120m SP. Continuous training with mostly +5/+4, aligning skills and training PER/WIL or INT/ME for a year straight after some time (with some exceptions). That is a third more. OFC, one can still be a happy pilot with 50mil or 20mil SP, but still a significant difference... |
Memphis Baas
94
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:04:34 -
[270] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:So which is 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?
|
|
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1684
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:12:30 -
[271] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Aryth wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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. 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. Would this give you an advantage in a fight over newer players who lack the disposable income for them? And would that advantage be more than the 5-10% higher SP you'd have in case you'd had it invested in learning implants?
Yes to both. It also gives you a much higher RISK profile in your pod. If CCP would ever do the implants from corpses thing they teased years ago that would be fun as hell. Pod high SP player with HG set and harvest his corpse. With some loss of course.
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
964
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:12:48 -
[272] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:So which is 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?
First type are alts or people who will find any excuse to not go. Just as with trying to convince PVEers to PVP, you can't. If they wanted to add to the sandbox (assuming they're a main) they would have done so by now.
The second bit really is the crux, it's not so much about "dumbing down" (although it certainly is a factor). It's that it turns the game more into p2w. Learning implants are the balancing factor as to why not "everyone" is running stat increasing (slave, crystal, snake etc) implants. Remove that and it turns into "spend money, buy implants because what else would you use those implant slots for".
It'll backfire. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
964
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:13:35 -
[273] - Quote
Just as I predicted.
|
Edward Olmops
DUST Expeditionary Team Good Sax
243
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:15:59 -
[274] - Quote
I just have to think of a comparison with League of legends. For those who are not familiar: there are 2 different perk systems (Masteries & Runes) that let you customize your character before any fight. No restrictions to flexibility whatsoever. Everything can be changed completely between two fights. Runes have to be bought before they can be used (they are, however, not destroyed)
Transferred to EVE...
Why not dump the idea of implants altogether?
We could have fittings for pods instead. The whole pod would then become more similar to a ship. -completely separate from clones and jump clone timers -all implants would become modules for pods -fitting restrictions possible through different slots (1:1 transition would be 10 different slot types, 1 each) -Genolution Auroral implant would become a pod SKIN (same as planned for ships) -you could save different fittings for pods as for ships -maximum flexibility -all used implants would still be destroyed (option: could be dropped?) on pod destruction |
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1437
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:21:57 -
[275] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:I will bet a large number of the placard-waving "implants must go" crowd inserted +5s in their first week, and have never let go (a lass above literally said that was the case for her), but how many people truly do this? How many people have ever injected a +5?
Confirming that for most of my space life I've been rolling with Cybernetics 3.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
206
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:22:05 -
[276] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:The guy who stays docked still pays his subscription, so you may not care about him but CCP does. It's not the fault of implants the guys stay docked, it's illusion that when he trained skills up with them he will be prepared for what will may come when he actually udock. Removing implants won't solve anything, ppl who want to PvP will do so, as they do now.
Learning implants are optional, not must have to skill up.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
|
Memphis Baas
94
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:22:48 -
[277] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:First type are alts or people who will find any excuse to not go. Just as with trying to convince PVEers to PVP, you can't.
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. |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
72
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:23:03 -
[278] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote:AkJon Ferguson wrote:Please just give us all the skills at V so that we never have to log in again and be done with it already! tia 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 see you're adopting the itrollu.jpg tactic. Whats A itrolly .Jpg tactic? Rumours if CCP will Takes Away atributes Points/implants and skills .Regardless Dosnt serve a purpose for my style of play and for many others new players or semi In This game I do respect the opinions of those who oppose this. I dont got time to grind away in one game I play many I just wanna jump in Blow up ships without worrying if I need a inplant or set up my attributes wrong or just plain stuck with 2 years of skills that is worthless because I believed in that Hype on the Trailers. All I ask Is Just give us the options to Reset our SP And attributes anytime we want Implants can stay I just wish it wasn't so damn expensive.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
41
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:26:31 -
[279] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote: If CCP is gonna remove learning implants, they should do it for the right reasons (ie they can deliver better gameplay options without them, lie it was with learning skills) and not the wrong reasons ("hey, if we remove these things, people will pvp their backsides off!!").
This. Personally I think attributes should be nuked. They serve no purpose anymore and limit training options. But learning implants don't need to be scrapped if you nuke attributes. They can easily just work on various skills and skills groups.
You can have cheap newbie level implants that work on frigate/small weapon systems. They can even be pretty high SP buffs to help newer players catch up with the vets. Then you can go down the chain where capital learning implants cost hundreds of millions.
I don't think the inherent system of "I risk more, so I learn faster" is a bad system at all. The problem is that it needs to be tiered better and a lot more flexible. Maybe I'm training Amarr BS V so I just buy a cheap implant that only hits that skill alone but works well on it. That way I can focus train, still PvP and not worry about loss as much. Or maybe I'm space rich and just prefer to spend billions on high SP learning implants that work for me across the board with all skills.
We need more choice, flexibility and options. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
965
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:27:47 -
[280] - Quote
Solops Crendraven wrote:Whats A itrolly .Jpg tactic?
You
|
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
965
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:29:59 -
[281] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:First type are alts or people who will find any excuse to not go. Just as with trying to convince PVEers to PVP, you can't. 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.
a) it'll be a very small portion of the players and b) what would you rather have more of? Said small portion going "Waah, people don't like my OCD" or all newer players going "waah, this game favours older players way too much, it's p2w because I need to buy plex to pay for slaves and crystals to compete". |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
72
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:37:13 -
[282] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote:Whats A itrolly .Jpg tactic? You 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated Im sure you wouldnt say this to my Face And your personal Attacks of calling me stupid have nothing to do with This Thread. I suggest you read the Forum rules http://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/forum-moderation-policy
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Edward Olmops
DUST Expeditionary Team Good Sax
244
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:38:41 -
[283] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote: 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.
I stated earlier that I am not using many hardwirings, because they are too inflexible. There may be times when I want to burn 10 times the same fitting (like in faction warfare), but most of the time I switch between lots of ships... armor vs. shield, different roles, different weapon systems, different tactics.
Any given hardwiring is just worthless 95% of the time, because I don't fly anything it gives a bonus on.
If I don't use them, it's because of this and not because they are too expensive or the risk is too high.
[it is true though that I never use pirate implants because they hurt SP/h. For the same reasons I never use Strategic Cruisers.] |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
676
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 16:11:42 -
[284] - Quote
Edward Olmops wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote: How typical am I? I will admit I don't know, but I would bet anything I'm a lot more closer to the norm than Mrs "wore +5s since day one and never trained a skill off-remap".
EDIT: Right, I went full-nerd and did some basic maths. 8765.81 hours/year, and removing unsubbed and unskilling time, I have been skilling for approx 5 years exact. Looking at my current sp (92mil and some change), it comes out that I've averaged 2106 sp/h over my characters life.
Started in August '09 and just passed the 120m SP. Continuous training with mostly +5/+4, aligning skills and training PER/WIL or INT/ME for a year straight after some time (with some exceptions). That is a third more. OFC, one can still be a happy pilot with 50mil or 20mil SP, but still a significant difference...
But at this stage of the day, what has that gotten you? In the likelihood of us fighting in the same ships, you might have 1 or 2 support skills a single level higher than me, but that is easily compensated by a set of combat implants you confess later to be unwilling to wear. Or in a less even match-up, its likely the fact I am all-5 skilled in all races of Strategic Cruiser, a ship you confess to refusing to fly, will compensate you being higher-skilled in a weaker class of ship.
There is a definite diminishing return of skill-points. I wont pretend it doesn't make a massive difference for the first few years when you are scrabbling to get in to T2 ships and weapon systems without horribly crippling yourself by avoiding the support skills, but after a certain point, it no longer really matters, to the point where I am currently paused while I skill up an alt on the same account in basic support skills to use a couple of doctrine ships (that I can already use at max skills), since having the ability to locate a combat-ready character in a different location to myself is far more useful than spending the time adding 5% damage to Fighters, or a third race of Dreadnaught. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
8658
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 16:16:37 -
[285] - Quote
Solops Crendraven wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote:Whats A itrolly .Jpg tactic? You 4. Personal attacks are prohibited. Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated Im sure you wouldnt say this to my Face And your personal Attacks of calling me stupid have nothing to do with This Thread. I suggest you read the Forum rules http://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/forum-moderation-policy 1) hes correct
2) you aren't a moderator. stop this.
"I'm also quite confident that you are laughing
and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers."
=]I[=
|
kingduckling
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 16:20:24 -
[286] - Quote
look small sons this is what needs to happen.
Keep the implants that provide combat boosts but remove the skill training attributes.
Completely revamp how you can get more skill points faster.
So many options for decreasing the cons and improving the pros, like a booster concept make it you can use one booster per 1/2/4/8/ days that will accelerate the training no matter what. Every time i die what pisses me off is that i loose my implants and i loose training time, Its all about SP.
I really hope the rumors are true, change is good, this game should be crawling with engagements everywhere, too much to loose, and by revamping this there will still be much too loose(excluding SP).
You guys can be "bitter vets" all you want. this is would be a great change for nullcombat since i will assume pods make it out intact in Lowsec. |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
72
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 16:27:43 -
[287] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote:Whats A itrolly .Jpg tactic? You 4. Personal attacks are prohibited. Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated Im sure you wouldnt say this to my Face And your personal Attacks of calling me stupid have nothing to do with This Thread. I suggest you read the Forum rules http://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/forum-moderation-policy 1) hes correct 2) you aren't a moderator. stop this. 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.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
HORAE Deteis
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 16:32:15 -
[288] - Quote
Well, If you dont like them Implants Dont plug them in! Myself I use them and various custome clones as "Tweeks" it just add that little bit of buff to me when i want it! If make the clevir player better. A lot can be said for the motivation to PLAY the game actively for the LP of ISk to get those implants.
DONT make the game dull please CCP keep the complexity HIGH we dont want the MMO thiugs in here tat just want to level to the top and then stagnate in END game duldrums. FFS :) (OFC it would take about 25Years with +5 implants to get all skills trained !! that is Brilliant! Add moar skills that can do stuff soon please) |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
163
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 16:39:28 -
[289] - Quote
Solops Crendraven wrote:Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote:Whats A itrolly .Jpg tactic? You 4. Personal attacks are prohibited. Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated Im sure you wouldnt say this to my Face And your personal Attacks of calling me stupid have nothing to do with This Thread. I suggest you read the Forum rules http://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/forum-moderation-policy 1) hes correct 2) you aren't a moderator. stop this. 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.
Yes the primary reason people leave the game are people on there high horses and trying to be things there not (trying to be a dev/gm/isd)
Implants should become more risk aka get rid of +2 +3 +4 as those are in the hardwire If you want +4's get a slave/snake/other set. The set you want not have +4's then make a choice or live with lower ones. dont want the set bonuses than get +5's |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
677
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 17:00:43 -
[290] - Quote
kingduckling wrote:Every time i die what pisses me off is that i loose my implants and i loose training time, Its all about SP.
And thats a good thing, dying should **** you off. Why would the game be better without thisfeeling?
|
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
72
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 17:34:16 -
[291] - Quote
Yes the primary reason people leave the game are people on there high horses and trying to be things there not (trying to be a dev/gm/isd)
I agree Thats pretty much of the Population Of Eve .I wouldnt never want to be a Moderator Dev or Gm However if im personally attacked on Forums Im going to defend myself . Regardless if we are talking about removal Of implants or Expressing a viewpoint that People will not agree However lets keep on topic and civil.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
378
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 17:41:58 -
[292] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Mara Rinn wrote: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?
Nothing is forcing you to do so. And yet people do. Why is that?
Some people watch Fox News too, and **** sheep
what gives
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
72
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 17:46:00 -
[293] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Mara Rinn wrote: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?
Nothing is forcing you to do so. And yet people do. Why is that? Some people watch Fox News too, and **** sheep what gives Lol that so True ..Just think people use to believe the world was flat if anything they need the attribute skills and Inplants more than we do.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
206
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 17:53:54 -
[294] - Quote
In short: Ppl want to boost learning by pluging attributes implants but doing so they are preventing themselfs from playing actively by using ships (undocking). So someone figured that if we remove that obstacle more ppl will undock., and maybe do PvP. Whole discussion was never about implants from the start. It was about gaining SP. It doesn't matter if we switch learning implants into skills ones. PvPer will always use empty clones. I can't imagine pluging implants worth 1B, jumping into frig and going roam lowsec. Rubbish. Now question: how much time do we gain with clean clone vs clone with +5 implants when we are learning skill with 1xmultiplier (no remap ofc)?
Just because learning implants took 1-5 slots and there are wide range of variety doesn't mean we have to remove them from game. Price, usability, ablity to manufacture them by players, more variations.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
|
Aliventi
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
810
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 17:59:48 -
[295] - Quote
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. |
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
41
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:04:36 -
[296] - Quote
kingduckling wrote: So many options for decreasing the cons and improving the pros, like a booster concept make it you can use one booster per 1/2/4/8/ days that will accelerate the training no matter what. Every time i die what pisses me off is that i loose my implants and i loose training time, Its all about SP.
I think one thing any future change should consider would be making it easy for the devs to tweak how long it takes to train into certain areas of the game. For example, let's say it today it takes 1 month to train into a good frigate pilot, 2 more months for destroyers and 4 more months for cruisers(made up numbers to make things easier). So today they make changes and "lock in" that it takes 1/2/4 months for each of those tiers.
The game goes on for 5-7 years, bittervets with 100+ mil SP are training into their T3 supers and a new player joins. Does CCP still want that new player to be locked into that 1/2/4 month training cycle?
Ideally CCP should be able to easily tweak the SP gains for various activities as the game ages. These tweaks shouldn't require heavy code changes and the tweaks should be reversible so they can change them based on play feedback. Personally I like implants for this because they come into the game via LP stores/drops and they exit the game via podding and replacing. I just think that how they currently work you can't tweak them much and target specific areas of the game.
The booster idea also isn't bad. Since those also "go away" after X days and CCP can control how new ones come into the game. But I think they'd be more interesting if they weren't just a universal SP boost, but targeted certain skill groups. So you'd have Sisters boosters, Fed Navy boosters, and so on.
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
72
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:06:14 -
[297] - Quote
Aliventi wrote: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. Im one of those Players. You can be my CSM representative anytime You got my Vote.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
8660
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:10:30 -
[298] - Quote
Aliventi wrote: Learning implants are not a meaningful choice.
learn faster, perform better , no loss upon pod death. thats a meaningful choice.
"I'm also quite confident that you are laughing
and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers."
=]I[=
|
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
19571
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:16:22 -
[299] - Quote
CCP removed clone grades, now wants to remove learning implants..
Next step, removing remaps.
Eve Online Homogenization and Generalization complete.
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.
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
163
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:19:46 -
[300] - Quote
Aliventi wrote: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.
If they where to be removed no bonus to training should be added standardize to the lowest possible training now.
|
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
72
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:32:51 -
[301] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:CCP removed clone grades, now wants to remove learning implants..
Next step, removing remaps.
Eve Online Homogenization and Generalization complete.
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. Actually A Cash shop to sell 30 day SP Boosters would be pretty neat. I would Buy It.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
8661
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:33:46 -
[302] - Quote
Solops Crendraven wrote:Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:CCP removed clone grades, now wants to remove learning implants..
Next step, removing remaps.
Eve Online Homogenization and Generalization complete.
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. Actually A Cash shop to sell 30 day SP Boosters would be pretty neat. I would Buy It. i know and hate you for it
"I'm also quite confident that you are laughing
and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers."
=]I[=
|
Aliventi
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
810
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:41:52 -
[303] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Aliventi wrote: Learning implants are not a meaningful choice.
learn faster, perform better , no loss upon pod death. thats a meaningful choice. CCP really should force you to train Reading to V before they allow you to train Out of Context Quoting. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
974
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:50:03 -
[304] - Quote
Aliventi wrote:Learning implants encourage risk adversity.
They don't.
The people who go "well, I can't compete till I have x SP, which I "need" my implants for so I'm not going to do PVP because it's expensive" will after the removal of learning implants go "well, I can't compete till I use slaves/crystals/whatever just like everyone else which is expensive". Because they don't use a proper reasoning, they're just using excuses. The gain from doing specific remaps compared to an allround perc/int map is actually quite small.
Aliventi wrote: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
Then you trained them badly.
Aliventi wrote: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?
People who previously were ok with pvping in learning implants (which in and of themselves do not affect an actual fight, but they want them anyway to "advance faster") will now switch to implants that DO affect a fight (slaves, crystals, etc). So your newbie went from a situation where he might have had slightly less SP gain that his target (which doesn't necessarily mean anything, the other guy might train for stuff that doesn't affect his current ship) to a situation where the ships stats are completely not in his favour.
This is BAD for said newbie. |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
72
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:51:52 -
[305] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote:Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:CCP removed clone grades, now wants to remove learning implants..
Next step, removing remaps.
Eve Online Homogenization and Generalization complete.
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. Actually A Cash shop to sell 30 day SP Boosters would be pretty neat. I would Buy It. i know and hate you for it Why The hate Im The Best new Thing That Happened in Eve. Theres nothing wrong for Eve to Sell Out And take Risks try new things.The Clones Upgrades Are Gone Atrributes Points implants are Next trust me this is just the Beginning. Im Not only one In Eve That Feels this way.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Aliventi
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
811
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 19:17:10 -
[306] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Aliventi wrote:Learning implants encourage risk adversity. They don't. The people who go "well, I can't compete till I have x SP, which I "need" my implants for so I'm not going to do PVP because it's expensive" will after the removal of learning implants go "well, I can't compete till I use slaves/crystals/whatever just like everyone else which is expensive". Because they don't use a proper reasoning, they're just using excuses. Aliventi wrote: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 Then you trained them badly. The gain from doing specific remaps compared to an allround perc/int map is actually quite small. Aliventi wrote: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? People who previously were ok with pvping in learning implants (which in and of themselves do not affect an actual fight, but they want them anyway to "advance faster") will now switch to implants that DO affect a fight (slaves, crystals, etc). So your newbie went from a situation where he might have had slightly less SP gain that his target (which doesn't necessarily mean anything, the other guy might train for stuff that doesn't affect his current ship) to a situation where the ships stats are completely not in his favour. This is BAD for said newbie. If you are under the illusion that people go "I need X SP to compete" you are wrong. People often don't use learning implants in order to better compete with other people. They use learning implants to unlock things quicker. A new player usually has some goal. That could be get into a drake, get T2 missiles, get better fitting skills, etc. Their objective is to better themselves, unlock more paths, and more content. Their goal isn't to "keep up with the Jones" but to make their play time more fun.
Don't even insinuate that I trained people badly when you have no idea what I did to train people. I was very much of the opinion that if day 1 new player trained ~8 hours so they could use a frigate, MWD, and a warp disruptor then they were useful in the small gang Syndicate PvP fleets I used to FC/be a part of. I loved having more tackle in my fleets. The group I was with even provided the fit frigates. We taught them everything from how to survive in nullsec, make isk in nullsec, gave them all the info they needed to get into useful ships, have to use attributes and remaps to their advantage, how to use EACS to get jump clones, etc.. We even told people to avoid letting their learning implants get in the way of their PvP. We understood that those implants caused risk adversity, and then the player wouldn't want to PvP, realize they aren't having fun shooting rats in highsec while they trained faster, and would eventually quit Eve out of boredom. That isn't good for anyone. Those that gave up the implants had far more fun and were far more likely to stick around. Imagine how many other players would be in Eve creating content if the hundreds of others had stayed.
Also, cut the slippery slope BS. Just because learning implants wouldn't be there does not mean everyone is going to switch to slaves, snakes and crystals. If that were going to happen it already would have because high grades give you +4 attributes. Which to most people is good enough as the 90SP/hour you get less is a fair trade for the advantages of those implants. |
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1035
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 19:17:35 -
[307] - Quote
Wouldn't mind the removal of the skill implants. Just refocus implants to bonus the ships. Simplifies stuff.
Yaay!!!!
|
UberFly
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 19:20:00 -
[308] - Quote
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. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
206
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 19:32:56 -
[309] - Quote
UberFly wrote: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. So, you propably won't have learning implants and won't have to sit in station, thus learning skills as fast as not having implants now and enjoying your time in null...
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
163
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 19:40:16 -
[310] - 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.
training everything to 5 then? you save 15 days on dread 1-5 and a weapon 1-5 with +5's and only 2 days with lv 5's if you only train them to lv4.
Want an option go play in low sec. As your implants are as safe there as in High sec while in space. And you are equally safe docked in any space |
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
825
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:02:41 -
[311] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:If I am likely to lose the pod, I wear no hardwires and might have some learning implants in, by happenstance as there is a limit to how many jump clones one can have.
If there are no learning implants and only higher stats, I will wear no hardwires and just bank the ISK. Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning? Yes. I would rather put the ISK into the next ship. Once my ship goes down it is normally unlikely that my pod will survive.
CSM Ten movement for change.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Chaotix Morwen
Ugly Duckling Inc
23
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:05:08 -
[312] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Chaotix Morwen wrote:It isnt the same argument. Learning skills once trained stuck with you, you never had to think of them again, the only cost was time. There are no alternatives to them, and there is no downside to having them, this is no choice. Learnng implants cost you your implant slots 1-5, which can be used for other things, get a crystal set for 15% boost to your rep rate or get that extra 1.5 sp/m with the learning implants? This is choice.
After 7 years you care about 11m sp? This is sounding more and more like a case of you wanting the +5 sp at no cost, heres the thing, this game was built upon consequences. Upon risk vs reward. If you want the reward, take the risk, fly with your +5s and enjoy the game. The options with learning skills were the same as the current options for learning implants. You had the option to ship spin for two months or train ship skills and actually have fun in game. Now that everyone picked the ship spinning route explains why we no longer have those skills in game. However with the learning implants it is the same choice again for people, do they want to have fun or progress faster in safety? Personally I don't care what happens with the learning implants as long as they flatten the attributes. It would just be a good opportunity to get both fixed at once. And yes I'm glad i didn't miss out on those 11m+ SP.
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" |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
35
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:17:29 -
[313] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
From my own perspective, I always fly with implants in (unless there's a very high chance of losing my pod - drunken roams come to mind). If learning implants were removed, I would just spend the difference on higher level skill hardwirings, personally. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
163
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:19:51 -
[314] - Quote
Chaotix Morwen wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Chaotix Morwen wrote:It isnt the same argument. Learning skills once trained stuck with you, you never had to think of them again, the only cost was time. There are no alternatives to them, and there is no downside to having them, this is no choice. Learnng implants cost you your implant slots 1-5, which can be used for other things, get a crystal set for 15% boost to your rep rate or get that extra 1.5 sp/m with the learning implants? This is choice.
After 7 years you care about 11m sp? This is sounding more and more like a case of you wanting the +5 sp at no cost, heres the thing, this game was built upon consequences. Upon risk vs reward. If you want the reward, take the risk, fly with your +5s and enjoy the game. The options with learning skills were the same as the current options for learning implants. You had the option to ship spin for two months or train ship skills and actually have fun in game. Now that everyone picked the ship spinning route explains why we no longer have those skills in game. However with the learning implants it is the same choice again for people, do they want to have fun or progress faster in safety? Personally I don't care what happens with the learning implants as long as they flatten the attributes. It would just be a good opportunity to get both fixed at once. And yes I'm glad i didn't miss out on those 11m+ SP. 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"
If you know what you are doing a set will cost you 240million.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
163
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:27:57 -
[315] - Quote
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.
|
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
35
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:28:54 -
[316] - Quote
Solops Crendraven wrote: I pay $100 or more in Plex.a month to play this game
Who cares? I am sure there are people that pay more every month - does that mean they have more value than you?
It never ceases to amaze me that people somehow think they're special because they know how to spend money |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
35
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:30:04 -
[317] - Quote
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. |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
35
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:32:46 -
[318] - 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 couple of years. IIRC, depending on how well your spec and your training queue line up. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
110
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:35:27 -
[319] - Quote
Skillpoints are the most valuable thing in the game because they are paid with your subscription fee and your life time. It's a bad mechanic to force players to choose between paying even more or restricting game play options just to get the best out of a subscription. It essentially perverts the rule that you should not fly what you can't effort to loose.
Jump cloning between learning, lowsec, and nullsec clones (to mitigate a bad mechanic), attribute remaps, train skills that match to the remap - all of these options do add nothing to the actual gameplay in the sandbox.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
UberFly
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:37:36 -
[320] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:So, you propably won't have learning implants and won't have to sit in station, thus learning skills as fast as not having implants now and enjoying your time in null...
Yep, I'd be all for the removing the remap / SP implants. The resulting SP/hr is meaningless to me, having the option right now, I choose to train faster.
Lady Rift wrote:training everything to 5 then? you save 15 days on a dread 1-5 and a weapon 1-5 with +5's and only 2 days with + 5's if you only train them to lv4.
Want an option go play in low sec. As your implants are as safe there as in High sec while in space. And you are equally safe docked in any space
Unfortunately, he isn't mapped for it, and doesn't have a remap for a few months, making the +5s more important. I'm actually training 3 dreads and associated guns to at least 4. |
|
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
19574
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:41:50 -
[321] - Quote
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!
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
613
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:41:59 -
[322] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
For those with larger budgets, sometimes there's an upper limit to the ISK you stuff into a clone without learning implants. For newer people, they have to balance getting that extra 1% in combat, or a slightly faster training time. That balance can make or break a fight. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
163
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:53:14 -
[323] - Quote
Elenahina wrote: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 couple of years. IIRC, depending on how well your spec and your training queue line up.
So I don't see the problem with attribute implants then as they have horrible ROI and anyone claiming they need to sit in +5's are looking at years of training.
How many ships do they need to fly at once. |
vccv
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:53:17 -
[324] - 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!
**** just got real!
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
72
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:57:57 -
[325] - Quote
Elenahina wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote: I pay $100 or more in Plex.a month to play this game Who cares? I am sure there are people that pay more every month - does that mean they have more value than you? It never ceases to amaze me that people somehow think they're special because they know how to spend money I am Special And I do care where I spend my money if a game or community ceases to be fun and becomes Lame Implants or no inplants I will Take my money else where.Trust me I wouldnt think twice kamikazeing my thousands of dollar worth of accounts.The reason I havnt is Eve has Hope And Im a Sucker For Sci Fi Fiction.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Memphis Baas
95
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 20:59:37 -
[326] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: NEVARRR!!! AUR for golden ammo! 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!
You laugh, but I'll take everything above for about 1% of the AUR price, with the proviso that everything self-destructs in 2 weeks. Another Armageddon event like on release day would be fun. I'd bet they'd make money on the promotion, even though ultimately we're paying for stuff that will guarantee self-destruct. Y'all hardened PVP'ers would have your easy titan killmails.
|
Wadaya
Trailerpark Industries
22
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 21:01:23 -
[327] - Quote
We have 2 sets of implants. One for hardwires for ship/eq bonues, and one set for learning or learning + set bonuses. I don't see how having learning implants is hurting anyone. They have benefits with risk, just like anything else in this game.
Back when we had learning skills, I remember that if you trained them all to 5, you shaved like 2 months of training off over a 3 or 4 year period. We didn't have skill queues, we didn't have remaps. If you felt the best way to play Eve was to sit docked up for 2 months and just train learning skills first. You were either an alt or an idiot.
What most people did, and I know what I did, is train short skills while you were playing, and long skills when you weren't , especially on those short CCP patch day, when sometimes they lasted a week of the game being up and down before they got **** stabilized. Those were the days we trained the advanced learning skills to 5.
I was ok with learning skills being removed, because everyone got compensated for what they put into it. And they added remaps. Remaps help people fall into the same camp as the "I can't play for 2 months because i have to train learning skills first" crowd. Be glad you can even remap, most Achura can't.
We started with less than 20k sp, and we ratted, humped veldspar in a frig, scammed and whatnot just to be able to afford +1\s and 2's. +3's were viewed as a luxury until at least a few months into the game.
If you want to take out learning implants, fine. But everyone should get a boost like the learning skill removal.. if you have +3's you get the +3 boost, if you have +5's you get the +5 boost etc.
What don't do is give out the biggest reward for the least risk. |
Memphis Baas
95
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 21:04:42 -
[328] - Quote
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. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
206
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 21:05:13 -
[329] - Quote
UberFly wrote:Yep, I'd be all for the removing the remap / SP implants. The resulting SP/hr is meaningless to me, having the option right now, I choose to train faster. It doesn't make any sense. Undock button is not locked when clone has +5 implants. SP/hr is meaningless to you, yet you choose to plug +5 to train faster, and not playing the game/undocking. Do you have kneecaps, sir? You shooting at your own arguments.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
72
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 21:11:17 -
[330] - Quote
vccv wrote: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! **** just got real! Hail Panda!http://th00.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/i/2011/207/f/3/all_hail_the_panda_reich_by_shiuman-d41pldb.jpg
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
|
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.
|
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
981
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 17:39:25 -
[361] - Quote
Leannor wrote: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.
What the jezus fck are you talking about. Somebody try and explain what is said here, cause it makes no sense in light of this whole discussion.
Also: "We have earned the right to be where we are, well, most have", a quick check on you and your L***h character shows that you haven't exactly earned that, according to your own :logic:. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
981
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 17:41:00 -
[362] - Quote
Olleybear wrote: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.
Older, richer players can pay for them with isk, younger players can not and "will have to" buy them with isk, bought with plex. If you can't understand that simple logic, don't blame me.
|
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
197
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 18:03:52 -
[363] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Olleybear wrote:You are trolling. Older, richer players can pay for them with isk, younger players can not and "will have to" buy them with isk, bought with plex. If you can't understand that simple logic, don't blame me.
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.
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
981
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 18:10:01 -
[364] - Quote
Olleybear wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Olleybear wrote:You are trolling. Older, richer players can pay for them with isk, younger players can not and "will have to" buy them with isk, bought with plex. If you can't understand that simple logic, don't blame me. 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.
Where am I trolling when I state "when the only option for implants are stat enhancing ones (instead of also attribs enhancing ones) then more people will use them which will skew the game more towards haves and not haves. Which typically results in an isk war which thus results in younger players "having to" buy them with plex". |
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
200
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 18:24:22 -
[365] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Olleybear wrote:Olleybear wrote:You are trolling. You are trolling. Where am I trolling when I state "when the only option for implants are stat enhancing ones (instead of also attribs enhancing ones) then more people will use them which will skew the game more towards haves and not haves. Which typically results in an isk war which thus results in younger players "having to" buy them with plex".
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.
When it comes to PvP, I am like a chiwawa hanging from a grizzley bears pair of wrinklies for dear life.
|
UberFly
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 18:38:42 -
[366] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:It doesn't make any sense. Undock button is not locked when clone has +5 implants. SP/hr is meaningless to you, yet you choose to plug +5 to train faster, and not playing the game/undocking. Do you have kneecaps, sir? You shooting at your own arguments.
The statements were separate, and should be read that way. 1. If I had no option, I wouldn't care what the SP/hr was. Meaning, if CCP removes learning implants and stats, and sets it to 1800SP/h or 2700SP/h, I'm fine (and I'm only speaking for me). At this point, there is no advantage to staying docked up, because I'm getting the same SP/hr as everyone else. I made this point only to slow down those folks who cry "you just want max SP/hr", because I do want the max SP/hr. However, I have no input on what that max should be, I'll leave it up to CCPs mathematicians and database scrubbers.
2. We currently have the option to improve our SP/hr, and get skills finished faster. Inside of these rules, I'd like to get my dread skills trained faster, so I'm sitting in +5 implants, not undocking, because I spent much of my isk on this character and can't afford to lose 1 or 2 sets of +5 implants. Not to mention the absolute fit that alliance leadership would have if I were to lose said implants.
All clear now? |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
981
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 18:47:39 -
[367] - Quote
Olleybear wrote: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.
You're stating things I have not said or Implied, trying to accuse ME of saying "newbies can't compete" is, frankly, hilarious. If only you knew.
You're picking on details and not wanting to see the bigger picture. ON AVERAGE there'll be more pilots with combat related implants which ON AVERAGE means that they will have the advantage which ON AVERAGE means people will try and compensate for it, so just as (per this whole discussion, you might check the thread a bit) people tend to go "I'll wait till I have # SP and I'll use remaps for it" (which is terrible) they'll now go "I'll wait till I can afford # implants and I'll use plex for it".
And that's just small scale. Guess what happens if in larger fleets people aren't "held back" anymore by the lure of learning implants, it'll be yet another advantage stacked squarely in favour of the "establishment", because as they can pay for lol fleets they can also pay for lol implants. And if there's no learning implants anymore to help to get more people into theyr Scaps then they'll use that isk for other stuff; combat implants.
Which means that people who are newer to it all, upstarts in terms of alliances, people who want to gnaw at the current status quo have yet ANOTHER hurdle to take, ANOTHER advantage the "haves" have.
learning implants are pay2advance, combat implants are pay2win. Removing learning implants messes up the balance and turns "everything" into pay2win. I honestly don't see how one could disagree with that. That or you're just throwing the "trolling" card because you disagree with what I'm saying, that's also possible. |
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
200
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 19:09:00 -
[368] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Olleybear wrote:You are trolling. You're stating things I have not said or Implied, trying to accuse ME of saying "newbies can't compete" is, frankly, hilarious.
Here is where you state newer pilots cant compete.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5440713#post5440713
Gregor Parud wrote:learning implants are p2advance, combat implants are pay2win. Removing learning implants messes up the balance and turns "everything" into pay2win. I honestly don't see how one could disagree with that.
Constantly restating the definition of Pay to Win as:
buying something in game with resources earned in game
will not change the definition of what Pay to Win actually means. Pay to Win is buying something in game with real money for in game advantage.
Your entire premise for your side of the debate is wrong. It is so obviously wrong that I can only conclude:
You are trolling.
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
981
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 19:12:20 -
[369] - Quote
Ah, I see the issue. I didn't necessarily mean "compete" as in actually fighting, You're completely correct in that it doesn't necessarily determine the outcome of a fight (although on average it does help skewing it to one side of course, which is the whole point) I meant competing wallet wise. |
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
200
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 19:30:42 -
[370] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Ah, I see the issue. I didn't necessarily mean "compete" as in actually fighting, You're completely correct in that it doesn't necessarily determine the outcome of a fight (although on average it does help skewing it to one side of course, which is the whole point) I meant competing wallet wise.
If "everyone" uses slave implants then most people will thus try and get them as well, to get on a more even playing field. If those are newer players who lack the income to (comfortably) use and lose those they will have to revert to plex for isk. Which makes it P2W.
Soooo, here your saying competing does not mean actually fighting, but to support your side of the debate you use a pvp scenario?
No. Most people will not try to get slave implants to get on a more even playing field. They do however decide to use a clone that does not have implants knowing full well others might have expensive implants. They dont want to risk losing more isk than the ship is worth. Flying without combat modifying implants, or any other implant, is what quite a few people do. Everyone here who has flown for any length of time has heard on voice coms people stating exactly this.
You are grossly mistaken in all of your assumptions. I only respond so your assumptions dont fool some new pilot into thinking they need eleventy-billion isk and skill points so they can compete in Eve. New pilots clearly can and do compete no matter which definition of compete you decide to use.
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
981
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 19:36:26 -
[371] - Quote
Jezus fck you're thick.
:added for content:
I know that, you know that, some others know that.
The majority of ppl in EVE are F1 pushing, lol fleet, mission grinding, "I must sit in station with my +5" folks. They are the majority and they will react as stated. |
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
200
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 19:42:47 -
[372] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Jezus fck you're thick.
:added for content:
I know that, you know that, some others know that.
The majority of ppl in EVE are F1 pushing, lol fleet, mission grinding, "I must sit in station with my +5" folks. They are the majority and they will react as stated. And when someone finally can not win a debate by discrediting the actual points of the other person, they resort to trying to discredit the actual person. The way you just did.
You are trolling.
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
981
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 19:48:07 -
[373] - Quote
If you keep not getting the point then, yeah at some point one has to come to that conclusion.
THIS WHOLE THREAD is about how PEOPLE (on average) will react to these possible changes, and PEOPLE (on average) aren't competent solo/small gang pvpers who understand how **** works. There's a reason lol blob alliances are so big.
And thus I'm talking about how PEOPLE (on average) will react to this.
You just want learning implants gone, so you can start using combat implants or at least get high sp/h. QED. |
Liam Inkuras
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
1423
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 23:17:13 -
[374] - Quote
Never not Snakes 23/7
I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
|
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
200
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 00:00:47 -
[375] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:
THIS WHOLE THREAD is about how PEOPLE (on average) will react to these possible changes, and PEOPLE (on average) aren't competent solo/small gang pvpers who understand how **** works. There's a reason lol blob alliances are so big.
And thus I'm talking about how PEOPLE (on average) will react to this.
You just want learning implants gone, so you can start using combat implants or at least get high sp/h. QED.
Lets have a recap:
You: 1) Learning implants are good, removing learning implants is bad. 2) Players buying Pay2Win combat implants is bad because players can buy more expensive combat implants than others. 3) On average, people will use more Pay2Win combat implants, then on average people will buy more combat implants to compete, which is also bad. 4) People using plex to buy a specific type of Pay2Win combat implant is bad as well because they dont have enough in game isk compared to older players 5) More people using Pay2Win combat implants is bad because it upsets 'the balance' and turns everything into pay2win, which is bad 6) Competing is not defined as fighting and has been redefined to the size of ones wallet when buying.... combat implants....which has to do with fighting.... which is bad 7) Losing expensive Pay2Win combat implants is bad because people will have to use plex to get another set, which is Pay2Win 8) Finally you say the majority of people cant fight and then turn right back around and say the whole thread is about the average players reactions to the removal of learning implants.
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. Sounds like fun yes?
When it comes to PvP, I am like a chiwawa hanging from a grizzley bears pair of wrinklies for dear life.
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
684
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 00:05:37 -
[376] - Quote
Olleybear wrote: And when someone finally can not win a debate by discrediting the actual points of the other person, they resort to trying to discredit the actual person. The way you just did.
You are trolling.
Except for the fact you had been doing that for 5 posts before he finally met you insult-to-insult. If you're going to call someone out, try not being a hypocrit.
|
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
200
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 00:32:21 -
[377] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Olleybear wrote:You are trolling. Except for the fact you had been doing that for 5 posts before he finally met you insult-to-insult. If you're going to call someone out, try not being a hypocrit. Since when is pointing out a troll as a troll an insult. Unless you yourself actually believe he is sincere.
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
981
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 01:17:18 -
[378] - Quote
Olleybear wrote: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.
There you go again making assumptions. I dec, mission bust, roam, bomb in WH, gank and whatnot. I'm completely FINE with there being "unfairness" in EVE, but at the very least I'd like that unfairness to be a result of planning, knowledge and tactics.
What I DON'T want (even though it would benefit me greatly, but I'm not a hypocrite) is to add ON TOP OF WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE even more unfairness that is based on an isk war. I'll win that isk war, no worries, but that doesn't mean I'd want to have it in this game, because I CARE for the game. And caring for this game means caring for an influx of players; The SECOND people get a whiff of "this game is p2w, I need plex to buy combat implants" that's not going to end well, if that get "air time" then we all lose. |
Aliventi
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
817
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 02:11:11 -
[379] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:There you go again making assumptions. I dec, mission bust, roam, bomb in WH, gank and whatnot. I'm completely FINE with there being "unfairness" in EVE, but at the very least I'd like that unfairness to be a result of planning, knowledge and tactics.
What I DON'T want (even though it would benefit me greatly, but I'm not a hypocrite) is to add ON TOP OF WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE even more unfairness that is based on an isk war. I'll win that isk war, no worries, but that doesn't mean I'd want to have it in this game, because I CARE for the game. And caring for this game means caring for an influx of players; The SECOND people get a whiff of "this game is p2w, I need plex to buy combat implants" that's not going to end well, if that get "air time" then we all lose. Let me ask you a few questions to ensure that I understand your stance. You are against removing leaning implants because people will take that isk they would have spent in implants and put it towards combat implants? (Feel free to correct this to whatever statement you wish.) Extending the previous statement: If learning implants are removed then everyone will run around with combat implants? (Feel free to correct this to whatever statement you wish.) Extending the first statement: If learning implants are removed then you believe that everyone will fill those slots with snakes, slaves, etc. (Feel free to correct this to whatever statement you wish.) You believe that combat implants are pay to win? (Again, feel free to correct this to whatever statement you wish.)
I will ask some more when you reply. Just laying a ground floor as you what your statements are. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
981
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 02:45:44 -
[380] - Quote
Pretty much yes to all of those. Of course combat implants are p2w, just because some of us can pay for them with ingame cash doesn't change that. Especially with CCP's "well, with the removal of learning implants that makes room for us to create new implants".
As stated before; learning implants are pay2advance and do not affect a current scenario/fight, the lure of these implants kinda ensures (to a degree anyway) that people won't be piling on the combat related ones. So people spending money on learning implants (whether or not this makes them passive and not undock) is not a problem, it's not affecting actual outcome of a fight (on whatever level that fight may happen, be it 1v1 or fleet).
And because of how SP is a balancing factor that actually is in FAVOUR of newer players (due to skill lvl cap they can't get that far ahead, if at all) newer players aren't actually at a disadvantage, all an older player can do is diversify, train different ships and skills than the one he's currently flying. The lure of learning implants so that an older player can train faster for his Hell (or whatever other distant goal) is an incentive for him to NOT use combat related implants, which evens the playing field.
If you remove learning implants this does not decrease the gap between older and newer players, you could of course make up for that with giving everyone increased attributes but this doesn't change anything at all, everyone will train faster or slower. But the SIDE EFFECT is that suddenly there's nothing else for older players to use their slots and isk on than combat related implants. And those WILL have an affect on the outcome of a fight, be it 1v1 or fleet vs fleet. Especially so if CCP starts to make more funky combat related implants.
And then the race begins just like with things as gang links. If you want to compete with a fleet that uses gang links, assuming equal player skills (again, I'm not talking about "yes well, you can still win you know" because that's missing the point), then you will have to run them yourself as well. And it's the same here; if you will want to compete with older players or fleets of players, you better try to even the playing field with.... combat implants.
And if you can't pay for those implants with ingame income then there's just one other option; buy them with plex isk. And once the word gets out that "EVE is fun but don't try to PVP because it's p2w" (whether or not that's 100% factually true is not important, it's what the main message will be) then this will hurt EVE in the long run, because it'll probably affect the influx of new players.
I have nothing against advantages or differences in capabilities, I make use of it every day, but at the same time I see no need or reason to add MORE inequality (one that heavily favours older players or ones spending money to sell plex) for no other reason than "uhm, some selfish folks want learning implants gone because :effort:". |
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4055
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 02:50:02 -
[381] - Quote
So... When do we get to buy skill points? (SP)
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
200
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 03:08:48 -
[382] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Olleybear wrote: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. There you go again making assumptions. I dec, mission bust, roam, bomb in WH, gank and whatnot. I'm completely FINE with there being "unfairness" in EVE, but at the very least I'd like that unfairness to be a result of planning, knowledge and tactics. What I DON'T want (even though it would benefit me greatly, but I'm not a hypocrite) is to add ON TOP OF WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE even more unfairness that is based on an isk war.... The SECOND people get a whiff of "this game is p2w, I need plex to buy combat implants" that's not going to end well, if that get "air time" then we all lose.
Did you just say your fine with unfairness in Eve then turn right back around in the same post and say you dont want even more unfairness in Eve? Really? Yes, there I go again making a correct assumption about your views on fairness from words you are typing here on the forums. You even restate your veiw on fairness in your most recent post but use the word inequality. You want Eve to be more equal, more fair. Thanks for admitting that, not once, but twice.
Eve is not Pay2Win as you continue to claim.
Isk does not make a pilot good at pvp. Having less isk or more isk does not mean you are going to lose or win a fight. PvP is more than just warping to zero and pressing the fire button. Buying really expensive implants means nothing if you dont know how to fit a ship, keep aware of your surroundings, and use game mechanics to your advantage.
Constantly claiming that removing learning implants will suddenly lead to Pay2Win is wrong. We have been able to buy and sell plex for isk for years. The simple removal of a single implant type will not make the game Pay2Win because of their removal. Everything you can do before the removal of learning implants can still be done after their removal.
You are wrong.
When it comes to PvP, I am like a chiwawa hanging from a grizzley bears pair of wrinklies for dear life.
|
Aliventi
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
817
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 04:11:54 -
[383] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:LOTS AND LOTS OF INFORMATION Alright. Thank you for posting your concrete ideas. It helped clear up many questions I had.
So you say that combat implants are Pay to Win. I think we can both agree that Pay to Win means that you are paying for some advantage that in many cases isn't fair. You are a smart man. You know that slaves boost your armor amount, crystals give you more shield repair, snakes make you go faster. You also understand that there are hardwiring and Omega implants that in slots not used by learning implants. So why is that many pods do not have hardwiring combat implants in them if the implants are pay to win?
I 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)?
What about combat boosters? Many of these boosters have effects that put +6% implants to shame (+30% armor or shield boost anyone? Perhaps a 37.5% tracking boost is more your style?) If a +6% implant is Pay to Win then these must surely be pay to win. I have excellent booster skills so I can frequently use these combat boosters without incurring a meaningful penalty. So why are there fewer people like me that use boosters without any penalties if they put many implants to shame and, by extension of your argument, are pay to win?
You cited many, many things that give pilots an edge in combat. Combat implants, gang links, I'll toss in combat boosters, faction/storyline/officer mods, etc. Heck we will even give them the benefit of the doubt and toss in AT ships. So why do they die (older KM. The fit shows up as cargo)? If paying for every advantage in the book still won't prevent you from dying to a tiny amount of pilots then how can these items be pay to win?
I think that what we are realizing is that your assertions that combat implants are pay to win simply aren't true. They do give an edge, but fall flat when the enemy brings more than you can handle. In Eve skill and having friends gives you far more power than any combat implants will. In addition, your assertions that if learning implants were removed the combat implants would become ubiquitous isn't true either. If they were true then we would see far more hardwiring combat implant use and far more pirate implant use as the advantages of the implants outweighs the loss of 90SP/hour.
In addition, CCP has already put measures into place to discourage the use of high level implants. Back when CCP Fozzie rebalanced battleships I asked him why he felt it necessary to make BS so expensive compared to cruisers or BCs. He replied with what I have coined as the CCP Fozzie Linerar Power Increase for Exponential Cost Theorem. It is just what it sounds like. The reason a BS is so much more expensive is that it is a linear power upgrade at an exponential cost. Implants, combat and learning, work the exact same way. A +1 implants cost under 2 mil isk. A +5% implant costs 100 mil isk. So even if your worst fear of combat implants being pay to win and appearing everywhere is realized (I know I showed it wouldn't because if it were to happen it already would have) the new player would have to pay far less isk to shrink the gap between them and the isk rich player. All that isk really is only going to buy the isk rich player a 2-3% advantage at best if the new player buys +3 implants. I know that 2-3% sometimes is the difference in fights, but that 2-3% advantage can easily be negated through....wait for it... skill and friends.
I applaud you for putting forth a valiant argument. Unfortunately, it simply isn't true. |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
73
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 05:10:00 -
[384] - Quote
Paying real life currency to beat players who are inherently better than you in any game would solve all this Mumblejumbo rermoving atributes points and implants and Advantage that 10 year veterans Have. I just cant wait till Permadeath. The Future is casual gamers.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Max Kolonko
WATAHA. Unseen Wolves
494
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 07:33:53 -
[385] - Quote
Death to atributes and learning implants. I hope this will happen sooner than later.
Its what cause players to not train skills that are beneficial to the corp. "Im on int mem so i xant train logi now buuuhuuuu"
As for learning implants it will increase ammount of people that will fly with set of low grades or higher imho. I know i would.
Read and support:
Don't mess with OUR WH's
What is Your stance on WH stuff?
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
984
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 07:58:09 -
[386] - Quote
Aliventi wrote: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)?
What are the chances that these "new implants we will create" will be less strong ones but more funky ones? Warp speed implants together with agility, just a few % mind you but "worth it". Sensor strength increasing combined with targeting range, stuff like that. Implants that would bring clone cost to 50-200 mil for a "nice set". High SP chars aren't paying for clones anymore so that pretty much makes up for it, "these are awesome, gotta have them!", "for this doctrine everyone fit these, cost 150 mil". It'll happen. |
flaming phantom
T.R.I.A.D Ushra'Khan
86
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 10:12:18 -
[387] - Quote
I have no basis for my opinion, but I like the attribute points and implants. but if they were to go, then oh well.
I guess I wouldn't worry about jumping back to my high sec clone in order to get max SP if i am not going to be pvping for a few days.
All great men have mustaches
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
75
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 13:05:14 -
[388] - Quote
I wouldn't object to a re-working of implants. Maybe mirror them more closely (than they already are) to Skills and Meta level.
Ie, you have the T1 Attribute +1 to +5. Then a T2 varient, then a faction/officer etc varient (just like most other modules and ships - thus totally no more advantageous than any other form of advancement in EVE).
Then you have a "mixed implant", which is the same base as the above, but, you can add together with a second part to enhance a skill. Maybe not each specific skill, but maybe that might be an idea. My initial thoughts was for everything you train in eve, there should be an option to boost that ability via the mixer. Maybe only generic skills, such as +1% refine up to +5% refine etc, which you can then intersect with the basic implants. If they're sold seperatly, and you mix and match (much like T3) you can make your own preferred implants, at your own level. And, with a maximum of 10 Jump Clones, you can effectively 'focus' on ten skills. So, you can have a refining clone, a PVE clone, a Manufacturing clone, ... or be more specific and have a Medium Gunnery Clone, and a Large Gunnery Clone, or a Warp clone. The advantage towards older players is lost, the more specific skills are availlbe.
Maybe, these mixer skill implants could be a kind of invention activity based off Skill Books, and consumes jove or Sleeper equipment and said skill book.
Hmm, I made that up as I went along, but the basic concept actually sounds pretty decent. Sure there's holes that need to be pulgged, but, anyway, there you go. :)
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Araxmas
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
5
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 13:50:44 -
[389] - Quote
Sounds like a good change.
To the people complaining remember that they mentioned the removal of LEARNING implants, not all implants! This means that we now have 5 implant slots freed up so people will still be hurt when they get pod killed, just instead of a bunch of attribute implants it will now be, hopefully, a bunch of new implants that will use the same slots.
Hell the charisma slot may now feature a bunch of implants that reduce tax, increase agent rewards, give leadership bonuses .etc Perception may instead be a bunch of implants that increase scan resolution, locking speed, cloak delay .etc
Of course this is all speculation but the reactionary "Waaah this is now WoW in space" is just laughable. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14735
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 15:34:48 -
[390] - Quote
Max Kolonko wrote: As for learning implants it will increase ammount of people that will fly with set of low grades or higher imho. I know i would.
Nah, they will think of another excuse to not PvP.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
75
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 15:47:10 -
[391] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Max Kolonko wrote: As for learning implants it will increase ammount of people that will fly with set of low grades or higher imho. I know i would.
Nah, they will think of another excuse to not PvP.
yeah, ...people who pvp, don't care about what they loose. Because they're the arrogant type that will think they will win, regardless of wether they do or don't.
People who don't PVP are those that are always thinking they won't win, and they don't wanna loose what they have, whatever that is. Implants are but an easy excuse. Until pvp happens in pods, without no risk, these types will remain, and represent the majority of folks.
(NB the arroganct thing for PVPers is a complimnet by the way, ... PVP need arrogance or maybe blind confidence is a better description). (aside from the exceptions who do it for fun.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Aliventi
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
820
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 16:32:33 -
[392] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Aliventi wrote: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)? What are the chances that these "new implants we will create" will be less strong ones but more funky ones? Warp speed implants together with agility, just a few % mind you but "worth it". Sensor strength increasing combined with targeting range, stuff like that. Implants that would bring clone cost to 50-200 mil for a "nice set". High SP chars aren't paying for clones anymore so that pretty much makes up for it, "these are awesome, gotta have them!", "for this doctrine everyone fit these, cost 150 mil". It'll happen. High SP players were never paying 200 mil isk for a clone. No one has 400 mil SP. I was paying ~20 mil isk IIRC. Clone Grades were terrible option to either lose SP or lose isk. SP is worth a heck of a lot more than isk so I bought myself a clone upgrade. Not having to pay for clone upgrades is nice because I no longer have to pay a cost I didn't want to pay. I am not thinking "oh ~20 mil isk to spent on implants!" I am thinking "Oh ~20 mil isk to spend on a ship or [insert X goal here]". By purchasing a clone upgrade I was never prevented from purchasing additional combat implants. If I wanted to do that then I would have. You can take a look at the pod mails to see that many others chose not to use combat implant then, and still don't use combat implants now.
You can take the CA-X Genolutions as an example of the implants CCP will create. These are powerful implants. Do not get me wrong. Their bonus max out at less than a 4% bonus if my math is correct. While powerful, the implants are not overpowered. There is a vast opportunity here to create new and interesting implants that will allow people to do things they weren't able to do before. If you decide that a few implants worth it then more power to you. If you choose to requre certain implants for a doctrine then more power to you. That is Eve Online. You have meaningful choices and consequences. These implants will not give you and edge that someone else can't take away with skill, by bringing friends, flying the counter to your ship, using EWAR, etc.
CCP has a pretty good grasp on how to balance. I know you can cite Ishtars and Tengus as unbalanced right now. But for every ships or module they made too powerful they got a dozen of other ships and modules right. CCP knows that the Tengu and the Ishtar are unbalanced and are taking a look at them. CCP doesn't like unbalanced things anymore than the players do. They know it is in no one's interest to have Ishtars Online. So if they create an implant that is too powerful then they will work to get it fixed eventually. |
mrjknyazev
Cookies Dealers The Gorgon Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 16:33:26 -
[393] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: Nah, they will think of another excuse to not PvP.
I think
we've already
got
this.
Thank you for sharing your greater understanding of human psychology with us. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
984
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 17:10:38 -
[394] - Quote
If only I could still like those posts, I always like good posts. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
164
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 17:34:32 -
[395] - Quote
mrjknyazev wrote:baltec1 wrote: Nah, they will think of another excuse to not PvP.
I think we've already got this. Thank you for sharing your greater understanding of human psychology with us.
SO SO true. baltec has nailed it. |
Mehrune Khan
Viziam Amarr Empire
25
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 17:53:02 -
[396] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
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. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
684
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 18:00:16 -
[397] - Quote
Mehrune Khan wrote: So yes, if learning implants didn't exist, I would play the game differently.
No, no you wouldn't.
Why?
You refuse to leave Hi-sec because you fear losing 50 million in implants. So, say that risk went away, what would you fly out there? 50 million worth of T2 fit Cruiser? 250 million worth of HAC? 300 million worth of BS? 500 million worth of T3 cruiser? How are any of these losses any more acceptable than 50 million of implants? Sure, the implants are 50 million on top of the ships cost, but that cruiser is 45 million on top of the cost of a T2 fit frigate, that BS is 250 million on top of the cruiser.
Take the cost of the implants in to account of the cost of the whole, and forget about it. Its a falsehood holding you back, an illusionary cost that in the scheme of things really doesn't matter. Free yourself from the chains of the lie.
|
Mehrune Khan
Viziam Amarr Empire
25
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 18:03:13 -
[398] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Mehrune Khan wrote: So yes, if learning implants didn't exist, I would play the game differently.
No, no you wouldn't. Why? You refuse to leave Hi-sec because you fear losing 50 million in implants. So, say that risk went away, what would you fly out there? 50 million worth of T2 fit Cruiser? 250 million worth of HAC? 300 million worth of BS? 500 million worth of T3 cruiser? How are any of these losses any more acceptable than 50 million of implants? Sure, the implants are 50 million on top of the ships cost, but that cruiser is 45 million on top of the cost of a T2 fit frigate, that BS is 250 million on top of the cruiser. Take the cost of the implants in to account of the cost of the whole, and forget about it. Its a falsehood holding you back, an illusionary cost that in the scheme of things really doesn't matter. Free yourself from the chains of the lie.
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. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
164
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 18:03:38 -
[399] - Quote
Mehrune Khan wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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. 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.
ps you con go to +5's if you want a real edge. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
164
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 18:04:48 -
[400] - Quote
Mehrune Khan wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Mehrune Khan wrote: So yes, if learning implants didn't exist, I would play the game differently.
No, no you wouldn't. Why? You refuse to leave Hi-sec because you fear losing 50 million in implants. So, say that risk went away, what would you fly out there? 50 million worth of T2 fit Cruiser? 250 million worth of HAC? 300 million worth of BS? 500 million worth of T3 cruiser? How are any of these losses any more acceptable than 50 million of implants? Sure, the implants are 50 million on top of the ships cost, but that cruiser is 45 million on top of the cost of a T2 fit frigate, that BS is 250 million on top of the cruiser. Take the cost of the implants in to account of the cost of the whole, and forget about it. Its a falsehood holding you back, an illusionary cost that in the scheme of things really doesn't matter. Free yourself from the chains of the lie. 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.
If you lose a pod in low it really is your fault for they are 100% avoidable. a t1 fit cruiser cost more than 5 mil. |
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
73
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 18:09:10 -
[401] - Quote
Mehrune Khan wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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. 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. Thats correct a 20mill+SP Character has more fun than a 2 mill SP Toon . If the Bazaar was more cheaper and more variety of toons I wouldnt waste years of my life training skills and remapping points. I would even buy the toon with implants if it was cheaper the issue isn't about really attributes and implants its really about pilot not wanting to lose 200 to billion worth of isk . I guarantee if everything was alot cheaper we would see more pilot PvP using implants and so on taking more risk because once you take away the value its all about having fun and blowing up ships. Like in the RW if you Tax everyone to death nobody is going to want to run a Business or take risks thats just common sense.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Mehrune Khan
Viziam Amarr Empire
25
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 18:14:20 -
[402] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Mehrune Khan wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Mehrune Khan wrote: So yes, if learning implants didn't exist, I would play the game differently.
No, no you wouldn't. Why? You refuse to leave Hi-sec because you fear losing 50 million in implants. So, say that risk went away, what would you fly out there? 50 million worth of T2 fit Cruiser? 250 million worth of HAC? 300 million worth of BS? 500 million worth of T3 cruiser? How are any of these losses any more acceptable than 50 million of implants? Sure, the implants are 50 million on top of the ships cost, but that cruiser is 45 million on top of the cost of a T2 fit frigate, that BS is 250 million on top of the cruiser. Take the cost of the implants in to account of the cost of the whole, and forget about it. Its a falsehood holding you back, an illusionary cost that in the scheme of things really doesn't matter. Free yourself from the chains of the lie. 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. If you lose a pod in low it really is your fault for they are 100% avoidable. a t1 fit cruiser cost more than 5 mil.
You've never jumped into a gate camp before, have you? You can't escape if your pod can't warp and is 15 kilometers from the gate.
I'm not a walking market index. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
685
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 18:29:53 -
[403] - Quote
Mehrune Khan wrote:
You've never jumped into a gate camp before, have you?
See, you proved my point by immediately falling in to your back-up excuse.
It is virtually impossible to lose your pod in lowsec, literally no ship can lock you before it is warped off. But upon someone stating this, you immediately went "well, but gatecamps". It is your mind holding you back, not the game.
|
Ashlar Vellum
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
138
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 18:34:14 -
[404] - Quote
Mehrune Khan wrote:Lady Rift wrote: If you lose a pod in low it really is your fault for they are 100% avoidable. a t1 fit cruiser cost more than 5 mil.
You've never jumped into a gate camp before, have you? You can't escape if your pod can't warp and is 15 kilometers from the gate. I'm not a walking market index. 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. |
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
206
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 18:34:58 -
[405] - Quote
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.
When it comes to PvP, I am like a chiwawa hanging from a grizzley bears pair of wrinklies for dear life.
|
Xercodo
Vector Galactic Did he say Jump
4106
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 18:56:16 -
[406] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:If I am likely to lose the pod, I wear no hardwires and might have some learning implants in, by happenstance as there is a limit to how many jump clones one can have.
If there are no learning implants and only higher stats, I will wear no hardwires and just bank the ISK. Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning?
For a lot of people they wanna save where they can so they'll only fit the attribute implants to get better skill training, but if those are gone then they'll just avoid fitting implants to save money.
The only implants most players will use at that point will be the PG and CPU implants and probably in 1% -3% variations and will prob scrap a fit if it needs a 5% or 6% one cause those are expensive (and/or because they need cyber 5)
Only people with more expendable income will use the implants. Personally I'd try to use the 3% and under hardwirings if I use any that I don't find in loot to keep costs down.
The Drake is a Lie
|
Mehrune Khan
Viziam Amarr Empire
25
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:00:28 -
[407] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Mehrune Khan wrote:
You've never jumped into a gate camp before, have you?
See, you proved my point by immediately falling in to your back-up excuse. It is virtually impossible to lose your pod in lowsec, literally no ship can lock you before it is warped off. But upon someone stating this, you immediately went "well, but gatecamps". It is your mind holding you back, not the game.
What the hell are you talking about?
First off, yes I actually have flown into a gatecamp before. "But gatecamps" isn't a just back-up excuse when it's something I've actually experienced. You're also trying to pigeonhole me into an argument about lowsec, when I was specifically mentioned both low and null. Also yes I have lost a pod in low as well. Navigating a right-click menu surprisingly becomes hard when your hands are shaking and your pulse is pounding in your ears like a sledgehammer. I suppose I could get used to it and perform better with more experience, but the whole point of this thread is: why would I try gaining more PvP experience with 50 mil of implants in my pod? |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
984
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:04:06 -
[408] - Quote
Olleybear wrote: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.
Yes well, FW with its Fisher Price arbitrary game mechanics and zero bubbles isn't exactly "all forms of PVP", now is it. But it's interesting to realise that you only seem to be able to understand your own situation and perspective. |
The Newface
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:14:11 -
[409] - Quote
No for the love of...
Im seriously worried that the plan here is to turn this into "Batlefield in space" Anyone can jump in at any time with no risk.
Remove implants they cost isk. Next they going to complain about fittings then about ships.
Soon you will be able to create a new account with max skills and fly super caps, all in the name of "making PvP more accessible" |
bloodknight2
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
345
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:16:24 -
[410] - Quote
Mehrune Khan wrote: 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.
Really?
The problem isn't eve or the implant. The problem is you. You lost your pod in low sec. There is no way a proteus (without remote sebo) and even less a BS can lock you before you warp. You can easily pvp in empire or low sec with a pod worth billions and never lose it. Ok, yes, you can lose it in LS if you warp at a gate...with 3-4 BS fitted with smartbombs, but fact is, staying in empire because "i don't want to lose my pod" is stupid.
The problem with implants is that most new players think they NEED them and without them, they will need to train weeks and weeks before going anywhere in this game (which is wrong) and if you *really* can't spam the warp button when you are in danger (...), then simply use +2. You will see no difference with +4.
I don't want to be mean, but all my 3 accounts are in NPC corp and every day, i see newbies with very low skill (you know, no skill high enough to use any T2 module) who do PVP, ask for help about fitting, lose ships in PVP and most important, don't give a **** about their lost because they had fun and they know isk is easy to get in this game.
Implants are fine. They are a choise. I never used +5 implant and rarely used +4 and a lot of players are using genolution implant because the small bonus they give are better than +1 attribute. |
|
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
206
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:20:17 -
[411] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote: Yes well, FW with its Fisher Price arbitrary game mechanics and zero bubbles isn't exactly "all forms of PVP", now is it. But it's interesting to realise that you only seem to be able to understand your own situation and perspective.
Here we go again with the trolling, from someone who claims to have pvp knowledge, who has a single, highsec pod kill on zkillboard and no kills on battleclinic, a positive 3.2 sec status and finally this year managed to make it out of the npc corps to form his very own 1 man corp.
Your just trolling.
When it comes to PvP, I am like a chiwawa hanging from a grizzley bears pair of wrinklies for dear life.
|
Paranoid Loyd
3683
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:25:12 -
[412] - Quote
Olleybear wrote:Gregor Parud wrote: Yes well, FW with its Fisher Price arbitrary game mechanics and zero bubbles isn't exactly "all forms of PVP", now is it. But it's interesting to realise that you only seem to be able to understand your own situation and perspective.
Here we go again with the trolling, from someone who claims to have pvp knowledge, who has a single, highsec pod kill on zkillboard and no kills on battleclinic, a positive 3.2 sec status and finally this year managed to make it out of the npc corps to form his very own 1 man corp. Your just trolling. No he's not. Everything he said has merit.
"Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata
Fix the Prospect!!!
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
984
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:25:25 -
[413] - Quote
Per your own words:
Quote: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.
Fisher Price game mechanics. I bet it's very difficult to sit at warp in with a scram (kiter). |
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
206
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:42:00 -
[414] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Per your own words: Quote: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. Fisher Price game mechanics. I bet it's very difficult to sit at warp in with a scram (kiter).
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.
When it comes to PvP, I am like a chiwawa hanging from a grizzley bears pair of wrinklies for dear life.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
164
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:45:54 -
[415] - Quote
Ashlar Vellum wrote:Mehrune Khan wrote:Lady Rift wrote: If you lose a pod in low it really is your fault for they are 100% avoidable. a t1 fit cruiser cost more than 5 mil.
You've never jumped into a gate camp before, have you? You can't escape if your pod can't warp and is 15 kilometers from the gate. I'm not a walking market index. 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.
this
your pod almost insta warps. and low has no bubbles |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
984
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:58:50 -
[416] - Quote
Olleybear wrote: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.
I'm remaking my channel, again. Adding vids to help newbies get ahead and have been doing so for years on different characters. I'm in rookie/help almost all the time and even take on previous WT as "apprentices" if they have the right attitude. What have you done apart from using fisher price game mechanics, sitting at warp in killing noobies in the novice plexes.
So. We already established that you're not capable of using someone else's perspective when it comes to balance and gameplay, also you seem to assume a whole lot to suit your agenda. On top of that the whole concept of alts and alt posting seems to be too difficult for you, while that really shouldn't take 5 brain cells. |
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
73
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 20:19:24 -
[417] - Quote
The Newface wrote:No for the love of...
Im seriously worried that the plan here is to turn this into "Batlefield in space" Anyone can jump in at any time with no risk.
Remove implants they cost isk. Next they going to complain about fittings then about ships.
Soon you will be able to create a new account with max skills and fly super caps, all in the name of "making PvP more accessible" Wouldnt that be more Fun Though?
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Ashlar Vellum
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
138
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 21:50:55 -
[418] - Quote
Mehrune Khan wrote: What the hell are you talking about?
First off, yes I actually have flown into a gatecamp before. "But gatecamps" isn't a just back-up excuse when it's something I've actually experienced. You're also trying to pigeonhole me into an argument about lowsec, when I was specifically mentioned both low and null. Also yes I have lost a pod in low as well. Navigating a right-click menu surprisingly becomes hard when your hands are shaking and your pulse is pounding in your ears like a sledgehammer. I suppose I could get used to it and perform better with more experience, but the whole point of this thread is: why would I try gaining more PvP experience with 50 mil of implants in my pod?
Why would you not? Don't look for excuses man just do what you want to do or you will never do it.
Gregor Parud wrote:Quote: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. Fisher Price game mechanics. I bet it's very difficult to sit at warp in with a scram (kiter). Come on hermano, you are just overly simplifying things. ;P |
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4055
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 12:59:53 -
[419] - Quote
Was there an actual suggestion put forward as to how to offset the +1 to +5 skill training aspect?
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Dragqueeninspace
The Drag queen in space fan club
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 13:44:02 -
[420] - Quote
Mehrune Khan wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Mehrune Khan wrote:
You've never jumped into a gate camp before, have you?
See, you proved my point by immediately falling in to your back-up excuse. It is virtually impossible to lose your pod in lowsec, literally no ship can lock you before it is warped off. But upon someone stating this, you immediately went "well, but gatecamps". It is your mind holding you back, not the game. What the hell are you talking about? First off, yes I actually have flown into a gatecamp before. "But gatecamps" isn't a just back-up excuse when it's something I've actually experienced. You're also trying to pigeonhole me into an argument about lowsec, when I was specifically mentioned both low and null. Also yes I have lost a pod in low as well. Navigating a right-click menu surprisingly becomes hard when your hands are shaking and your pulse is pounding in your ears like a sledgehammer. I suppose I could get used to it and perform better with more experience, but the whole point of this thread is: why would I try gaining more PvP experience with 50 mil of implants in my pod?
Don't use the right click menus to save your pod. |
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
77
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 13:45:52 -
[421] - Quote
Dragqueeninspace wrote:
Don't use the right click menus to save your pod.
Er ..... um ..... THIS!
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Celgar Thurn
Department 10
164
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 14:14:24 -
[422] - Quote
I just noticed this/my OP is linked in the weekly news. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1482
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 17:27:03 -
[423] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
If more slots were available, or if hardwires could be swapped, possibly via licence, (I am not suggesting removal, before this post gets blobbed) I would ABSOLUTELY use hardwirings more.
As it is it is a bloody nuisance, to have to change clone just to fly an armour ship, or one with different weapons. Buying hardwires? Sure "bring out your wares" never being in the right clone, when the fight goes down? Why bother, less sometimes hassle to fly on empty.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Deputy Glitter
Rubella Solaris Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 20:51:20 -
[424] - Quote
Hi, I'm a rather new player here (just over 3 months old), but I will say that EveOnline has been very refreshing in that their are options available to players, and there is risk involved in the game. Just a few observations on my part....
1) I think it is a good thing that there is risk involved with implants. 2) People need to have something to lose when they undock outside of simply losing a ship. 3) Skill attribute diversity is a good thing.
I do realize that point that some people make that there are some char's who stay docked with +5's until they reach some certain point.
Maybe the still implants should take a queue from the hardwirings and go from have 5 total (+1, +2, +3, +4, +5) to 3(+1, +2,+3) and give an innate +2 to base attribute numbers. This would reduce the disparity between have zero skill implants and having +5's.
And while I think that have skill attribute diversity is perfectly ok, if I browse through EveMon you can see a disperity between Mem/Int and Per/Will which have a lot of skills, and then there is Will/Int and Per/Mem with only one skill each. This could be something that CCP could look at.
TLDR: I've played waaaaay too many mmo's where the dev's just water stuff down and it ruins the immersion of the game. Change is fine, but gutting a system for "player convenience" isn't. |
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
340
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 21:02:17 -
[425] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: 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.
For myself, the ISK saved on not needing attribute implants would stay in my wallet. When PvP'ing in high-risk areas (nullsec and wormholes), I use a clone with a pair of +3 attribute implants, and in low-risk areas (lowsec and highsec) I use a pair of +4 implants, only ever for the current remap I'm on. The most I would ever save is 20-25m for the two +3's and 40-50m for the two +4's.
When I use combat implants, I go with the 3% implants. I feel they offer the best benefits for the ISK vs. Risk. Saving at most around 50m ISK isn't going to save me enough to move even a single 3% up to a 4%. While that 20m to 50m ISK would afford another combat implant or two, I already don't fly with those not because I can't afford them, but because they just don't provide enough of a benefit for me to consider being worth the ISK for that particular clone.
The biggest change would be that my training clone, if attribute implants were removed, could become another PvP clone. Fortunately, though, there are a few more clones that I can train for, and those skills are on the horizon (eventually), so even that's a minor concern.
Ransoms are accepted in Isk, Mods, Ships, and Dolls.
|
Tibo Paralian
Dirt 'n' Glitter
42
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 21:03:10 -
[426] - Quote
Aliventi wrote: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.
After pages of minor insults and nonsense, this needs repeating.
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
76
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 01:07:12 -
[427] - Quote
Tibo Paralian wrote:Aliventi wrote: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. After pages of minor insults and nonsense, this needs repeating. However You Can still Pay for a Sisters of Eve air Drops! I mean Eve Online Icelandic Style. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIYyCaLercI#t=49
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14758
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 01:20:45 -
[428] - Quote
Mehrune Khan wrote:
What the hell are you talking about?
First off, yes I actually have flown into a gatecamp before. "But gatecamps" isn't a just back-up excuse when it's something I've actually experienced. You're also trying to pigeonhole me into an argument about lowsec, when I was specifically mentioned both low and null. Also yes I have lost a pod in low as well. Navigating a right-click menu surprisingly becomes hard when your hands are shaking and your pulse is pounding in your ears like a sledgehammer. I suppose I could get used to it and perform better with more experience, but the whole point of this thread is: why would I try gaining more PvP experience with 50 mil of implants in my pod?
I fly around with 500 mil to a billion in implants in my head in fights with entire grids covered in bubbles. If you won't PvP because of a paltry 50 mil worth of implants then removing them will change nothing. You will think up another excuse to not PvP.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
835
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 02:18:05 -
[429] - Quote
Solops Crendraven wrote: I pay $100 or more a month to play this game Quote:Our first patient is SirLordex, an aluminium magnate of Russian extraction. His existence was only a rumor among the English-speaking population of EVE for many months; he was alleged to have bankrolled his own alliance, RED.OVERLORD, in a quest to seize the region of Feythabolis from its previous owner Goonswarm; How many games do you know of where someone spends over $100,000 on spaceships and brags about it? From here
I wonder how entitled he felt?
Aliventi wrote:Learning implants are not a meaningful choice. Take any situation: mining, ... I would say that putting in a big fast Charisma implant for awhile to increase my ability to boost the miners was a rather meaningful choice.
Leannor wrote: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. I need an over 9000!!! Like button.
CSM Ten movement for change.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Sir Substance
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
667
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 03:11:54 -
[430] - Quote
Attribute points are stupid and really hard to explain to new players.
"What does willpower do?"
"Well! The formula for skill training is..."
:cripes:
I'd be happy to see attributes reworked into something meaningful (2% bonus to targeting speed per point in perception, 1% bonus to hitpoints of each type for every point of willpower, etc.).
Alternatively, trashing them is fine too. As for removing learning implants, I'm not sure that really reduces risk in undocking as it currently stands. Sensible people maintain implantless clones for combat, or run cheap implants they don't care about losing.
Personally, I'd rather remove attributes and implants completely, and rework boosters and combat implants so that people feel compelled fill their combat clones with implants under all circumstances rather then run them empty.
The beatings will continue until posting improves. -Magnus Cortex
Official Eve Online changelist: Togglable PvP. - Jordanna Bauer
|
|
Rift Tarkken
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 03:17:33 -
[431] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Learning implants are awful. This is nothing to do with PvP risk - I routinely fly with mid-grade pirate sets. The problem is that they make you choose between learning efficiency and PvP efficiency, which has a flow-on effect of reducing PvP. They should be removed from the game entirely.
I disagree. You should have to make the choice. I'm interested in speed of learning so that's where I put my hard earned isk. It's all about choices. I don't believe that making a choice and choosing learning efficiency over PVP bonus's reduces PvP. It may make you clone jump to your PvP clone. But you can't have everything. If you want the bonus for learning, you don't get bonus for PvP and vise versa. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1891
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 03:26:39 -
[432] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: I fly around with 500 mil to a billion in implants in my head in fights with entire grids covered in bubbles. If you won't PvP because of a paltry 50 mil worth of implants then removing them will change nothing. You will think up another excuse to not PvP.
Or just maybe..... Most of us aren't as crazy rich as you are, and 50 million is actually a significant amount of isk to us.
Most players do not generate hundreds of millions of isk per hour, or even a hundred million, especially the high sec players you continually abuse. Since not every single player runs at your perfect maximum optimisation for isk gathering that you love to scream about. Even running SOE missions I only turn 30 Mil/Hour typically because I'm not super fast at it and I'm not perfect at blitzing. And I don't have huge amounts of play time most weeks, so two hours worth of implants is actually a significant amount of my weekly playtime, on top of that ship I just lost.
Will some still not want to PvP and come up with excuses, sure. But it will make a significant difference to others. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
11558
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 03:36:56 -
[433] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Most of us aren't as crazy rich as you are, and 50 million is actually a significant amount of isk to us.
Then they're flying with the barebones implants anyway, and those are pocket change to anybody.
Quote: Most players do not generate hundreds of millions of isk per hour, or even a hundred million, especially the high sec players you continually abuse.
And? It's not like those people bother to PvP anyway unless someone brings it on them.
Implants should exist, they are a meaningful gameplay mechanic that has a distinct risk vs reward component, creating meaningful choices. I know you are all for literally anything that takes meaningful gameplay and consequences away from EVE, but this really isn't justifiable.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4056
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 04:46:40 -
[434] - Quote
The attribute learning bonus should be tied into the average of your security status + (racial) state faction standing / 2 (rounded down, with 0 the lowest possible result). So a +5.0 security status and 10.0 faction standing would yield a maximum +7.0 attribute bonus.
Yeah, the evil and lawless take a hit... this chokes me up.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Solops Crendraven
Solops Inc
76
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 05:16:50 -
[435] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Solops Crendraven wrote: I pay $100 or more a month to play this game Quote:Our first patient is SirLordex, an aluminium magnate of Russian extraction. His existence was only a rumor among the English-speaking population of EVE for many months; he was alleged to have bankrolled his own alliance, RED.OVERLORD, in a quest to seize the region of Feythabolis from its previous owner Goonswarm; How many games do you know of where someone spends over $100,000 on spaceships and brags about it? From hereI wonder how entitled he felt? Aliventi wrote:Learning implants are not a meaningful choice. Take any situation: mining, ... I would say that putting in a big fast Charisma implant for awhile to increase my ability to boost the miners was a rather meaningful choice. Leannor wrote: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. I need an over 9000!!! Like button. i would've Invested in real state instead. what a waste of money. Im a idiot for just spending $100 a month. thats not including Spaceships and implants However I like the game so it dosnt really matter Im Just busting balls ill be just like that russian bragging about the millions I threw away playing a video games 10 years from now.
Check Me Out!!! On Twitch Tv 24/7 Coming soon! Hug a Suicide Stealth Bomber Pilot Today!! enter link description here
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5942
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 05:30:36 -
[436] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:The attribute learning bonus should be tied into the average of your security status + (racial) state faction standing / 2 (rounded down, with 0 the lowest possible result). So a +5.0 security status and 10.0 faction standing would yield a maximum +7.0 attribute bonus. Yeah, the evil and lawless take a hit... this chokes me up. Be serious.
The Paradox
|
Memphis Baas
102
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 13:43:40 -
[437] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:I fly around with 500 mil to a billion in implants in my head in fights with entire grids covered in bubbles. If you won't PvP because of a paltry 50 mil worth of implants then removing them will change nothing. You will think up another excuse to not PvP.
OMG you're so elite and we're such pubbies; we don't even know wtf we will do even though you have clearly spelled out the future for us, multiple times too.
I think CCP should remove the implants, then roll back the server 24 hours later, with patch notes that say "Baltec1 told you fucks that you wouldn't undock, and you didn't; now post your ****** excuses in the comments thread and then stfu, you useless pubs." |
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
645
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 13:58:27 -
[438] - Quote
So much **** posting in this thread.
My take: scrap leaning implants, scrap attributes. They do nothing positive for this game, and it gives those who avoid PVP and avoid leaving highsec* a skill training advantage.
*Yes you can get podded in highsec. But the disparity in risk of being podded in highsec vs being podded in nullsec is massive.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Josef Djugashvilis
2868
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 13:59:20 -
[439] - Quote
Right now, as the game is, no one is forced to use any implants, training or otherwise, to remove the option to do so, would simply remove player options for no good reason.
This is not a signature.
|
Sir Substance
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
668
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 14:20:32 -
[440] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Right now, as the game is, no one is forced to use any implants, training or otherwise, to remove the option to do so, would simply remove player options for no good reason.
Perfect engineering is found not when you have nothing more to add, but when you have nothing more to take away.
There needs to be a compelling gameplay reason to keep attributes and implants.
They aren't fun (They're pretty neutral on the fun scale, they aren't unfun either, they're just a thing) They aren't providing meaningful choices (you always use the best implants you can afford, and you use estel arador to **** out enough JC's that you never have to choose between PvP and not risking your implants, everyone who cares uses evemon to map out year long skill queues and then remaps their attributes to optimise, everyone else sets a happy medium and forgets about it) They aren't marketing the game to external audiences (external audiences don't pay attention to minutia like that) They don't make the game easier for new players (see my earlier comment about formulas)
The strongest argument you could make is that they add flavor to the universe, but since we aren't talking about scrapping all implants, only learning implants and associated attributes, that's pretty weaksauce as an argument, and hardly a compelling gameplay reason to keep them.
Shitting up the games features for the sake of having a long feature list is not and has never been the mark of a quality product. Refactor them or chuck them, this has been a long time coming.
The beatings will continue until posting improves. -Magnus Cortex
Official Eve Online changelist: Togglable PvP. - Jordanna Bauer
|
|
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
389
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 14:43:15 -
[441] - Quote
Sir Substance wrote:There needs to be a compelling gameplay reason to keep attributes and implants.
They add choices and consequences. And EVE has no other gameplay than choices and consequences.
|
Celgar Thurn
Department 10
166
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 16:08:06 -
[442] - Quote
My personal viewpoint is that learning implants and attribute points are fine as they and should not be iterated.
If learning implants and attribute points are going to be removed then I would go with removing those five implant slots as well. Otherwise we will end up being charged double the ISK for what we can achieve with hardwiring now. Or ship bonus stats will be reduced to compensate for additional slots available for hardwirings.
Divert the man hours to do more necessary work like fixing Corp/Alliance Roles & Permissions or Null-sec sovereignty. Or in other words fix broken elements of the game and not parts of the game that work as intended. My standard reply but it works. |
StuckReporter
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 17:00:09 -
[443] - Quote
First, both implants and attributes could use a pass to make them more interesting and integral to gameplay. Perhaps this is more variation in implants and having attributes impact the performance of various modules in some small way. Take the tact of introducing more touch choices and complexity rather than striving to completely eliminate mechanics which are underperforming.
Game mechanics which offer a choice between buffing short-term performance OR long-term progression are an in-game reflection of the 'immediate gratification' vs. 'delayed benefit' decisions which are prolific in our world. Having such choices available in EVE help separate it from the crowd and allow varied styles of gameplay based on how the player chooses to operate in the EVE sandbox.
'Attributes' and similar mechanics drive depth and engagement. Used effectively, they reward forethought and planning by shaping your in-game persona in a meaningful fashion to reach your desired role. EVE could use some improvement here (more depth!), but the basic mechanic itself is sound: Our EVE player base isn't 'one size fits all' and the game needs to reflect that.
Removing such mechanics would be a sad day for EVE; One more step on the path to a simpleton's one-button-wonder environment little depth or meaningful complexity. Too many folks seem to want the best of everything IMMEDIATELY and don't want any downside for their short-term planning and perspective. EVE isn't Battlefield4 in-space where you just login and punch a couple buttons to 'win'. You have to think and plan a bit, growing with the game and evolving into a lethal killer if that's your goal. This may not suit all the console-kiddie's 'don't make me think' mentality, but it is the core of EVE and has been since inception.
Again, implants and attributes need a pass to make them even more meaningful; There's no doubt that they could use improvement. But both contribute to an gameplay element of EVE that many folks do consider 'fun': planning out your path and evolving your character over time to best fit your own vision of what's enjoyable in the EVE sandbox universe.
The bottom line is that, you DO NOT have to change your attributes and you DO NOT have to use implants in order to play EVE. These are elements that add depth of gameplay for those who choose to leverage them; Something EVE should be expanding on rather than eliminating.
Respectfully,
SR |
Josef Djugashvilis
2869
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 18:02:34 -
[444] - Quote
Am I the only one who is sick and tired of, 'but think about the noobs'?
We were all noobs once, we learned a bit, made some mistakes, learned some more, made more mistakes etc.
If Eve was so easy for noobs to grasp and understand in its entirety very quickly, I dare say most of us here would quit.
This is not a signature.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14770
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 18:13:16 -
[445] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Most of us aren't as crazy rich as you are, and 50 million is actually a significant amount of isk to us.
Im not crazy rich. I consider having 100 mil in the bank to be doing well.
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Most players do not generate hundreds of millions of isk per hour, or even a hundred million, especially the high sec players you continually abuse.
I earn my isk from high sec missions.
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Since not every single player runs at your perfect maximum optimisation for isk gathering that you love to scream about.
Its not hard to make 50 mil in a nights work.
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Even running SOE missions I only turn 30 Mil/Hour
Thats level 2 income. You being bad at this game does not mean CCP should remove a whole range of implants.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
8710
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 20:19:36 -
[446] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Am I the only one who is sick and tired of, 'but think about the noobs'?
We were all noobs once, we learned a bit, made some mistakes, learned some more, made more mistakes etc.
If Eve was so easy for noobs to grasp and understand in its entirety very quickly, I dare say most of us here would quit. You're not. infact plenty of the newbies I have spoken with (usually immediately after iv ruined their day) actually like the challenge And find the notion that they could possibly beat someone else at it to be something of a motive .
"I'm also quite confident that you are laughing
and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers."
=]I[=
|
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
47
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 23:55:04 -
[447] - Quote
Have to say I think this is a good idea. As long as some kind of implants remain, there will still be risk of loss associated with losing your pod. And there will be more pod diversity once you're no longer basically required to use five slots on learning acceleration.
Hopefully if removed CCP would boost passive SP generation slightly to compensate. Perhaps a permanent equivalent of +2 or +3 implants?
You've just read another amazing post by WiNGSPANTT, the 4th Best Commentator on YouTube! GÇï Follow along with my exploration and stealth bomber adventures on my YouTube channel
|
Logan Revelore
Symbiotic Systems
43
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 00:14:39 -
[448] - Quote
Sir Substance wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Right now, as the game is, no one is forced to use any implants, training or otherwise, to remove the option to do so, would simply remove player options for no good reason. Perfect engineering is found not when you have nothing more to add, but when you have nothing more to take away. There needs to be a compelling gameplay reason to keep attributes and implants. They aren't fun (They're pretty neutral on the fun scale, they aren't unfun either, they're just a thing) They aren't providing meaningful choices (you always use the best implants you can afford, and you use estel arador to **** out enough JC's that you never have to choose between PvP and not risking your implants, everyone who cares uses evemon to map out year long skill queues and then remaps their attributes to optimise, everyone else sets a happy medium and forgets about it) They aren't marketing the game to external audiences (external audiences don't pay attention to minutia like that) They don't make the game easier for new players (see my earlier comment about formulas) The strongest argument you could make is that they add flavor to the universe, but since we aren't talking about scrapping all implants, only learning implants and associated attributes, that's pretty weaksauce as an argument, and hardly a compelling gameplay reason to keep them. Shitting up the games features for the sake of having a long feature list is not and has never been the mark of a quality product. Refactor them or chuck them, this has been a long time coming.
Sir Substance brought substance. I've been partly won over in favor of scrapping or overhauling. Have a like. |
Daemun Khanid
Sanctus Imperialis
51
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 06:15:08 -
[449] - Quote
Attribute points are a useless over complication of the learning system with no purpose other than to fuel the mouse clicks of those with OCD. (Most of EvE I know) They, and the attribute implant bonuses, should have been cut from the game along with the learning skills a long time ago in a galaxy far far away. And the fact that high grade implants are +4 attribute on top of their bonus has always been a facepalm. Without dealing with crap learning implants I might actually bother setting up different clones with different hardwirings for specific applications, putting more isk into the market and more at risk.
CCP gets a +1 from me on this idea.
*End rant*
Daemun of Khanid
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
689
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 09:44:14 -
[450] - Quote
The majority of the "defence of the noob" arguements are all based on hindsight, and knowledge and experience a noob does not have.
A day-old newbie doesn't care if he is recieving 1800 or 2400 sp/hr. Sure, he is aware one is bigger, and that bigger is probably better, but thats as far as his understanding goes.
Tell that day-old newbie he gets 2400 now, and only used to get 1800, he'll probably shrug and go "all games help late comers catch up". Its not a "victory" for him, its just how games go. It'll be forgotten the minute after you tell him. Ultimately his experience is changed in no way he can appreciate.
Tell that newbie "you used to be able to get implants that speed up your training time - you don't now, but they give you that speed-up for free", and odds are he'll say "why can't we get the implants too, I'd love to be able to speed up my training time?". It doesn't matter that he's in a better place now than he was, he'll just notice that the ability for him to effect his training is removed.
The fact is, removing Implants is removing game content. In a game that already lacks early-game milestones (it is a frequent comment made in newbie-experience discussions that EvE lacks the early feelings of achievement (that level-up "ding!") that keeps a player playing), do we really want to be removing one of those few milestones? The discovery of Implants (I can't remember if one is a tutorial reward (but it should be), but they certainly show up as early storyline rewards) is a milestone to a new player, and something to push them in to learning more about these items, giving them a new objective (get more and better ones).
I think CCP need to decide what this discussion is about. If its about removing complexity, Learning Implants dont add complexity, they are as staightforward as they get to understand (add implant, train faster). Sure, a rework of attributes would help this goal, but that doesn't require throwing Implants in the dumpster, just rework them alongside to suit the change (if attributes go completely, change Implants to flat % speed increases to set skill groups). If this discussion is about learning speed for new players (or all players in general), just tweak the numbers and call it a day (10% sp bunus up to 5mil sp, 5% bonus up to 10mil sp, or something like that), and leave Implants as the rewards and decisions they are. |
|
Parsimony Kate
University of Caille Gallente Federation
25
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 10:00:08 -
[451] - Quote
As I see it, yes attribute implants are optional, no a lot of players don't bother with them, but there are plenty of players (myself included) who will feel that our SP matters and therefore we must learn with greatest efficiency. The common argument seems to be that you can still successfully (or at least entertainingly) PVP with practically no skills therefore having lots of SP doesn't matter...
... True. And great!
But what if you want to be something else, like say an industrialist? Or a trader? Or a miner? Or a hauler? Or maybe you want to do PVP but you want to be a logistics pilot, or fly a big arsed Titan etc? You need longer term, specific training plans for these types of careers, really anything beyond jumping straight into a cheap ship and getting yourself blown up in a totally hilarious way, involves training. Given the option *is* available to speed up training - even just a tiny bit, a lot of us will feel compelled to use that option to accomplish our goals and then we're stuck with the problem of how to not risk replacing our very expensive implants without compromising our sometimes very long training plans.
Either way I think removing attributes gets rid of this issue and that would be a positive change which will help to encourage more pilots to try out more diverse non-station-bound activities. And tbh it would have been nice not to have spent 2 weeks early on training cybernetics V! That seemed like an eternity as a brand new pilot itching to learn something more useful. Not to mention the cost of funding those implants, that level of expense early on just encourages mining.... :o
The skill implants are another matter. I'm not sure how I feel about those; the same risk/cost problems do apply certainly and for that reason it would be nice if they were lootable from corpses. It would help to lower the cost of them on the market if they were more prevalent and thereby reduce the financial burden of replacing them. I must admit I don't like the UI much for them, so I can see how having pod rigs (or pod modules if lootable) would be a more pleasant experience lol! I always have a slight moment of indecision when I look at the confirmation box to destroy an implant I want to replace as it doesn't state which one I'm destroying and I briefly wonder if I've selected the right one!
|
Marisol Aldurad
EVE University Ivy League
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 11:31:07 -
[452] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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 hard-wiring 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.
You know what would make me spend a TON more on implants??? Giving me the ability to remove them w/o destroying them! it is a horrible combination of being stuck in a JC just to have access to the hard-wiring you need/want for a specific occasion.
Want to make people less risk averse -- keep your learning implant concept in play but make it part of "Medical Clone Refinement" - where you pay a cost in ISK to set an attribute from +1 to +5. Make them no longer part of the killmail, and not destroyed when you get podded.
With those two changes I'd happily spend billions on hot-swappable Skill base focused implants and use them all the time.
Last thought -- now that the Eve universe is enormous once again, consider dropping the Jump Clone refresh cycle to something like 8 Hours as a base. I would love to have the ability to go off and run an Amarr incursion in the a.m. and be able to be back again that same day to PVP out in my lowsec home while maintaining separate sets of implants to use on the fly.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29639
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 11:50:03 -
[453] - Quote
Removing learning implants is a bad decision for the gameplay it removes for players who generate them, but risk aversion over learning rates is a problem that needs to be addressed for the pulse of the game. SP accumulation is a passive activity that is affecting active gameplay.
A more elegant solution is zero cooldown for same-station jumps.
The issue is beyond the game mechanics and simple risk. SP accumulation is a benefit of paid subscription time. The thought process that causes this hangup of not undocking is simple. SP is important, and compared to the prospect of loss, SP accumulation over undocking is an easy and appealing choice.
Zero-cooldown same-station jump clone timers would allow players to make efficient use of inactive subscription time, without that decision affecting active gameplay, or the other way around. The two should be disconnected. They need to be disconnected.
Another result of zero-cooldown, same-station jump clones would be switching from an uber crystal clone to a slave clone, but I don't think this is anything to get upset about. It's not very different from docking to swap ships.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
bloodknight2
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
345
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 13:10:44 -
[454] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Am I the only one who is sick and tired of, 'but think about the noobs'?
We were all noobs once, we learned a bit, made some mistakes, learned some more, made more mistakes etc.
If Eve was so easy for noobs to grasp and understand in its entirety very quickly, I dare say most of us here would quit.
This.
We were all noobs once and we all know how hard eve is when you are new to this game. Tons of skills to learn, learning how to propely fit a ship, game mechanics, modules. New players have the game easier than we had. No more clone upgrade, ships rebalancing (HELPING A LOT) or learning skills.
When i was new to this game, i did not bought +4 right away. Used +2, then +3 and only after i had more iskies that i finaly used +4 and even now that i have billions of isk, i'm still using +3 on all my 3 characters (all in NPC corp in empire, so no, it is not because i fear being podded). Using +4 right away and whining because you cannot do PVP with them in your head is YOUR choise.
Like i said earlier, for dreadnought lv1, +4 implants are ONLY 3 days faster than +3. Not 1 week, 10 days, 20 days but 3 days. 74 vs 77 days. +3 are like a day and a half slower per month than +4. People think implants are giving them a huge boost in training time which is wrong.
How about a titan? Titan, fighter bomber, doomsday and capital guns all at 5 (no support skills). Without implant : 685 days With +3 implants : 596 days With + 4 implants : 571 days
+3 implants are 89 days faster than without implant and +4 are 25 days faster than +3. In my opinion, implants are fine. They do not give that massive boost a lot of people think nor you need to absolutely have +4 to play this game and i don't understand how 50-100m of implant can be a lot for newer players. I lost an apocalypse in LS when i was less than a month old (yes i know, i have a low slot empty... apoc). A cruiser cost 10m, a BC up to 50m and a BS can easily cost 200m (all this without any module).
TDRL +4 implant does not give a massive boost over +3. You will be perfectly fine with +3 (even +2 for new player). |
Kaleen Khadath
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 16:10:51 -
[455] - Quote
I strongly support the idea to remove attributes, neural remaps and learning implants, but keeping hardwirings and the rest.
The logic behind it is very simple - do attributes, neural remaps and learning implants add anything to the game, besides unnecessary complexity? And the answer is: no. Are they challenging? No. Entertaining? No. Interesting? No. Do they attract new players? No. They just...are. They add complexity for the sake of complexity, and nothing else. Sure, they're an ISK sink, but you can just shift that burden to remaining implants without negatively impacting the game in any way.
It's the same as clone grades, removed in December. What did they add? NOTHING. They were an ISK sink, nothing more. The mechanic wasn't fun, challenging or interesting. It was just something you had to click through and sink ISK into when you got podded. Just busy work, unnecessary complexity.
"Wasteful to spin unnecessary adaptations. Complexity bad. " -Abathur |
Nail Zota
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 16:19:04 -
[456] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: A more elegant solution is zero cooldown for same-station jumps.
I just read 10 pages to check if this option was proposed and thought about as an alternative |
Adam Lyon
Tribal Absolution
13
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 17:04:22 -
[457] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Words about pods and such.
I wouldn't spend more on pods. +3 hardwirings are a bit too expensive for me in my throwaway PvP pods--I only use +2/3 learning implants for my current skillque because SP is objectively far more valuable to me as a character than +3% hybrid damage. Even though I rarely lose pods, I still wouldn't put +3s in in all likelyhood.
~6% damage (on a single weapon type) isn't worth 40-50m if faster SP (the only thing worth far more than isk) is only worth 10-20m for me. |
Logan Revelore
Symbiotic Systems
43
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 21:04:23 -
[458] - Quote
Kaleen Khadath wrote:I strongly support the idea to remove attributes, neural remaps and learning implants, but keeping hardwirings and the rest.
The logic behind it is very simple - do attributes, neural remaps and learning implants add anything to the game, besides unnecessary complexity? And the answer is: no. Are they challenging? No. Entertaining? No. Interesting? No. Do they attract new players? No. They just...are. They add complexity for the sake of complexity, and nothing else. Sure, they're an ISK sink, but you can just shift that burden to remaining implants without negatively impacting the game in any way.
It's the same as clone grades, removed in December. What did they add? NOTHING. They were an ISK sink, nothing more. The mechanic wasn't fun, challenging or interesting. It was just something you had to click through and sink ISK into when you got podded. Just busy work, unnecessary complexity.
"Wasteful to spin unnecessary adaptations. Complexity bad. " -Abathur
They add another way to gain an advantage over players with lesser dedication. |
Raquel Smith
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
52
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 21:30:08 -
[459] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Benny Ohu wrote: i'd have a look at what level implants the largest proportion of characters have equipped. if, for example, a huge number of characters have +3 implants, i think that'd indicate that the price:benefit ratio made these a must-fit, and that the price:benefit of +4s was at a nicer spot in comparison
since i don't like must-fits, i'd take action to remove the 'must' bit. i'd then make +4s into +1s, leave them where they are in terms of rarity, sit back and see what happens
That's the point, what is the reality of the situation? I will bet a large number of the placard-waving "implants must go" crowd inserted +5s in their first week, and have never let go (a lass above literally said that was the case for her), but how many people truly do this? How many people have ever injected a +5? Bear in mind the Cybernetics requirement might mean some characters physically can't (in fact, thats an interesting and easily figured stat for CCP, what % of characters has Cybernetics 5?) And how long do the players who have a +5 clone actually spend in it? Ask the same for +4's, even +3's (given the free Genvolutions that got handed out, this will likely be a high %, but even then, how many owners spend what % of time wearing them). In fact, how many characters have never worn an implant outside the occasional +1s and +2s that came from a mission reward? (or not even that much, again an easy stat to discover, what percentage of characters do not even have Cybernetics injected at all?)
My character is coming up on nine years old. I've had +5 implants in my head literally for years. I typically use learning implants no matter where I am in the universe. Ever since flying in AT IX I've had the same set of 5% implants alongside the +5 implants. When I JC to null I am in a lower set of learning implants, whatever is available on market, usually. I log out in +5 implants and conduct most of my activities in +5 implants as well. |
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
593
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 23:11:47 -
[460] - Quote
CCP is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're going to get.
For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/
Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
|
|
Algathas
Wraithguard. Dirt Nap Squad.
52
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 23:54:22 -
[461] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: 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.
Most of the people that I fly with (and also most that I have podded) have no implants or very cheap ones. They would rather train slower than risk isk losing their pod. If learning implants were removed then they still wouldn't risk isk on their pod.
I personally fly with the +4's for whatever I am training. I also toss in some fitting or combat implants on as well. I would say I would probably end up filling the implant slots with something else if there were no learning implants.
I have never once put a +5 in my head nor have I ever felt the need to. I also don't bother jump cloning to avoid losing my implants. I am not podded much even though I am in fights every day, so the cost to replace the two +4's is not an issue for me.
Because of the diminishing returns on the higher implants, New players don't really need +5's anyway. They can save isk and time training cyber V just getting a couple of +3's and still train plenty fast if they want to.
SO:
RIght now we have a a few choices:
1) Have no implants and save isk when podded 2) Have learning implants and train faster but don't gain combat ability from those slots 3) Put combat implants in those slots and train slower. 4) do some combination of the other choices.
I am for keeping the learning implants. There is plenty of choice involved with using them, (risk/reward/combat/not combat,etc) and you are not forced to have them (and many people don't). Removing interesting choices is not where the game should be going.
|
Diemos Hiaraki
Perkone Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 00:11:53 -
[462] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Am I the only one who is sick and tired of, 'but think about the noobs'?
We were all noobs once, we learned a bit, made some mistakes, learned some more, made more mistakes etc.
If Eve was so easy for noobs to grasp and understand in its entirety very quickly, I dare say most of us here would quit.
When you started there was only a few years to catch up on, not a decade. I do appreciate where you are coming from, but still your character is nearly eight years old so....am I the only one who thinks what you've just said is really conceited? |
Raymond Moons
Parallactic Veil
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 00:19:22 -
[463] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
The reward from learning implants is continuous, even when not logged in. Hardwiring for performance is only useful occassionally, so the value of learning implants is far greater than that of hardwiring even if the isk cost of the implants is the same.
The other problem with hardwiring is that the bonusses are not useful for every ship and we can't keep a dozen different pods in the same station to change between like we can with our ships.
Removing the learning implants is a good idea for PvPer's, and for the people that can never afford the most expensive implants but it also penalises those that have them already (since they accumulate SP faster than everyone else).
I don't think removing the learning implants will make people less risk averse or encourage them to spend isk on alternative implants of equal cost. Please remove them though because I am too tight to buy +5's, and my PvP character who started out at a 3 mil sp deficit to my main is now nearly 7 mil sp behind! |
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars Khanid's Legion
192
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 00:42:46 -
[464] - Quote
Haven't seen this specific combination suggested yet, but what I would like to see is the removal of remaps and set all base attrs to a fixed val under the hood. I agree that the complexity here is not really "good" gameplay content for newbs and vets alike, just annoyance.
However, leave the impact of attrs in place and leave the +2/3/4 effect for low/mid/high grade sets to give people incentive and reward for using those nice juicy high-grade sets and letting newbs have a sense of progression with them.
Finally, take the existing learning implants and repurpose them into low/mid/high grade sets with generic fitting bonuses (basically +cpu and +pg), like the Genolution sets do now. Having fitting implants as a pirate set gives newbs a way to offset their skill deficit. As they get their core fitting skills trained up they can start replacing this set with the other more special purpose sets.
The benefit of this change is that you no longer have any incentive to stay only in a +5 clone. You might decide between low/mid/high based on safety, but at no point are you using a non-combat set. The best you can do is the +4 of a high-grade so you might as well pick a pirate set that works for you (with the new fitting pirate set being a nice default option for many generic cases and newbs).
Leave hardwirings exact as they are now.
And big +1 to no-cooldown JC swapping when in the same station. |
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
49
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 04:32:48 -
[465] - Quote
Lena Lazair wrote:Haven't seen this specific combination suggested yet, but what I would like to see is the removal of remaps and set all base attrs to a fixed val under the hood. I agree that the complexity here is not really "good" gameplay content for newbs and vets alike, just annoyance.
However, leave the impact of attrs in place and leave the +2/3/4 effect for low/mid/high grade sets to give people incentive and reward for using those nice juicy high-grade sets and letting newbs have a sense of progression with them.
Finally, take the existing learning implants and repurpose them into low/mid/high grade sets with generic fitting bonuses (basically +cpu and +pg), like the Genolution sets do now. Having fitting implants as a pirate set gives newbs a way to offset their skill deficit. As they get their core fitting skills trained up they can start replacing this set with the other more special purpose sets.
The benefit of this change is that you no longer have any incentive to stay only in a +5 clone. You might decide between low/mid/high based on safety, but at no point are you using a non-combat set. The best you can do is the +4 of a high-grade so you might as well pick a pirate set that works for you (with the new fitting pirate set being a nice default option for many generic cases and newbs).
Leave hardwirings exact as they are now.
And big +1 to no-cooldown JC swapping when in the same station.
Not sure how I feel about the exact numbers but replacing the learning implants with fitting implants is not a bad idea. It would be very useful for new-to-mid players... though there's some chance of imbalanced new builds arising.
You've just read another amazing post by WiNGSPANTT, the 4th Best Commentator on YouTube! GÇï Follow along with my exploration and stealth bomber adventures on my YouTube channel
|
Ben Ishikela
13
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 06:21:26 -
[466] - Quote
let me tell you how i did it when nooby: I wanted to explore the rich industry and markets, so i remapped to charisma and intelligence. (aweful remap). Then i remapped to intelligence/memory, because i needed fitting room in my ships to use the suggested ones for pvp. I wanted to do PVP because there was the cooperation i desired. But i could not fit into the Ships. I could not fly combat. So i was stuck with electronic warfare before i even understood how to use them. So somehow, even when i had the choices to train slowly for combat, it did not feel that way, because i did a dumb choice in the past. This remapping stuff kept me from exploring the game. Well no, it hindered me and made me slower. => Suggestion: no Attributes, no Remapping.
|
Ben Ishikela
13
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 06:22:14 -
[467] - Quote
As for the Training Speed: I usually asses the probabiliy of loosing the pod for what i expect to do in the next day. Then i calculate what i earn in isk per time. And then i invest into my pod. So i would use hardwiring, when the attributes are gone. Maybe even more than now. For me it "feels" like less possible error and more meaningful choice. Also less "work" for reattaching the right implants to the right skills. So maybe just straight +1%->+5% trainSpeedImplants (no matter attributes) would do it for me. But at the same time, trainspeedimplants are boring as mentioned/explained above several times by sb.else. => suggestion: +% trainSpeed-B O O S T E R (wears off on death of course) as replacement of attributeImplants. That way, they are consumed already and even +5s decrease in value the more they reach wearoff. So once in a while they do not hinder pvp as much. Also, we still have the far future trainFaster-choice intact that seems vital to some players. Also there might be more use in pirate-implants as they no longer block each other, which will be interesting, but more of my thoughts on that below.
|
Ben Ishikela
13
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 06:23:05 -
[468] - Quote
On Hardwires: Story: I was on an exploration trip to earn some isk alone. I scouted a c3WH from a Lowsec connection. I found a Curse sitting on a wormhole. I wanted to gank it and loot it to earn some more. So i asked around in corp if anyone could help me kill a curse. 30 people online, 20 nonafk, 10 were excited and were idle at that moment. So when they formed up and ready to go someone asked where it was exactly and i told them: "in 20km below that wormhole inside the C3", 8 of them said they would not go into there because they did not want to loose their expensive implant set. So there were 3 of us left and we could not do it. So thats why i do not like expensive pod-pilots. It makes players unflexible, but its their choice of course. Someone wrote earlier, hardwirings and non-attribute-implants are good to encourage action. But i say they make you less open to new and therefor risky endevours. Of course they are good to prepare for a certain purpose and are a great tool for the +1%-better-in-pvp-meta-game. => Suggestion: make PODs and their implants refitteable in stations/other with a med-bay. This facility lost a big purpose on the well received removal of Medical-Clones. Lets make it meaningful again by inventing surgery.
|
Ben Ishikela
13
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 06:24:37 -
[469] - Quote
=> optional&interesting&funny: Implants use "BioStability"(=Calibration). If the implants exceed a certain stable level, there will be "interesing" effects. Also make it possible to equip a bomb to your Pod (use much biostab). If you are in your Pod, there is a button to activate it, if you do: suicide-attack! (only because it fits to the actual RL terrorist meta)
Thanks for reading. However this is just for inspiration. Nothing serious |
Ben Ishikela
13
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 06:34:05 -
[470] - Quote
Lena Lazair wrote: Finally, take the existing learning implants and repurpose them into low/mid/high grade sets with generic fitting bonuses (basically +cpu and +pg), like the Genolution sets do now. Having fitting implants as a pirate set gives newbs a way to offset their skill deficit. As they get their core fitting skills trained up they can start replacing this set with the other more special purpose sets.
The benefit of this change is that you no longer have any incentive to stay only in a +5 clone. You might decide between low/mid/high based on safety, but at no point are you using a non-combat set. The best you can do is the +4 of a high-grade so you might as well pick a pirate set that works for you (with the new fitting pirate set being a nice default option for many generic cases and newbs).
or that instead of trainboosters. implants with a +2%/3%/4% boost to train-speed.
|
|
Josef Djugashvilis
2873
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 07:54:16 -
[471] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Am I the only one who is sick and tired of, 'but think about the noobs'?
We were all noobs once, we learned a bit, made some mistakes, learned some more, made more mistakes etc.
If Eve was so easy for noobs to grasp and understand in its entirety very quickly, I dare say most of us here would quit. When you started there was only a few years to catch up on, not a decade. I do appreciate where you are coming from, but still your character is nearly eight years old so....am I the only one who thinks what you've just said is really conceited?
Due to real life stuff, four years actual playtime, so I am hardly speaking as a bitter vet with zillions of skill points.
Even if we all train at the smame speed from, say the 1st of March, new players can never catch up with older players.
I have always used +3s because it was a decision I made. To remove the ability of players to make personal choices in the game tends to be a bad thing.
This is not a signature.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
214
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 08:34:43 -
[472] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:=> Suggestion: no Attributes, no Remapping. Attributes, remapping but one per month.
Ben Ishikela wrote:=> suggestion: +% trainSpeed-B O O S T E R (wears off on death of course) as replacement of attributeImplants. That way, they are consumed already and even +5s decrease in value the more they reach wearoff. So once in a while they do not hinder pvp as much. Also, we still have the far future trainFaster-choice intact that seems vital to some players. Also there might be more use in pirate-implants as they no longer block each other, which will be interesting, but more of my thoughts on that below. It will work exactly as learning implants. Ppl will be scare to lose boosters.
Ben Ishikela wrote:=> Suggestion: make PODs and their implants refitteable in stations/other with a med-bay. This facility lost a big purpose on the well received removal of Medical-Clones. Lets make it meaningful again by inventing surgery. I would rather suggest having more than one clone at station with shorter cd on them, but only with same station clone switching.
Switching learning implants to hardwires solves nothing ppl still won't pvp because they will be scared to lose them.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
Amanda Compton
PIXEL Corp Nothing2Lose.
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 08:54:53 -
[473] - Quote
all my toons are with +5 thats being said i do null sec pvp heavly with them and i accept the risk i get when losing the ship and trying to save the pod and the implants . now if u delete the learning implants what gives me a headstart on every1 else since i wanna risk more ?
honestly if my trainning get damped to be the same as any other player that will be the last nail in the coffen
i spent hours planning a perfect skill plan ( not considering the 300mills i pay when losing my pod ) just to make sure i get that extra 90sp/hour over the rest of players to catch up with high sp pilots and now there is rumors of removing that . |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
79
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 10:59:01 -
[474] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote: Switching learning implants to hardwires solves nothing ppl still won't pvp because they will be scared to lose them.
On the whole, that's just horse****.
There are tonnes of PVPers in 0.0 every day. You saying none, not even a significant minority (which would be thousands), have implants?
If people I know are anything to go by, even the most caustious and frugal have the basic implant sets. And rightly so ... there are levels of implants to suit newbies as well as vet's. PVP adverse will alwasy be PVP adverse, implants are just the latest fashionable excuse.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Reha Hope
Junior Praetorian Guard of Honour Praetorian Directorate
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 11:55:56 -
[475] - Quote
It's almost like ccp wants to get rid of the learning system and switch to a XP base system and the way they been leaning the past few years it would not surprise me at all. The sandbox is slowly disappearing it is not the Implants that are keeping folks from 0.0 and pvp it is the players/ powerblocks/ insert name here/ . I have seen a lot of changes over the years and eve is getting smaller and smaller ....
April 23 2004 and hope to play 11 more years.
Its a game guys let's make it fun... Its all up to the player base not CCP
" Change is inevitable ....except from Vending machines "
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
214
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 12:28:36 -
[476] - Quote
Reha Hope wrote:It's almost like ccp wants to get rid of the learning system and switch to a XP base system and the way they been leaning the past few years it would not surprise me at all. That would be disaster, EvE have unique learning system.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
Sir Substance
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
672
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 13:58:52 -
[477] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Reha Hope wrote:It's almost like ccp wants to get rid of the learning system and switch to a XP base system and the way they been leaning the past few years it would not surprise me at all. That would be disaster, EvE have unique learning system.
I wouldn't worry about that:
a) It's already been tried, during beta IIRC. People orbited asteroids for hours shooting them with pulse lasers to level up their laser skill while they were at work.
b) An XP-for-Rats system doesn't work, because ratting is not a primary activity in this game.
c) given the problems they are already having with dogma, re-writing it to work on an XP based system would be a nightmare.
Seriously, if CCP is considering moving the game to an XP system, they are considering moving to Eve 2. The re-write would be so extensive they might as well just throw everything out and start from scratch. Seagull is not that stupid.
The beatings will continue until posting improves. -Magnus Cortex
Official Eve Online changelist: Togglable PvP. - Jordanna Bauer
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
215
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 14:09:55 -
[478] - Quote
Sir Substance wrote:Seriously, if CCP is considering moving the game to an XP system, they are considering moving to Eve 2. The re-write would be so extensive they might as well just throw everything out and start from scratch. Seagull is not that stupid. Current system if overcomplicated because ppl still thinks that they will get substantial boost if they have implants pluged in. Something that is addon to the game become must have in their eyes. I don't think one remap per year is a good thing. I want to play the game not make business plan for one/two years ahead.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
Raymond Moons
Parallactic Veil
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 14:40:17 -
[479] - Quote
I like the idea of a training speed Booster pill. If it had a max duration of 24 hours (with the booster duration skill at 5) it would encourage people to log in every day to keep their SP gain up. The side effects could be a chance of -1 (scaled to implant) to one or more attributes. Which also slows training in some skills. So if you want the +5 pill you also have the most risk of getting a temporary attribute nerf.
To encourage the use of pirate sets why not set the learning pills to be a replacement for the set implant. So the +5 pill is also the high-grade omega implant set booster.
A synth skill booster could be awarded to noobs in the turorial and would not only show them that they can get a training bonus from pills but also introduce them to the other performance boosters. Since boosters are temporary I'd expect them to cost less for a single pill and would represent less isk loss in one go if podded. The pills could have a material cost that makes them cost the same as a full set of the current learning implants for a years supply. Plus you could time your consumption around your typical PvP play times anyway.
Also encouraging drug use is so very bad ass, and so very Eve!
One final thought with attributes. We all pick a race and a bloodline and a trade. If we are removing remapping and have default attributes why don't we make it so that we get skill category bonusses? For example Caldari can train shields and missiles slightly faster, Minmatar can train navigation and projectiles slightly faster etc. At the moment apart from the inital skill set given to new characters it makes absolutely no difference what you choose at character creation. It used to be your choice gave you fixed attributes that you could mitigate somewhat by the learning skills. Since that is no longer the case I think there should be some other permanent outcome to our choice. |
Shiloh Templeton
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
231
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 15:58:53 -
[480] - Quote
I like training implants -- they make for choices. I don't think it affects my PvP activites very much - I've built up a set of clones so I can swap out if needed. Also training implants make some good game play/isk in LP & market activities.
I just want CCP to change the remap to being based on birthdays instead of one year since last remap. And let the remaps be accrued if not used. |
|
Temba Mapindazi
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 16:28:25 -
[481] - Quote
People who do not want to pvp will find another reason beyond implants if you take them away.
EVE is a unique experience as it currently exists, I want it to evolve not to devolve into another run of the mill game.
Dev's please tread carefully when making this game simpler, part of it's appeal is that it is also a thinking person's game. You can be a mindless drone in a swarm gate camping or fighting sov wars for your masters if you do not want to think much or you can do market stuff, build stuff, and work in a powerful corp that explores everywhere.
EVE is not one size fits all, be careful going down that road.
A combat pilot must have two goals to survive, -á#1 get the first shot in every fight , #2 get the last shot in every fight!
|
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
52
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 17:47:14 -
[482] - Quote
It just occurred to me: Could this change be a stepping stone towards the implant and clone systems that will exist with Legion and Valkyrie? What if learning implants are incompatible with those games, and CCP is looking to create an even playing field for layers who elect to bounce between game genres?
You've just read another amazing post by WiNGSPANTT, the 4th Best Commentator on YouTube! GÇï Follow along with my exploration and stealth bomber adventures on my YouTube channel
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
477
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 17:56:49 -
[483] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Learning implants are fine. You don't need them and losing them is just risk vs reward at work.
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.
Faction warfare pilot and solo/small gang PVP advocate
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
169
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 18:14:36 -
[484] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:baltec1 wrote:Learning implants are fine. You don't need them and losing them is just risk vs reward at work. 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.
its called months of training to see a benefit and by the time you do you could have reached near max efficiency with a handful of frig types before you meet the break even point for +5's.
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
477
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 18:23:10 -
[485] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:baltec1 wrote:Learning implants are fine. You don't need them and losing them is just risk vs reward at work. 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. its called months of training to see a benefit and by the time you do you could have reached near max efficiency with a handful of frig types before you meet the break even point for +5's.
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.
Faction warfare pilot and solo/small gang PVP advocate
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
169
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 18:34:35 -
[486] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Lady Rift wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:baltec1 wrote:Learning implants are fine. You don't need them and losing them is just risk vs reward at work. 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. its called months of training to see a benefit and by the time you do you could have reached near max efficiency with a handful of frig types before you meet the break even point for +5's. 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.
That is more than a 2 year skill queue comparing +5 to nothing. try +4 compared to your +5. You where talking about newbros who would be better served in a +3 or +4 implant set and taught the right way to plan and remap there attributes |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14823
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 18:47:09 -
[487] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:baltec1 wrote:Learning implants are fine. You don't need them and losing them is just risk vs reward at work. 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.
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.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
169
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 19:14:05 -
[488] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:baltec1 wrote:Learning implants are fine. You don't need them and losing them is just risk vs reward at work. 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. 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.
they become even more potent after 8 hours and get a MWD. |
Amanda Compton
PIXEL Corp Nothing2Lose.
3
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 19:49:37 -
[489] - Quote
Lena Lazair wrote:Have this specific combination suggested yet, but what I would like to see is combinationhe removal of remaps and set all base attrs to a fixed val under the hood. I agree that the complexity here is not really "good" gameplay content for newbs and vets alike, just annoyance.
However, leave the impact of attrs in place and leave the +2/3/4 effect for low/mid/high grade sets to give people incentive and reward for using those nice juicy high-grade sets and letting newbs have a sense of progression with them.
Finally, take the existing learning implants and repurpose them into low/mid/high grade sets with generic fitting bonuses (basically +cpu and +pg), like the Genolution sets do now. Having fitting implants as a pirate set gives newbs a way to offset their skill deficit. As they get their core fitting skills trained up they can start replacing this set with the other more special purpose sets.
The benefit of this change is that you no longer have any incentive to stay only in a +5 clone. You might decide between low/mid/high based on safety, but at no point are you using a non-combat set. The best you can do is the +4 of a high-grade so you might as well pick a pirate set that works for you (with the new fitting pirate set being a nice default option for many generic cases and newbs).
Leave hardwirings exact as they are now.
And big +1 to no-cooldown JC swapping when in the same station.
and what if i have max fitting skills but i still wanna have +5 to train faster and pvp in while having them ? am i not allowed to because it doesnt fit ur game play ???
these implants gives us alot of combinations but that doesnt mean the combination u dont use is bad combination it just doesnt fit ur game play but sure it fits lots of other people gameplays
and no i dont wanna fly in ******** high grade pirate set because that **** is costly
you see u need 6 high grade implants to make a diffrance but u need only 2 +5 implants to make a diffrance in training |
Memphis Baas
107
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 05:09:50 -
[490] - Quote
Flying with attribute implants is like flying with trade goods in your cargo hold:
- The ship's combat capabilities are NOT affected by either. - There is additional loss if the ship (pod) is destroyed. - People make a choice whether to put the implants in, and also whether to put the goods in the cargo bay. - Those who transport cargo typically aren't looking for fights at that moment; the cargo is a PVP deterrent to them.
Some arguments focus on the deterrent, others on the fact that it's a choice, others on the fact that the destruction of the cargo adds value to the killmail. Would traders pick up PVP if ferrying cargo is no longer available as a game mechanic? With so many different arguments, it's unlikely that we'll reach a consensus.
Ultimately, CCP will do what they want. |
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
478
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 10:39:13 -
[491] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:baltec1 wrote:Learning implants are fine. You don't need them and losing them is just risk vs reward at work. 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. 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.
While I appreciate the sentiment how much modern exposure do you have to genuine newbies that weren't recruited through bbs or referral?
I deal with them quite often myself and they seem really surprised to learn about how things could have been if they had done things my way instead of their own. Otoh I don't normally give out advice anymore because of muh personal adventure etc that infects people who start out without someone to hold their hand from the beginning.
Whether you can accept it or not there is a "correct" way to play eve determined by factors completely removed from being in space. And then once you have undocked there's a right way to do everything there too?
Care to disagree?
Faction warfare pilot and solo/small gang PVP advocate
|
Eli Apol
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
58
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 11:16:00 -
[492] - Quote
I see a lot more smartbombing mallers just there to killboard pad / grief people in their pods, I can see why it's kinda a good idea...
...but since I have a full +5 'holiday' clone as well as a pair of +3 or 4s in my usual day to day clones I'd like to know the full extent of reimbursement and how the skill queues are going to be rebalanced if at all (potentially more skill remaps/year, ability to drop charisma to 0 etc) |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
79
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 12:46:38 -
[493] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Flying with attribute implants is like flying with trade goods in your cargo hold:
- The ship's combat capabilities are NOT affected by either. - There is additional loss if the ship (pod) is destroyed. - People make a choice whether to put the implants in, and also whether to put the goods in the cargo bay. - Those who transport cargo typically aren't looking for fights at that moment; the cargo is a PVP deterrent to them.
Some arguments focus on the deterrent, others on the fact that it's a choice, others on the fact that the destruction of the cargo adds value to the killmail. Would traders pick up PVP if ferrying cargo is no longer available as a game mechanic? With so many different arguments, it's unlikely that we'll reach a consensus.
Ultimately, CCP will do what they want.
um, if you look, there are many attribute implants that do impact your ship, in a mulititude of ways.
:)
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Kamahl Daikun
Perkone Caldari State
41
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 15:06:09 -
[494] - Quote
bloodknight2 wrote:Brigadine Ferathine wrote:I mean the risk for newer players is MUCH higher with the implant system because we need the speed boost. A set of BASIC +4's runs about 130million. That is insane. Older players don't need that boost. Why make noobs take more risk than older players? It is backwards logic. Cry moar. You DO NOT NEED +4 implant. In fact, i have billions of isk and still buy +3 to my alt because the price for +1 attribute doesn't worth it in my opinion. Next, removing faction modules because the poor noobs like you cannot afford buying mods worth hundreds of millions for only a small bonus? Removing skill hardwirings giving +5% to something because the new player cannot afford one? 130m isn't a lot. 130m is around 2 time cheaper than a fully fit BS. 130m is what you can make in 4-5h when you are quite new to this game.
I'd have to agree with this.
Considering the scenario of a new pilot, getting Cybernetics up probably isn't anywhere close to a priority. Especially considering how small of an impact Attribute Implants have on low training times. More than half of my queue is ~21h trains right now. Implants probably wouldn't even shave 30 minutes off that. They really start to ramp up with 20d+ trains. New pilots don't have a lot of those, if any, and getting those 20d+ skills to V isn't a priority either.
I can't understand what the fuss is all about. Get a jump clone with your learning implants and log it whenever you leave. I run with Mid Grade Snakes and I practically only use that for PvE since I'm bound to get bubble-raped in null. |
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars Khanid's Legion
196
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 16:29:51 -
[495] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:Not sure how I feel about the exact numbers but replacing the learning implants with fitting implants is not a bad idea. It would be very useful for new-to-mid players... though there's some chance of imbalanced new builds arising.
One possible option here is to make the fitting pirate set use flat CPU/PG numbers rather than % based values. This would put it in the realm of the MAPC, so it would generally speaking only be a balance issue in frigate/dessie fits and quickly become irrelevant for larger ships.
This nicely fits the goal of targeting it to newer players while making it that much easier to keep balanced. Flat values per-implant would also be much more transparent; you wouldn't need a fitting tool to sort out what your increase in % CPU/PG is from implants. This likewise helps when swapping individual implants from this set a new set; you can easily see what you are going to lose in fitting for each implant you change out and don't necessarily have to change them all at once. All of these things are good things for new players less familiar with EVE mechanics.
Sure, vets are still going to come up with some awesome frigate fits that take advantage of these, but 1) they are likewise giving up whatever current pirate effect they might instead use, so it's not pure benefit and 2) at least the balance problem is restricted to smaller ship classes instead of across the board, so it's slightly easier to manage. |
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars Khanid's Legion
196
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 16:44:50 -
[496] - Quote
Amanda Compton wrote:and what if i have max fitting skills but i still wanna have +5 to train faster and pvp in while having them ? am i not allowed to because it doesnt fit ur game play ???
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. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
173
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 17:21:36 -
[497] - Quote
Lena Lazair wrote:Amanda Compton wrote:and what if i have max fitting skills but i still wanna have +5 to train faster and pvp in while having them ? am i not allowed to because it doesnt fit ur game play ??? 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.
high grade pirate impants get better with each one you have. You only need 2 +5's to get the most benefit from them. |
Torbrun Shazih
Reavers Cartel
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 21:00:41 -
[498] - Quote
All my toons are fitted with +5 implants to boost training speeds.
As ever, a lot of the discussion I see here seems to revolve around PVP and encouraging PVP, but there are players that have absolutely no interest in pursuing that style of gameplay. As an industrialist, anything that helps me chip through the mountain of science and production skills that bit faster is essential, and are more useful than enhancements to defense, arsenal or navigation. The industrially flavoured attribute implants are extremely scarce and consequently expensive when they make an appearance - the Omega seems almost mythical.
The hardwiring implants that would be beneficial for me mostly rely on the same implant slot and collectively offer limited incentive to bother investing in them at this time.
The first line of the OP opens discussion, but the word "apparently" casts doubt on the accuracy of the opening comment, and in the absence of proposed alternative plans, it's impossible to say whether any ideas under consideration are better or worse.
All I know is that I want to to chew through my skill training plans faster than I can at the moment. I'm of the view that if attributes and implants are under review, then the whole character skill training mechanic needs to be looked at the same time. |
Anthar Thebess
849
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 08:40:08 -
[499] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
I will spend this isk on hardwirings. I think that making sp rate flat will only benefit this game.
What we need and cannot change is the introduction of enough replacement hardwirings so people that run missions will have still reason to do it.
Those implants provide good isk sink , but this one of the minor roles. Simply people need isk to buy ships. Mission runners get most of their income from those implants , when you remove them they will need to move to something else in the LP stores , and this will make many items value to collapse.
Next item is trading , hauling and hunting on people who haul this stuff. This also will be gone.
What we need is to make all 5 basic implants still important by adding some additional effects to them.
Still it will be very hard to balance. |
Josef Djugashvilis
2873
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 08:44:39 -
[500] - Quote
The same players who will not participate in pvp because they will not risk losing their learning implants will be the same players who will not pvp and risk losing their hardwired implants.
Don't most folk use a less expensive clone to pvp anyway?
This is not a signature.
|
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
80
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 10:00:50 -
[501] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:The same players who will not participate in pvp because they will not risk losing their learning implants will be the same players who will not pvp and risk losing their [insert any item you can enter into combat with, ship, fittings, pod, etc].
Don't most folk use a less expensive clone to pvp anyway?
Fixed it for you ...
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
80
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 10:02:34 -
[502] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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. I will spend this isk on hardwirings. I think that making sp rate flat will only benefit this game. What we need and cannot change is the introduction of enough replacement hardwirings so people that run missions will have still reason to do it. Those implants provide good isk sink , but this one of the minor roles. Simply people need isk to buy ships. Mission runners get most of their income from those implants , when you remove them they will need to move to something else in the LP stores , and this will make many items value to collapse. Next item is trading , hauling and hunting on people who haul this stuff. This also will be gone. What we need is to make all 5 basic implants still important by adding some additional effects to them. Still it will be very hard to balance.
tend to disagree ... you choose where to spend your isk. All the time. On a basic cheapo ship, or a T2 ship, ... if you spend a cheapo ship you got more for the implants ... all swings and roundabouts. :)
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Josef Djugashvilis
2873
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 11:03:45 -
[503] - Quote
Leannor wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:The same players who will not participate in pvp because they will not risk losing their learning implants will be the same players who will not pvp and risk losing their [insert any item you can enter into combat with, ship, fittings, pod, etc].
Don't most folk use a less expensive clone to pvp anyway? Fixed it for you ...
Thank you
This is not a signature.
|
Anthar Thebess
852
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 12:13:37 -
[504] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Leannor wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:The same players who will not participate in pvp because they will not risk losing their learning implants will be the same players who will not pvp and risk losing their [insert any item you can enter into combat with, ship, fittings, pod, etc].
Don't most folk use a less expensive clone to pvp anyway? Fixed it for you ... Thank you Well i disagree a bit.
When you loose a hardwiring , ship , mods - you loose only ISK, something that is easily replaced. When you loose a learning implant , you loose time, time that cannot be replaced.
You could say that you can replace them with new implants - yes , but when you fly very small ships, or live in null you are dying constantly in your pod. Sometimes your pod can live 5 days , sometimes 5 minutes.
I have the same bad habit for Tech 3 cruisers. Loosing ISK is not the problem , but losing 5 days ... I prefer to loose a dread than tech 3 cruiser, even if it is 10 times more expensive. So far so good , 5 dreads dead , 0 tech 3 cruisers lost
|
Agent Unknown
Night Theifs DamnedNation
10
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 14:26:28 -
[505] - Quote
The only thing I hate about implants is losing a pod in 0.0 and having to fly back to Jita for a new set....especially the CA-1 and CA-2 implants. |
Wobblypops
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 14:33:04 -
[506] - Quote
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. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
82
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 14:33:17 -
[507] - Quote
Agent Unknown wrote:The only thing I hate about implants is losing a pod in 0.0 and having to fly back to Jita for a new set....especially the CA-1 and CA-2 implants.
for me, that also applies to ships ... (unless I settle for a sh*t local ship) ... so, the same.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
6151
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 15:34:02 -
[508] - Quote
My first reaction to this is an admittedly negative one, although that may simply be due to not having taken the time yet to actually read the CSM minutes yet. (I must find time for that soon.)
I think I'd be okay with this if it ties into statements that were made when clones were changed. It was indicated that the way clones were handled was eventually going to be completely changed, with more interesting and challenging choices introduced.
Since our clones and our implants are irrevocably linked, to my mind that also meant that implant mechanics were going to undergo a major rethink as well.
If they are removed and new mechanics do not replace them in a positive manner, I will not be very happy about it. However if clones, implants, and death itself are given a big (and well conceived) face lift... well... I"m not going to cling to old mechanics simply because change is scary.
So for my part I will wait for the other shoe to drop.
View the latest EVE Online developments and War Thunder game play by visiting Ranger 1 Presents.
|
Idoru Yoshikawa
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 15:43:08 -
[509] - Quote
I think is a terrible idea. If you want to pewpew and not to lose implants, jump clone. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
174
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 17:06:47 -
[510] - Quote
Wobblypops wrote: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.
JUMP CLONES
If you cant go 20 hours without training implants then stay docked and become a station trader, also high sec is just as deadly for clones as low sec is so you really shouldn't be undocking ever. |
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
215
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 22:13:30 -
[511] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:You could say that you can replace them with new implants - yes , but when you fly very small ships, or live in null you are dying constantly in your pod. Sometimes your pod can live 5 days , sometimes 5 minutes. If your goal is to fly small ships you don't need expensive implants because all necessary skills are low training time. As for live in null, without them you will train as fast as now. What's the point of removing them? There's a polish idiom for that behaviour - gardner dog- if i can't have it nobody can. Also stop shooting at your own knees. You don't want to use learing implants, you won't use hirdwires beacuse sometimes you can live for 5 minutes.
Why you guys are focused on SP so much? SP have nothing to do with pvp. It's relic from xp system (i have more xp gained on my char i'm better at something - wrong). My main have around 35 mil SP now. I have zero experience in pvp, if i jump in combat i have no idea what to do. Player with 5 mil SP would propably decorate gate with my guts. Pod is just a tool not a purpose.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
45thtiger 0109
AL3XAND3R.
149
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 23:00:07 -
[512] - Quote
Whatever happens to implants and hardwire so be it.
I also live in nullsec and at times you need to use no implants in your head or when you are in a fleet or roaming null sec to avoid losing implants that you have used your hard earning isk to get them.
I see why CCP wants to get rid of them and I do accept what CCP is trying to achieve here.
We all should accept what CCP is trying to do to make this game more friendly for all.
implants and hardwire is a big isk sink for allot of players so long CCP does reimburse the players for implants and hardwires by giving us all SP or something else.
**You Have to take the good with the bad
and the bad with the good.
Welcome to EvE OnLiNe**
|
Torbrun Shazih
Reavers Cartel
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 23:20:19 -
[513] - Quote
The better trained I am, the better I am able to accomplish my goals - the SP I accrue improves my ability to refine materials, research blueprints, manufacture and invent ships and modules etc. My science skill levels unlock access to research agents which expands the range of datacores available to me and the rate at which I can earn research points to buy them for trade and invention of the T2 gear that PVPers use and lose in combat. From my perspective SP is not a worthless relic, but an essential part of the game. At the moment, there is no other mechanic within the game that will let me do all this,so the faster I can learn and accrue SP the better. |
Tibo Paralian
Dirt 'n' Glitter
45
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 23:25:34 -
[514] - Quote
I do enjoy the safety of highsec and +5s while leveling my raven. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
215
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 07:17:30 -
[515] - Quote
Torbrun Shazih wrote:The better trained I am, the better I am able to accomplish my goals - the SP I accrue improves my ability to refine materials, research blueprints, manufacture and invent ships and modules etc. My science skill levels unlock access to research agents which expands the range of datacores available to me and the rate at which I can earn research points to buy them for trade and invention of the T2 gear that PVPers use and lose in combat. From my perspective SP is not a worthless relic, but an essential part of the game. At the moment, there is no other mechanic within the game that will let me do all this,so the faster I can learn and accrue SP the better. Sure, from manufacturing perspective SP are the most important thing, but you not using your pod the way pvpers do. You have a skill lvl treshold, you can't manufacture without certain skill level. Pvpers can pvp with lower skills and can get better in time. Worthless relic is thinking: i have more SP i'll be better at pvp. I'll buy titan char, fly a titan and win EvE. There is a lot talking about having options in EvE now, for me removing implants is decreasing them.
Whole discussion starting to be like: "i won't be using implants because i may lose it in fight, it's unfair because that way i'm learning slower than hisec carebear".
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
82
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 09:07:27 -
[516] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Torbrun Shazih wrote:The better trained I am, the better I am able to accomplish my goals - the SP I accrue improves my ability to refine materials, research blueprints, manufacture and invent ships and modules etc. My science skill levels unlock access to research agents which expands the range of datacores available to me and the rate at which I can earn research points to buy them for trade and invention of the T2 gear that PVPers use and lose in combat. From my perspective SP is not a worthless relic, but an essential part of the game. At the moment, there is no other mechanic within the game that will let me do all this,so the faster I can learn and accrue SP the better. Sure, from manufacturing perspective SP are the most important thing, but you not using your pod the way pvpers do. You have a skill lvl treshold, you can't manufacture without certain skill level. Pvpers can pvp with lower skills and can get better in time. Worthless relic is thinking: i have more SP i'll be better at pvp. I'll buy titan char, fly a titan and win EvE. There is a lot talking about having options in EvE now, for me removing implants is decreasing them. Whole discussion starting to be like: "i won't be using implants because i may lose it in fight, it's unfair because that way i'm learning slower than hisec carebear".
ARe you irish? ;-)
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
bloodknight2
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
347
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 16:15:30 -
[517] - Quote
Wobblypops wrote: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 bought implants who cost too much, so i need to stay docked and not play the game. Remove implants from the game".
Use Evemon and look at the difference in training time implant does. A full set of +5 implant is +-20% faster than no implant. +4 aren't much slower than +5 and cost less (you can almost buy a full set of +4 for the price of a single +5). I'm still using +3 on all my 3 accounts (2 of them having 92 and 85m SP).
YOU made the choise of playing ships spinning in a station because YOU choose to spend a shitload of isk in your implants for learning skills faster. Yes, you will save quite some time using +5 over +4 or +3 in 4-500 days, but right now, you are not playing the game. Is it worth training skills faster if you aren't playing the game? I do not think so. You said you left the game because you had to stay docked. Yet, you are back and still doing the same thing?
What you are asking is the removal of implants because you've made the wrong choise. You can do L4 using a T1 BS with T1 guns. Yet, some players buy faction ships, faction guns, faction or deadspace mods because the extra DPS/tank make missionning faster/easier. A paladin does almost 400 more DPS than an abaddon. Almost 30% more DPS, but cost 5 time higher. 4 factions heat sink only add around 70DPS on a faction tachy nightmare VS T2 one, but cost nearly 115x more! You choose to spend more on your implants for faster learning like missionners spend more isk on faction mods for completing missions faster.
And anyway, if you go look at players doing PVP in LS, you will see they rarely lose their pod. It's all about choise and learning the game mechanics (you know...there is something called...jumpclone, spamming warp when you are in structure...).
|
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
406
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 16:56:57 -
[518] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: 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 never use a clone without learning implants because it's the only way I can buy extra SP. Hardwirings, if they're useful I'll use them but they never provide anything close to as valuble as extra SP and it's frequently a pain to be in the right ones. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
216
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 21:11:00 -
[519] - Quote
Leannor wrote:ARe you irish? ;-) Nope, but i wouldn't mind huging a bottle of whiskey
Speaking of having options, is 1 remap per month would be too much?
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
335
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 03:32:40 -
[520] - Quote
I know that I am not the average player and am aware that my OCD for max SP / hour is not logical or functional. However maxing out my SP / hour is one of my main things in this game. Call it stupid if you want but it's how I play. I don't PvP so my input my not apply but even in doing risky PvE stuff if it requires me jumping out of my learning implants for 20+ hours the answer is no way.
I'm sure most players are not like me but with ships you can switch out of your faction fit mission runner and into a cheap PvP ship and go loose it with no consequences other than the lost ship that you planned on loosing anyway. With implants if you jump clone out of them you loose skill points regardless of what happens in the PvP.
To me removing attribute implants makes sense if you want to encourage PvP. Maybe keep the hardwirings as you don't loose anything that you can't get back when you loose them.
You can make arguments that it is dumbing down the game which it likely is, you can make arguments that it is removing some of the risk versus reward which it is but I think there is a line here between permanent loss and regainable loss. When CCP removed the potential skill point loss and clone upgrade system PvP increased no one can argue against that. I know of several people myself included that won't fly T3 crusiers due to the potential skill point loss and I noticed that the T3 dessies don't have it. I think CCP realized it was a mistake and not good for the game. |
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
216
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 07:23:10 -
[521] - Quote
ergherhdfgh wrote: To me removing attribute implants makes sense if you want to encourage PvP. Maybe keep the hardwirings as you don't loose anything that you can't get back when you loose them.
Sure sure, let me check the cost of hardwire implants. Eifyr and Co. 'Gunslinger' Small Projectile Turret SP-605 +5% buff to dmg, cheapest at 131 mil 06.02.2015. For example: Memory Augmentation - Improved +5 attribute, 119 mil 06.02.2015 Sure, they will use hardwires...
ergherhdfgh wrote:When CCP removed the potential skill point loss and clone upgrade system PvP increased no one can argue against that Is it? Increased? Last time i saw graphic about pvping (fanfest i think) 10% of players were pvping. How much does it change since then?
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team Good Sax
1155
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 07:56:33 -
[522] - Quote
We should also remove expensive ships and mods from the game as people are less likely to undock and PVP in them.
Stupid idea, imo.
\m/ O.o \m/
"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
85
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 09:03:46 -
[523] - Quote
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:We should also remove expensive ships and mods from the game as people are less likely to undock and PVP in them.
Stupid idea, imo.
well said ...
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Josef Djugashvilis
2874
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 11:43:42 -
[524] - Quote
Dear Leannor, I am at a loss to understand your comment, - are you Irish?
Please wpuld you be so kind as to explain it.
Thank you.
This is not a signature.
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
85
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 12:00:14 -
[525] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Dear Leannor, I am at a loss to understand your comment, - are you Irish?
Please wpuld you be so kind as to explain it.
Thank you.
he said treshold, not threshold (this was bolded in the quote). Like the way the irish sound like they;re saying 'tree' when they're actually saying 'three'. :)
(it was a tongue in cheek joke. ;-) )
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Josef Djugashvilis
2874
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 12:56:27 -
[526] - Quote
Leannor wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Dear Leannor, I am at a loss to understand your comment, - are you Irish?
Please wpuld you be so kind as to explain it.
Thank you. he said treshold, not threshold (this was bolded in the quote). Like the way the irish sound like they;re saying 'tree' when they're actually saying 'three'. :) (it was a tongue in cheek joke. ;-) )
No problem
This is not a signature.
|
SOL Ranger
SOL.
191
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 13:09:55 -
[527] - Quote
I will simply quote my past comment on the subject:
SOL Ranger wrote: ...I would like to keep the attributes and complexity from them as much as possible, albeit I'll admit there are some issues with the attributes.
Learning implants I believe these should be removed, they are merely disguised learning skills.
Attribute change: I believe attributes should not be manually assigned nor "reset", instead they should by the skills you train home in on those specific attributes it requires, so you become keen in those attribute areas needed over time and train faster.
We get: Still takes time to change skill type training scheme. Doesn't require any thought in to setting attributes. No more magical sudden "resets". No more risk in making a faulty attribute mapping. No more waiting a year to fix a faulty attribute mapping. Natural progression into whatever you fancy training. Keeps same penalty for mixing training.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3575837#post3575837
The Vargur requires launcher hardpoints, following tempest tradition.
|
Renegade Heart
Renegade Empire
395
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 14:25:17 -
[528] - Quote
Keep all implants, and make corpses salvagable! More reasons to shoot at pods can't be a bad thing. |
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1941
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 14:52:21 -
[529] - Quote
Renegade Heart wrote:Keep all implants, and make corpses salvagable! More reasons to shoot at pods can't be a bad thing.
Keep attribute implants and do this. Still get rid of learning implants of course. |
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 17:58:32 -
[530] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:If I am likely to lose the pod, I wear no hardwires and might have some learning implants in, by happenstance as there is a limit to how many jump clones one can have.
If there are no learning implants and only higher stats, I will wear no hardwires and just bank the ISK. Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning?
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. |
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
175
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 18:20:43 -
[531] - Quote
Terra Chrall wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:If I am likely to lose the pod, I wear no hardwires and might have some learning implants in, by happenstance as there is a limit to how many jump clones one can have.
If there are no learning implants and only higher stats, I will wear no hardwires and just bank the ISK. Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning? 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.
The solution you are looking for is in your own reply. Jump clones but a cheap +2 or +3 implants in it and you lose 6480sp a day for a set of +2's. Which is no difference at all.
Also Low sec is safe for pods if you know the area(dont warp to the Osoggur gate when in amamake and places like rancer) aka the lightly spots to see smart bombs |
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 19:07:01 -
[532] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:
The solution you are looking for is in your own reply. Jump clones but a cheap +2 or +3 implants in it and you lose 6480sp a day for a set of +2's. Which is no difference at all.
Also Low sec is safe for pods if you know the area(dont warp to the Osoggur gate when in amamake and places like rancer) aka the lightly spots to see smart bombs
I understand jump clones are a partial solution, which is why I trained and repped up for it. And if the choice was no or low bonuses to training vs the current system I would keep it the same without changing it. I'll go the route or a +2/3 clone if I want to get into risky behavior more often. The down side is for those, like me, that are risk averse by nature this hinders spontaneity of risky behavior, having to worry about jump clone timer and location of clone.
If there were no training implants, or if they were cheap, I would run around most the time in a disposable clone vs one worth 100-500m. Where as now I run around in the expensive one to maximize SP and have to live with my risk aversion.
But if they were removed and all skill training was balanced around +4/+5 then I would play the game differently and I think I would enjoy it more.
Or if the price of +4/5 were reduced to what +2/+3 are now, that would be enough to augment my play style and get me into more of the game content on a regular basis. |
Memphis Baas
116
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 19:19:08 -
[533] - Quote
You're using logic to argue against the way he FEELS. The OCD about implants is a psychological thing; makes no sense but there it is.
It's probably a lot easier for CCP to put out a dev blog (everyone reads dev blogs) with some statistics and pretty charts to drive home the point that there's almost no difference between +2's and +4's. Add Rancer and Amamake to everyone's avoidance list, like Jita is. But they haven't even considered that. Instead they're proposing Pavlovian manipulation of our behavior (remove implants -> we PVP more), and coding a whole bunch of changes to the skill system in order to implement it.
People put a lot of irrational value on their skill points. Remember how everyone raced for Destroyer 5 and Battlecruiser 5 in order to gain free skill points when CCP split those into the 4 racial skills? Some even re-subscribed just to make sure they had the skills ready. Are they flying destroyers or battlecruisers now, more than before? Unlikely; so training for Destroyer 5 and BC 5 made no logical sense. Yet CCP got surprise income out of a change to some skills that was done just for balancing purposes. |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
878
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 20:47:19 -
[534] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Instead they're proposing Pavlovian manipulation of our behavior (remove implants -> we PVP more), and coding a whole bunch of changes to the skill system in order to implement it.
Again, leading off with the caveat that I'm not a designer on the team discussing this, so forgive me if I can't speak for them on specifics:
You're assuming a motivation which hasn't been stated, and, to my knowledge, isn't necessarily the case.
I could imagine an argument for simplifying the skill & attribute system to make it easier to learn for new players, or to reduce the cumulative impact on players who learns about the relevant game mechanics later than all their friends (and thus potentially loses months of training compared to learning earlier.) I could also imagine simplification being very helpful for technical reasons. And, of course, the CSM minutes did state that a major developer concern was that the current system forces people to learn skills in a less-useful order if they want to optimize for SP/hour.
Any set of changes that they end up proposing would likely take into account economic impacts, impacts on the subjective degree of risk involved in the average pod loss, and a need to keep implant-related gameplay interesting. It's unlikely that something like learning implants would be removed without something else added to keep pods interesting.
It's easy to argue against a strawman ("I think they're doing this for reason X, and that's stupid because..."). I'd suggest that you try to broaden your thinking a bit about why someone might see such a change as a positive, and what such a change might look like, before you give feedback on something that's not even fully-formed enough to roll out in a dev blog yet.
I often see people asking "Why don't we get to hear about future changes to the game early, when they're still being considered, instead of right before they happen?" This is an instance where you have heard about something that's far enough out that even the game designers aren't sure what they want to propose yet.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Machagon
Plate of Beans Incorporated
65
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 21:11:34 -
[535] - Quote
Thank you CCP Darwin. There's so much talk about "dumbing down" and "noob friendliness" that I sometimes think that people on this forum think that the secret to good game design is just adding more features when, in fact, it is often the opposite.
The removal of learning skills was a huge plus. The removal of permanent race-based attributes was a huge plus. The truth is that the attribute system was a bad feature from the point of conception. People in this thread are talking about not PVPing in learning implants, or not training skills outside your remap, as though these are just irrelevant bad feels. But these bad feels stem from a very real game design flaw. Both learning implants and remaps create a perverse incentive where the most fun thing to do and the most efficient thing to do are at direct odds.
This is not the good-complexity creating risk vs. reward. This is just a system with no purpose other than to cause bad feels (and the occasional shadenfreude good feels in people who look down on the bad feels people).
I am 100% for removing base attributes (so you always train as though you had an optimal remap), and almost 100% in favour of removing learning implants. My only slight reservation is that I wouldn't want to remove the pirate sets and they would definitely need a rebalance and/or availability dump if they were the only uses for slots 1 to 5.
I've also noticed a few people talking about removing hardwirings. I don't think that's a good idea and I also don't think it was ever really on the table. Hardwirings directly interact with what you are doing at the moment. You plug them in to use them proactively. They provide an opportunity to get a vital tiny edge in a fight in exchange for an up front investment and an increased risk if you lose your pod. This is exactly the good sort of risk vs. reward that makes EVE great and the sort of complexity we should maintain while cutting away the cruft. |
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 22:19:03 -
[536] - Quote
Machagon wrote:Thank you CCP Darwin. There's so much talk about "dumbing down" and "noob friendliness" that I sometimes think that people on this forum think that the secret to good game design is just adding more features when, in fact, it is often the opposite.
The removal of learning skills was a huge plus. The removal of permanent race-based attributes was a huge plus. The truth is that the attribute system was a bad feature from the point of conception. People in this thread are talking about not PVPing in learning implants, or not training skills outside your remap, as though these are just irrelevant bad feels. But these bad feels stem from a very real game design flaw. Both learning implants and remaps create a perverse incentive where the most fun thing to do and the most efficient thing to do are at direct odds.
This is not the good-complexity creating risk vs. reward. This is just a system with no purpose other than to cause bad feels (and the occasional shadenfreude good feels in people who look down on the bad feels people).
I am 100% for removing base attributes (so you always train as though you had an optimal remap), and almost 100% in favour of removing learning implants. My only slight reservation is that I wouldn't want to remove the pirate sets and they would definitely need a rebalance and/or availability dump if they were the only uses for slots 1 to 5.
I've also noticed a few people talking about removing hardwirings. I don't think that's a good idea and I also don't think it was ever really on the table. Hardwirings directly interact with what you are doing at the moment. You plug them in to use them proactively. They provide an opportunity to get a vital tiny edge in a fight in exchange for an up front investment and an increased risk if you lose your pod. This is exactly the good sort of risk vs. reward that makes EVE great and the sort of complexity we should maintain while cutting away the cruft. Well said.
I had been focused on just the implants. But taking into account the whole attribute/learning system, removing it would not take much away from the game. It greatly favors the informed over the uninformed making training into various skills much more time consuming for some.
Should that be a part of the game that is kept? As a relatively new player I could do with out it. I like the idea of changing the system, not to make things easy mode, or dumbed down, but for the sake of opening up game play. By being able to train any skill maximally, it allows players the freedom to shift between areas of interest on the fly and stop training for that new ship and get into leadership, or logistics simply by putting the relevant skills at the top of the queue. Then the decisions about skills are about skills and not about how are my attributes are set for the next year.
If an attribute system with remaps is kept, I would propose this simple (not saying easy) solution for getting out of a bad remap. Have a free attribute reset (+1) for every remap you have. So even if you have no remaps left, you can always reset to the standard default set. This would also open up the use of a years remaps for shorter term trains without a penalty for moving away from that focus the rest of the year. And give new players more confidence to play with the system on their own, knowing they can reset without burning a bonus remap.
I don't think the system is broken, as it is a system with pros and cons, but I agree with Machagon in that it seems flawed. This is a sandbox universe and I would prefer a more flexible learning system that encouraged trying new and different things by way of training any skill in a timely way. |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1685
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 22:49:00 -
[537] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Memphis Baas wrote:Instead they're proposing Pavlovian manipulation of our behavior (remove implants -> we PVP more), and coding a whole bunch of changes to the skill system in order to implement it. Again, leading off with the caveat that I'm not a designer on the team discussing this, so forgive me if I can't speak for them on specifics: You're assuming a motivation which hasn't been stated, and, to my knowledge, isn't necessarily the case. I could imagine an argument for simplifying the skill & attribute system to make it easier to learn for new players, or to reduce the cumulative impact on players who learns about the relevant game mechanics later than all their friends (and thus potentially loses months of training compared to learning earlier.) I could also imagine simplification being very helpful for technical reasons. And, of course, the CSM minutes did state that a major developer concern was that the current system forces people to learn skills in a less-useful order if they want to optimize for SP/hour. Any set of changes that they end up proposing would likely take into account economic impacts, impacts on the subjective degree of risk involved in the average pod loss, and a need to keep implant-related gameplay interesting. It's unlikely that something like learning implants would be removed without something else added to keep pods interesting. It's easy to argue against a strawman ("I think they're doing this for reason X, and that's stupid because..."). I'd suggest that you try to broaden your thinking a bit about why someone might see such a change as a positive, and what such a change might look like, before you give feedback on something that's not even fully-formed enough to roll out in a dev blog yet. I often see people asking "Why don't we get to hear about future changes to the game early, when they're still being considered, instead of right before they happen?" This is an instance where you have heard about something that's far enough out that even the game designers aren't sure what they want to propose yet.
We have theorycrafted this out for years now. My best advice is to make damn sure you guys get a good replacement for what is essentially the LP floor of EVE.
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
886
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 00:29:17 -
[538] - Quote
Aryth wrote:We have theorycrafted this out for years now. My best advice is to make damn sure you guys get a good replacement for what is essentially the LP floor of EVE. I can't comment on what their current thinking is, but I do know that Team Size Matters are absolutely aware of and thinking about the potential economic impacts of any changes.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
233
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 06:38:08 -
[539] - Quote
Ya I wouldn't be a fan of losing implants. This is an element of Risk to the game.
The argument that implants are what keeps people from PvPing is silly at best. If you want to make it easier, then just lower the standings needed for JC's, or make it so you can always make a JC from your original school.. There.. done.
I mean why shouldn't I be able to train faster? I Trained the Cybernetics skill. I Paid for my implants, and optimized a skill plan. And I take a risk EVERY time I undock that I could get podded. Even in Highsec. Done implants and remaps can save weeks and months off long term goals.. And it's a choice we should be free to make. I learned this stuff fast. Why do we need to spoon feed everything to a new player? I'm not saying Eve needs to be a learning.. wall. But You get implants in the Tutorials.. YOU GET THEM. And while using them offers some advantage, it's not the Huge advantage you get from knowing specific skills to train, or remapping, or knowing tactics, etc.
Saying that those implants are the reason, well as was mentioned before.. Lets remove expensive ships, and ammo's, and modules. Lets just have Eve be just T1 Frigs and Meta0 modules.. No.
Personally I wasn't a huge fan of the change of Med Clones. That was an element of the game that needed to be Fixed, but didn't need to be nuked. It's not the end of the world, but it's one less risk/reward. How many times did DBRB loose Fleet 5 cause he forgot to update his clone?
I'm all for helping a new player learn the game. That's a good thing. Better tutorials, better training missions. Tool tips.. All Great. But we don't need to dumb down the game too. Eve is a Complex Game. It's why I play it. |
Ashterothi
The Order of Thelemic Ascension Novus Dominatum
237
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 07:14:16 -
[540] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
Although I haven't had time to read this full post let me offer some thoughts.
Implants are a long term investment whereas hardwirings is a short term investment.
Esp if you remove mappings (Which many people do in their calculations) then Implants represent a significant way for someone to risk for long term gain. That is very important.
IF Attributes were removed, it would be the same as if remaps were removed. If attributes are removed all you remove is the option to put that little bit of effort and planning into your character. If implants are removed, you lose the ability to add additional risk for long term permanent value (Higher SP totals).
Clone grades were removed to remove a non-choice. You had to upgrade your clone. However remaps and implants are real choice based on effort and risk. In that sense they improve the depth of the game, and ultimately the player who chooses to ignore them isn't that far put out. So no, I wouldn't say people would just shift that 50mil isk to hardwires, because it is a totally different value decision.
Ashterothi for CSM 10 #AshYC117!
|
|
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1941
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 07:44:41 -
[541] - Quote
If you get rid of base attributes and learning implants then new possibilities arise. People currently argue against reassigning trained skill points because they could have been learned at a lower rate owing to attributes.
This opens the door to an annual skill remap which means that players could deconstruct unwanted skills and load them into a new area ready for another year invested in the game. That would definitely be an improvement. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
219
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 11:58:32 -
[542] - Quote
Solhild wrote: This opens the door to an annual skill remap which means that players could deconstruct unwanted skills and load them into a new area ready for another year invested in the game. That would definitely be an improvement. I don't like the word "year" here. Most non mmo have 20-30 hour lifespan playing time. If new players don't be hooked then they won't be playing long enough to use this feature.
CCP Darwin wrote:I could imagine an argument for simplifying the skill & attribute system to make it easier to learn for new players, or to reduce the cumulative impact on players who learn about the relevant game mechanics later than all their friends (and thus potentially loses months of training compared to learning earlier.) I could also imagine simplification being very helpful for technical reasons. And, of course, the CSM minutes did state that a major developer concern was that the current system forces people to learn skills in a less-useful order if they want to optimize for SP/hour.
Any set of changes that they end up proposing would likely take into account economic impacts, impacts on the subjective degree of risk involved in the average pod loss, and a need to keep implant-related gameplay interesting. It's unlikely that something like learning implants would be removed without something else added to keep pods interesting.
It's easy to argue against a strawman ("I think they're doing this for reason X, and that's stupid because..."). I'd suggest that you try to broaden your thinking a bit about why someone might see such a change as a positive, and what such a change might look like, before you give feedback on something that's not even fully-formed enough to roll out in a dev blog yet.
I often see people asking "Why don't we get to hear about future changes to the game early, when they're still being considered, instead of right before they happen?" This is an instance where you have heard about something that's far enough out that even the game designers aren't sure what they want to propose yet. This is GD thread i think everyone are aware it's not feedback, just posting personal opinions about implants and learning in-game.
I don't like current mechanism. Remaps are useless to me. I don't play this game to build training plans for a year long period. I don't like choosing "to be or not to be" for a year long period if i want to speed up learning. I would like one remap per 30 days (for a price ofc), if learning implants are going to be removed ( i would still have influence on my clone that way).
What option to train do we have now? 1) attributes remap - not necessary a good thing, if we change mind after few months ("ye maybe this whole mining is not my thing"); 2) buy learning implants - cost much, easy to lose them ("guys let's go shoot something -no, we station spinning for >20 days of training") 3) buy skills hardwires - why train to lvl 5 when i can buy +5% skill implant ("wait, wait, same cost of +5 learning if we lose them, decisions, decisions) 4) combination of all above ("never undock, i have no idea what to do in this game") 5) don't give a s*** about it and just play the game.
I think it's going into removing attributes, remaps and learning implants direction. If players won't have the choices they won't choose wrong (i think it was in a movie i saw few months ago).
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
Francis Inch
Void Enterprises Sev3rance
23
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 12:17:04 -
[543] - Quote
Removing Learning implants would be great for my EVE experience. The decision between what level of learning increase I want vs the value of the pod I might lose keeps me clone jumping between high sec for training and low/null for combat.
It means I participate less and that I have to actively manage my jump clones far more not to play the game, but to avoid slower skill training. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
705
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 14:08:07 -
[544] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote: I think it's going into removing attributes, remaps and learning implants direction. If players won't have the choices they won't choose wrong (i think it was in a movie i saw few months ago).
Clone grades were removed because it was a non-choice. If we are removing non-choices, why does it make sense to turn a choice into a non-choice.
That is a feature of EvE lots of us love, that it is entirely possible (and indeed a frequent occurance) to choose wrong. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
705
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 14:10:34 -
[545] - Quote
Solhild wrote:This opens the door to an annual skill remap which means that players could deconstruct unwanted skills and load them into a new area ready for another year invested in the game. That would definitely be an improvement.
Gimme, gimme, gimme
We are still arguing whether CCP give you an inch or a yard, and your already staking your claim on a mile. Truly, some people are never satisfied.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
219
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 15:06:13 -
[546] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Clone grades were removed because it was a non-choice. If we are removing non-choices, why does it make sense to turn a choice into a non-choice. I didn't say i support this i just think it may happen. There are so many layers of the problem that removing the problem at all of them would be simplest solution.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1045
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 17:20:31 -
[547] - Quote
Honestly the implant attributes should go. Its a needless system that ....
Its stupid. I'll be frank. It makes people risk adverse. My heads full of training implants, let me not go into lowsec/nullsec/wormhole space.
Kick training implants to the curb. Implants should make the pilot and the ship more effective. That is a decision you make to increase the value of your gameplay. The attribute implants really restrict people from committing to different gameplay becase (implants in my head) argument.
Kick them to the curb, make weaker versions of all the other implants (virtues, slaves, etc). For those screaming (no that would wreck gameplay?). Fine, make it so that they can't remove their implants in space when they have a timer on them. I'm sure they would love not being able to pull their implants before they die, ruining their killboard as they get podded in lowsec in their slaveset.
I'd do something like that.
Remove the training implants Remove the ability to pull implants in space when you have a timer.
I would aim to do that. Hate it if you like, but I hate when we catch a person and they pull their implants before they get podded to "save" their killboard.
No training implants, people would leave highsec more and not fear dying that much because (damn I'll lose skillpoint training speed because implants).
Yaay!!!!
|
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1941
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 17:20:32 -
[548] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Solhild wrote:This opens the door to an annual skill remap which means that players could deconstruct unwanted skills and load them into a new area ready for another year invested in the game. That would definitely be an improvement. Gimme, gimme, gimme We are still arguing whether CCP give you an inch or a yard, and your already staking your claim on a mile. Truly, some people are never satisfied.
Not really sure what's wrong with you. I'm simply suggesting an opportunity to add choice to the game. |
Pelle Wittewoa
University of Caille Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 01:53:11 -
[549] - Quote
Pod death, and implants in? it should give some kind of reward to the killer (drops)! |
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
89
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 02:56:09 -
[550] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Honestly the implant attributes should go. Its a needless system that ....
Its stupid. I'll be frank. It makes people risk adverse. My heads full of training implants, let me not go into lowsec/nullsec/wormhole space.
Kick training implants to the curb. Implants should make the pilot and the ship more effective. That is a decision you make to increase the value of your gameplay. The attribute implants really restrict people from committing to different gameplay becase (implants in my head) argument.
Kick them to the curb, make weaker versions of all the other implants (virtues, slaves, etc). For those screaming (no that would wreck gameplay?). Fine, make it so that they can't remove their implants in space when they have a timer on them. I'm sure they would love not being able to pull their implants before they die, ruining their killboard as they get podded in lowsec in their slaveset.
I'd do something like that.
Remove the training implants Remove the ability to pull implants in space when you have a timer.
I would aim to do that. Hate it if you like, but I hate when we catch a person and they pull their implants before they get podded to "save" their killboard.
No training implants, people would leave highsec more and not fear dying that much because (damn I'll lose skillpoint training speed because implants).
Risk...go into low/null/w-space with expensive implants.
Or use a clone with cheap or no implants.
Choices....but hey...lets take choice away.
You know what stops me from doing pvp, losing a ship. Lets make it so you don't lose a ship. More pvp would be had by all. |
|
Ben Ishikela
14
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 03:12:13 -
[551] - Quote
Raymond Moons wrote:I like the idea of a training speed Booster pill. If it had a max duration of 24 hours (with the booster duration skill at 5) it would encourage people to log in every day to keep their SP gain up. The side effects could be a chance of -1 (scaled to implant) to one or more attributes. Which also slows training in some skills. So if you want the +5 pill you also have the most risk of getting a temporary attribute nerf.(...) A synth skill booster could be awarded to noobs in the turorial and would not only show them that they can get a training bonus from pills but also introduce them to the other performance boosters. Since boosters are temporary I'd expect them to cost less for a single pill and would represent less isk loss in one go if podded. The pills could have a material cost (...). Plus you could time your consumption around your typical PvP play times anyway. Also encouraging drug use is so very bad ass, and so very Eve!(...) This. |
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
234
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 04:42:12 -
[552] - Quote
Pelle Wittewoa wrote:Pod death, and implants in? it should give some kind of reward to the killer (drops)! It does.. Nice Killmails :p |
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
539
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 03:35:11 -
[553] - Quote
Solhild wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Solhild wrote:This opens the door to an annual skill remap which means that players could deconstruct unwanted skills and load them into a new area ready for another year invested in the game. That would definitely be an improvement. Gimme, gimme, gimme We are still arguing whether CCP give you an inch or a yard, and your already staking your claim on a mile. Truly, some people are never satisfied. Not really sure what's wrong with you. I'm simply suggesting an opportunity to add choice to the game. No, what you're suggesting doesn't add choice. It removes the consequences of choice.
Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
|
Giju
The Scope Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 04:23:30 -
[554] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
I think the main point is that hardwirings, as you say, give you an edge in combat. So it's purely a choice , if you desire that "edge".
The thing with learning implants, at least from my perspective, is that by not having them it costs you more real cash money not to have them. The difference in time taken to train skills over one year between no implants and plus5's equates to a extra money to pay for your account for the same amount of skill points. It comes down to a value for money issue. Real money.. |
Beta Maoye
54
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 07:22:03 -
[555] - Quote
No objection to remove attributes/implants.
If they decided to keep the attribute and implant things, the remap restriction should be eased. Make the remap available each month for a certain sum of isk. Give pilots more freedom to choose their directions. One year is too long for today's computer game. Most people will not be interested in planning one year ahead for a video game.
The wide span of skill trees have already created very divisified characters and play styles. Master of any one area of skill sets already requires long period of time. I don't see any reason to keep the one-year restriction. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
86
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 09:18:41 -
[556] - Quote
Giju wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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. I think the main point is that hardwirings, as you say, give you an edge in combat. So it's purely a choice , if you desire that "edge". The thing with learning implants, at least from my perspective, is that by not having them it costs you more real cash money not to have them. The difference in time taken to train skills over one year between no implants and plus5's equates to a extra money to pay for your account for the same amount of skill points. It comes down to a value for money issue. Real money..
but you're forgetting they cost isk, and the only way to get isk is to spend real time to earn it, thus using up real time money spent on time in game. And there's a wide range of cost.
Swings and roudnabouts my friend. (and you spend what you can afford, those with big wallets have done something to get those bigger wallats so don't go down the disproportionate road quite so easily)
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
124
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 10:00:23 -
[557] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:...a major developer concern was that the current system forces people to learn skills in a less-useful order if they want to optimize for SP/hour. And that is the part that amazes me most. Under current game design, players have to make decisions: either learn high-priority skill, or keep training with optimal SP/hour. Players making decisions was always considered a good game design. And suddenly, this is "a major concern". WTF? |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
86
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 10:14:23 -
[558] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:...a major developer concern was that the current system forces people to learn skills in a less-useful order if they want to optimize for SP/hour. And that is the part that amazes me most. Under current game design, players have to make decisions: either learn high-priority skill, or keep training with optimal SP/hour. Players making decisions was always considered a good game design. And suddenly, this is "a major concern". WTF?
I agree, where is the issue here? You know the score, you know what at risk, you know what the options are. You make a choice, and you either get SP epeen, or ability Epeen. People have different priorities. For every vet out there bragging about how many SP they have, there's a hundred more dedicated lesser SP person than could woop their ass in whatever they do. Be it mission, mining or fighting.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
594
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 10:26:33 -
[559] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:either learn high-priority skill, or keep training with optimal SP/hour.
Sounds like learning skills.
Deciding what ship to fly, how to fit it, and how to fly it... these are interesting choices. Deciding to hang in hisec with +5s and train fast or derp around in null/WH and train slow... this is not an interesting choice. Fiddling around with jump clones and jump clone timers to try to have the best of both worlds is also not particularly compelling game play. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
86
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 10:36:24 -
[560] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote:Skia Aumer wrote:either learn high-priority skill, or keep training with optimal SP/hour. Sounds like learning skills. Deciding what ship to fly, how to fit it, and how to fly it... these are interesting choices. Deciding to hang in hisec with +5s and train fast or derp around in null/WH and train slow... this is not an interesting choice. Fiddling around with jump clones and jump clone timers to try to have the best of both worlds is also not particularly compelling game play.
and that's just it. A choice with repercussions.
You p[lay it safe, and you get ahead in SP but get behind in the game play. Or you play it risky and get ahead in both. Or you play it simple and get ahead in gameplay and not in SP.
There is always a choice, and always a consequence for each choice.
That's the beauty of EVE. No other game has such interactive skill abilities. It's what makes EVE so immersive. Start peeling that away, eventually you'll get to a point where it's WOW (or rather DULL).
And yes, if you do 'start' peeling, you're more predisposed to peel the next layer away (even though you say you won't be now) and so on. History proves this (sometimes for better, sometiems for worse). Here, it is certainly for worse - if maintaning EVE as an mature game of intellgence is the objective.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
|
flaming phantom
T.R.I.A.D Ushra'Khan
91
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 11:10:00 -
[561] - Quote
I orignally posted quite a few comments (pages?) back expressing my dislike about removing implants and skill points.
After some thinking about it, I have changed my mind. I have realized this because I sometimes have the issue that I can only feasibly play once a week. I then have a choice if i don't want to risk my expensive clone: 1. clone jump to my clone without my expensive learning implants. Then I can't jump back untill the next day. Since I can't log in the next day, I basically go several days without effecient training. 2. don't jump, get more sp over the next few days, and don't pvp
I know it's my choice to not jump and not risk my implants, but if I am paying for game time (i.e. sp), then I would like to get my maximum amount I can. So i basically end up just pvping on nights when i know i can get back on the next day to switch my clone around. If we removed that system, then I know it wouldn't matter where I parked my clone for a few days when I won't get on, quite likely leading to me pvping more on those single nights i get the chance
All great men have mustaches
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
901
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 11:42:29 -
[562] - Quote
I'll again offer my caveat that I'm not on the team considering possible changes to the attribute system, just engaging in the conversation and speaking for another point of view.
Leannor wrote:I agree, where is the issue here? You know the score, you know what at risk, you know what the options are. You make a choice, and you either get SP epeen, or ability Epeen. People have different priorities. For every vet out there bragging about how many SP they have, there's a hundred more dedicated lesser SP person than could woop their ass in whatever they do. Be it mission, mining or fighting.
There are a couple of specific issues with how this system currently works that make it less than ideal, both related to the new player experience:
1) Most new players learn about the full impact of the attribute system very late, and because the effect of the system is cumulative (the degree to which person A with a less-optimal remap falls behind person B with an optimal remap increases over time) it's frustrating for new players to discover, months into the game, that they've possibly left a lot of skill points on the table.
(This differs crucially from the case where a new player discovers that they've been training what, for whatever reason, they consider the wrong thing, because at least they've probably 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.
Those two issues add up to a system that more severely punishes new players (whether they know the system or not) who experiment or dabble in skills, and I think one could make a very good argument that such experimentation is essential for new players to try a range of activities in the game and find their place.
Note that I haven't said a word about the impact of fitting implants on PvP. :)
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
86
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 11:43:18 -
[563] - Quote
flaming phantom wrote:I orignally posted quite a few comments (pages?) back expressing my dislike about removing implants and skill points.
After some thinking about it, I have changed my mind. I have realized this because I sometimes have the issue that I can only feasibly play once a week. I then have a choice if i don't want to risk my expensive clone: 1. clone jump to my clone without my expensive learning implants. Then I can't jump back untill the next day. Since I can't log in the next day, I basically go several days without effecient training. 2. don't jump, get more sp over the next few days, and don't pvp
I know it's my choice to not jump and not risk my implants, but if I am paying for game time (i.e. sp), then I would like to get my maximum amount I can. So i basically end up just pvping on nights when i know i can get back on the next day to switch my clone around. If we removed that system, then I know it wouldn't matter where I parked my clone for a few days when I won't get on, quite likely leading to me pvping more on those single nights i get the chance
I see where you're coming from, but it's all about risk versus reward. If I loose a pimped out ship, it's still 'money' I've lost as everything you do in game is born from your time in game. I have a choice to pimp out my brain, or not. Do you take the risk, or don't you. Take away the ris,, you take away the adrenaline rush when you go into battle. Everything becomes a little bit safer. Less risky. Less fun. It would be the same logic if you moved to a freelancer style of ship replacement. You get blown up, no worries, you get back to station in same ship you lost. Same logic applies.
While there is risk, reward and open clear choice that's fairly priced for all, I'm remain unconvinced on removing a game play factor.
(Sure change, modification, ... but not removal).
There's also the other economical factor. There's a **** tonne of implants on market, as of today. Of which value will be wiped, how would that be fairly resolved? And for those who have invested millions (or billions) in existing implants. How would they be recompenesed for purcahses that are now useless by game mechanic change? Where would the cut of be for 'well, you knew it was coming'. Would this remove the existing combo implants which are not just attribute based (or would their attribute element just get removed?).
I have to say, the whole attribute re-mapping thing is, and always has been, a joke. One line of training flips around will difference optimal remaps. And one typical route of training will not last a year. To be set optimised for one skill for a whole year ... useless ... most people either even it all out, or drop charisma. That they could simplify... just one attribute maybe ... but, the ability to speed up and enhance, with risk, and cost, ... that imo shouldn't be removed.
My previous idea about skill related implant combos ... personally i think is best. :-)
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
901
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 11:46:43 -
[564] - Quote
Leannor wrote:There's also the other economical factor. Yes, and the designers who are looking at this question recognize that this is a big issue. There are various possible solutions (and there's probably some value in speaking up in this thread if you think of something interesting yourself that you feel would be a good step forward for the game.)
Edit: I'm not aware of anyone who's proposing removing implants. Eliminating attributes would require removing attribute bonuses on implants, of course, but possibly replaced by some other bonus of some kind.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1072
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 11:58:45 -
[565] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: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.
No, everyone makes choices, risk assessments and compromises. This is no different from miners who get a full row of MLU because they couldn't possibly deal with having to fit a DC. Next thing you'll say that mission ships really shouldn't have to deal with the burden of having to tank, they should be capable of fitting 4 damage mods and 3 painters/TC because otherwise those poor mission runners just can't deal with being sub optimal.
People make a choice and deal with the consequences, if people choose to go focussed remaps they choose to train focussed skills. If they don't like that they shouldn't use that remap. Nobody is forcing them to use it but at the same time it's an available option for the people who DO want it and (thus) agree to the compromise.
Also, it's still using the assumption that massive SP is somehow a necessity or a goal. It's not, people can MAKE it their goal but it really is just a choice.
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
86
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 12:03:38 -
[566] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Leannor wrote:There's also the other economical factor. Yes, and the designers who are looking at this question recognize that this is a big issue. There are various possible solutions (and there's probably some value in speaking up in this thread if you think of something interesting yourself that you feel would be a good step forward for the game.)
Thanks. Implants have been a big money earner ever since dot, and they're entwined with loyalty points yada yada, so yeah, it certainly is not as simple as just removing a class of missile.
After following this thread, my ideal solution to the 'implants reduce PVP' dilema would be as follows.
First acknowledge that implants are but a replacable excuse for PVP avoidance, for most people. (Has there been a significant increase in PVP since clones were dumped?). If you're still insistant on addressing the issue ...
Second, consider greater ability to move within clones easier or move implnats easier. Idea 1) Simillar to Jump Fatigue, have clone fatigue. THis enables you, during one days activity, to login to your skill prioritised clone. Decide you're going to fight, jump to the PVP focused clone, fight, then after battle (say a few hours) jump back to skill clone and log off for the day. When you log in the next day rinse and repeat. After that second switch you need to wait 12 hours, after which you got 3hr wait. idea 2) You have JC as current, and can jump between them as current, but implants follow you around / or are located in a stations clone vat. And you're able to switch between implant sets within that station. (this excludes the ability to unplug and sell, just allows the ability to switch within the clone bay. Again, there can be a timer delay on this as idea 1).
Third ... personally I don't like the attribute idea, especially the one year re-map. And if your aim is to free up slots, or re-address this entirely, then (in conjunction with above, or not ) my previous idea of having each implant (ten at anyone time is good) made up of attribute (or not) plus skill specific boost. Like the way you have heat on modules. YOu can have boosters on up to ten skills at any one time. Maybe paired with the more generic '+5% Shield HP' type hardwiring, but the pairing of the choosing of the player - within various restrictions (like only sheild skills with a shield boost - or the opposite to avoid doubling impacts).
Happy to talk offline, via evemail. :) I could talk now about how and why this would be good, and all the subtext remaifications of what I've said above ... but that would be a thesis, and even the above is probably enough to turn most people off before they get to the bottom. lol
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
86
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 12:10:43 -
[567] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:[quote=CCP Darwin] 2) A new player [might make bad choices]
No, everyone makes choices, risk assessments and compromises.
Agreed
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
901
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 12:23:10 -
[568] - Quote
Noting one more time that I'm not a game designer and not on the team considering these changes, just participating in the conversation. :)
Gregor Parud wrote:No, everyone makes choices, risk assessments and compromises. 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.
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.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
167
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 12:44:16 -
[569] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: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. I agree on this, it is no reason at all to have people locked in to min/max attributes. Let people train skills in the order they fancy without penalty. We already had the original attribute system before remaps and it was a royal pain for everyone not born Achura.
Remove the attributes and give everyone a flat SP/h speed and be done with it, it is long overdue. The training will still be full of consequences as nothing stops you from maxing out the wrong ship/weapon system. Just that you finally can mix shield and missile skills in your skill queue without feeling bad that you are doing half the training suboptimally.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
86
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 13:09:27 -
[570] - Quote
Actually, one very fair way of removing implants from the game? ...
Do not introduce anymore, remove any BPO/BPC (if any exist), and just let those on the market sell out. As people loose them, they slowly decrease.
This could be done covertly, so as not to raise prices until right near the end.
Or it could be done openly, so the current remaining implants out there rise in value.
All this with a back drop that after 'x' years, inactive players (for 'x' time) will have them removed, and then after 'x' more time, active players will have them removed also (where x plus x is known before hand and where that time period also is considered to be 'having ones money worth from them'. - that last bit will be a bigger debate.... lol)
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1072
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 13:22:15 -
[571] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Noting one more time that I'm not a game designer and not on the team considering these changes, just participating in the conversation. :) Gregor Parud wrote:No, everyone makes choices, risk assessments and compromises. 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.
No, I got the point just fine. The attribute system does not in any way punish said behaviour. Anyone can choose a well rounded perc/int "combat remap" and do fine with it and while then "having to" train for drones isn't super optimal the difference in actual speed to get T2 light/med drones with decent support skills is about 10-20% compared to an optimised drone remap (about 3 days total, no one cares).
No one is forced to remap before understanding what play style he wants to choose, no one is forced to go int/mem for the first year. It's not the speed, it's the perception based on misunderstanding, bad advice and the overall "having your cake and eat it" mentality. Neither of those... reasons are valid to make changes to the game, if that were the case we might as well just close down the servers because everything takes effort, time and choices.
Nothing is gained from a game perspective by removing attribs/learning implants as a whole, apart from removing choices and options. Especially not if that opens the door to hilarious combat implants which I'm sure will sell just fine and thus increasing plex sales. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
86
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 13:30:39 -
[572] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Leannor wrote:There's also the other economical factor. Edit: I'm not aware of anyone who's proposing removing implants. Eliminating attributes would require removing attribute bonuses on implants, of course, but possibly replaced by some other bonus of some kind.
Hmm, then my options above work. I have no love for the Attributes, other than sentimentality. Especially the lock in etc.
But removing implants - would be a bad idea imo. Removing the ability to enhance skill training at some risk and/or cost - also bad imo.
Removing Attributes, and replacing that with skill specific (or, hell, even 'skill type' specific) SP boosters .. now there's an idea.
Adjusting JC'ing so that's it's possible to 'effectively' have an offline clone and an online clone, ... that's useful.
:)
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Mathias Raholan
Lezaruss Industrial Systems Intrepid Crossing
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 13:32:21 -
[573] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: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. I agree on this, it is no reason at all to have people locked in to min/max attributes. Let people train skills in the order they fancy without penalty. We already had the original attribute system before remaps and it was a royal pain for everyone not born Achura. Remove the attributes and give everyone a flat SP/h speed and be done with it, it is long overdue. The training will still be full of consequences as nothing stops you from maxing out the wrong ship/weapon system. Just that you finally can mix shield and missile skills in your skill queue without feeling bad that you are doing half the training suboptimally.
There is a flat SP gain and that is the one you get unimplanted. Characters today start with all the same attribute points as opposed to before when we had to see which race and bloodline we thought matched the most. Implants aren't the bad guys and neither are attributes. The only way you can possibly be trained "suboptimally" in any scenario is not completing the skill training or not using the the actual skill/mechanics you are training for. Those +3s and +4s aren't that expensive or hard to figure outand neither is skill hardwiring |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
707
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 13:33:31 -
[574] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Eliminating attributes would require removing attribute bonuses on implants, of course, but possibly replaced by some other bonus of some kind.
The obvious is to replace the attribute increases with a flat % speed increase within certain skill categories. Most categories use the same Primary/Secondary (with the occasional exception), so say Attributes get binned, turn the Perception Implants in to Implants that increase training speed in the categories that used to have Perception as the main attribute.
|
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
125
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 13:48:06 -
[575] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:1) Most new players learn about the full impact of the attribute system very late... That's why you chose to remove the feature, rather than properly explain that feature for the new players. I've heard a story of a new player who undocked in his shiny rookie ship and stated his journey towards the unknown. He saw a stargate and firmly intended to explore it and what was beyond. Unfortunately, he didnt know that his ship was able to make warps, thus aligned to the gate at full speed and waited. He waited till downtime. On a second day he logged in and waited some more. Unsatisfied with the little progress he had, he logged off and never logged in again. Now that you've heard that story too - are you ready to consider removing warp mechanics and collapse solar systems accordingly? IIRC, in recent games of "X" series ("X3: Reunion" for example) developers chose this exact model, so it could be a good idea for EVE too.
CCP Darwin wrote: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. Are you sure? Skill que is not an obstacle in front of playing the game. This is the part of the game. One of the game features. And to be honest, anticipation of flying a ship (in many cases) gives you a whole lot more positive emotions than actually flying that ship. Titans being the ultimate example, but even exhumers - which are expensive and damn skill intensive - are just the same T1 barges, but with 30% more shield, 10% more cargo and 3% more yield.
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
193
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 13:49:44 -
[576] - Quote
remove remap.
give a new attirbute bonus slot. (only bonus implants can be fit in this slot)
create new bonus implants bpo's with 3% 4% 5% 6% increase to training time on all attributes.
implants lasts for 3 months, cannot be removed once fit.
they die with pod deaths.
cost of implants bpo reflected by level of bonus given.
makes it easy to understand and gives us some new content to make isk from.
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
86
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 13:52:48 -
[577] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:remove remap.
give a new attirbute bonus slot. (only bonus implants can be fit in this slot)
create new bonus implants bpo's with 3% 4% 5% 6% increase to training time on all attributes.
implants lasts for 3 months, cannot be removed once fit.
they die with pod deaths.
cost of implants bpo reflected by level of bonus given.
makes it easy to understand and gives us some new content to make isk from.
this, but remove attributes totally. just 'skill boost' slot.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
913
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 13:55:48 -
[578] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:1) Most new players learn about the full impact of the attribute system very late... That's why you chose to remove the feature, rather than properly explain that feature for the new players. If it weren't for (2), a better presentation of the feature might be a way to deal with (1) However...
Quote:CCP Darwin wrote: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. Are you sure?
Yes, I'm pretty sure that a brand-new player who plays optimally from day 1 by mapping for and focusing heavily on support skills is probably not having much fun, because they're not training skills that let them do new things (which is how you explore the game as a new player.)
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium
189
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 14:00:08 -
[579] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Noting one more time that I'm not a game designer and not on the team considering these changes, just participating in the conversation. :) Gregor Parud wrote:No, everyone makes choices, risk assessments and compromises. 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.
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.
CCP RedDawn: Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty.
CCP Goliath: I often believe that the best way to get something done is to shout at the person trying to help you. http://goo.gl/PKGDP
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1327
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 14:44:36 -
[580] - Quote
There's a pretty simple way to go about this.
Remove basic learning implants; leave pirate implant sets. Shift all skill hardwirings up five slots to 1-5, where they would now occupy the same slots as pirate implant sets do. Leave slot 6 available for pirate omegas and gang bonus mindlinks.
Then, remove attributes entirely. Retool the SP gain formula to work as if every attribute was 32 (max remap with +5s.)
Boom, I fixed skill training. Yes, it would require you to choose between pirate implants and skill hardwirings; this is a good thing.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Sven Viko VIkolander
Friends and Feminists
323
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 15:22:26 -
[581] - Quote
All of the arguments people are making in favor of attributes are the same vacuous arguments made in favor of learning skills back in the day. Virtually no one thinks learning skills were good for the game, and so, for the same reasons, you should not think attributes are good for the game.
All of the same reasoning for defending attributes was used to defend the terrible mechanic that was learning skills: it adds "choices," it adds "risk" by punishing people for making bad choices, it is a "slippery slope toward making EVE easier," etc. None of these are true, and they also involve a flawed understanding of what real choices and risk involve in EVE. |
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
93
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 15:31:43 -
[582] - Quote
Just give every player every ability at 5 then everyone can be on equal footing. No consequences.
But then the cost of ships would be prohibitive to someone.
Then lets make every ship free.
Then everyone can be consequence and risk free and space ships can be blown up and everyone can brag about the killmails. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
89
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 15:31:48 -
[583] - Quote
Sven Viko VIkolander wrote:All of the arguments people are making in favor of attributes are the same vacuous arguments made in favor of learning skills back in the day. Virtually no one thinks learning skills were good for the game, and so, for the same reasons, you should not think attributes are good for the game.
All of the same reasoning for defending attributes was used to defend the terrible mechanic that was learning skills: it adds "choices," it adds "risk" by punishing people for making bad choices, it is a "slippery slope toward making EVE easier," etc. None of these are true, and they also involve a flawed understanding of what real choices and risk involve in EVE.
well, at the very least, the slippery slope is, logically, proven correct. First the skills, now the attributes, ... then ... and then... etc ... slope . ;)
but, if I'm reading this thread correctly. It's turned into a 'yeah, lets get rid of attributes, they're pointless, but lets not get rid of implants and a SP implant booster of some kind'.
Which, is a little different to whatyou're saying above, and in agreement with most of it.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
176
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 16:48:36 -
[584] - Quote
Makari Aeron wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Noting one more time that I'm not a game designer and not on the team considering these changes, just participating in the conversation. :) Gregor Parud wrote:No, everyone makes choices, risk assessments and compromises. 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. 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.
Don't think as training with a balanced attributes as a penalty but as a the standard and a focused remap is the bonus one gets for focusing on one area. |
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
167
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 17:15:47 -
[585] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Don't think as training with a balanced attributes as a penalty but as a the standard and a focused remap is the bonus one gets for focusing on one area. Except focused is the standard and has been since the remaps were introduced. Balanced is for those that don't mind falling behind.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
234
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 17:25:34 -
[586] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Lady Rift wrote:Don't think as training with a balanced attributes as a penalty but as a the standard and a focused remap is the bonus one gets for focusing on one area. Except focused is the standard and has been since the remaps were introduced. Balanced is for those that don't mind falling behind. I think Balanced is by far the more common, at least early on. Focused is for people with long term plans.
Also, I get what CCP is saying, but, we get THREE Remaps when we star a new char. For that first year we can quickly change gears. So I can't say I agree that it "forces" anyone to remap and then train skills sub-optimally. |
Sinigr Shadowsong
Monkey Attack Squad Goonswarm Federation
130
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 18:17:19 -
[587] - Quote
Learning implants are actually is not a very good game mechanic. They might appear to be a good for the game on the first look though. Here's the main problems with them gathered from my personal experience:
1. New players do not understand how they work. As Cybernetics is not available initially, a true newbie has no idea how important they are in the long run. And if said newbie did not start via recruit-a-friend program then this person won't even have money to afford +3 set after tutorial (+2 at best). Coupled with neural remap limitation it can slow down progression for a newbie by a very large margin.
2. Learning implants highly reduce willingness to engage in PvP activity. When I only started to play Eve implants +4 were the main reason not to step my foot into 0.0. After losing few sets +3 it was very painful to replace. Nowadays I use them here and there and it doesn't stop me from combat but reduces willingness to use certain shiptypes: Interdictor is a suicide most of the time, who wants to lose implants in his own bubble?
3. Learning implants lower usage of Hardwirings. When you already spent a lot on your pod, you do not want to make this loss-mail even shinier. Carrying all these implants around and keeping a stockpile in case of loses already adds hassle.
However Implants have their own good sides that somehow justify their presence: they take away LP and some ISK from the game when purchased and, unlike ships and modules, cannot be re-used on other character. Not sure how big of impact it has on the economy as a whole, but I doubt it's an unsolvable problem overall. |
Sinigr Shadowsong
Monkey Attack Squad Goonswarm Federation
130
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 18:22:13 -
[588] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote: Also, I get what CCP is saying, but, we get THREE Remaps when we star a new char. For that first year we can quickly change gears. So I can't say I agree that it "forces" anyone to remap and then train skills sub-optimally.
New players do not know what is "balanced". They do not understand yet how to utilize these 3 remaps and may irreversibly waste them on their first month of play to accelerate getting into first BS or something like that. This system is more beneficial for vets creating another account and planning remaps ahead of the road to maximize training speed. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
193
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 18:36:53 -
[589] - Quote
Leannor wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:remove remap.
give a new attirbute bonus slot. (only bonus implants can be fit in this slot)
create new bonus implants bpo's with 3% 4% 5% 6% increase to training time on all attributes.
implants lasts for 3 months, cannot be removed once fit.
they die with pod deaths.
cost of implants bpo reflected by level of bonus given.
makes it easy to understand and gives us some new content to make isk from.
this, but remove attributes totally. just 'skill boost' slot.
well if attributes where all the same level for all why need them ? agreed.
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
234
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 18:53:27 -
[590] - Quote
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:Sniper Smith wrote: Also, I get what CCP is saying, but, we get THREE Remaps when we star a new char. For that first year we can quickly change gears. So I can't say I agree that it "forces" anyone to remap and then train skills sub-optimally.
New players do not know what is "balanced". They do not understand yet how to utilize these 3 remaps and may irreversibly waste them on their first month of play to accelerate getting into first BS or something like that. This system is more beneficial for vets creating another account and planning remaps ahead of the road to maximize training speed. As someone who has most of my accounts in the Rookie Corps.. news players tend not to use the remaps at all. Even when they ask about them. Every now and then you see someone who's blown one, but most just stick with the standard map for the beginning.
I'm sure if CCP wanted to they could give us some numbers, average maps for age, remaps used and when, etc.
Now don't get me wrong, Eve's explanation of HOW remaps and all that stuff works is abysmal at best in game. Not that I'm sure there's any easy way to do so. But this is the complexity I DON'T want removed from Eve.
I learned how to do this stuff, learned what it meant, made skill plans to take advantage of my yearly remap, and my Bonus. People who don't shouldn't get the same advantage. Does that mean some start slow? Sure. But why is that a bad thing? Why does everyone need to be equal.. Maybe rather than giving us SP CCP can just decide what skills we should learn? How we should fit the ships? How we should play.. No. It's choices. It's up to individuals to take the initiative to learn, and if not, then they will lag behind. It's part of the Complexity that made me want to try Eve, and made me stick around. |
|
Memphis Baas
126
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 19:26:12 -
[591] - Quote
We can argue back and forth, but none of us have any actual data to back up the "facts" that keep being mentioned:
- newbies don't use remaps - newbies do use remaps - newbies don't understand remaps - the average attribute usage is a "balanced" remap - the average attribute usage is a "focused" remap - having implants discourages PVP - having implants doesn't matter - equal numbers of people pewpew with or without implants - jump clones are being used for quick bursts of PVP then back to training - jump clones are only being used for travel - most people would prefer to keep implants - most people would prefer to get rid of implants
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
372
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 19:56:30 -
[592] - Quote
Removing learning implants and granting the full "max" possible SP/Hour for all skills would be the best for the game overall.
Learning implants can be replaced with additional types of hardwiring/pirate/Jovian?/Sleeper? implants that have different effects.
A new player can completely get hosed by not understanding the remap process and picking a bad (charisma?) remap first. Players may have to wait months to try out new ships/modules that come out simply because their remap is horrible for that item.
Maintaining base training times for skills is all around a good thing- however, punishing players for trying to crosstrain against their current remap is no longer viable in Eve as it stands today.
Eve used to have a place for highly specialized characters that were "locked in" to specific professions. However, the market is saturated with so many thousands of characters for sale with different specializations that it does not make sense to retain the current system as it is. This does not mean there should be a Plex/Aurum for SP system, as that would be on the same level of dumb as walking in stations.
The only players that are against removing learning implants are those that are either:
a) in the implant markets
or
b) butt hurt pubbies that feel like everyone should have to go through what they went through when they started the game
or
c) short-sighted "thinker" types that believe that keeping implants is an additional risk or somehow good for the game
Those are literally the only three options, and they are all bad.
In before someone tries to again provide a dumb argument that implants are a risk assessment etc etc- people that are stuck in +5s (or even +4s) become risk averse to the point where they will generally not go out and expose themselves. Removing that "mandatory" risk assessment means that more people will generally be more active and exposed in space, or replace that isk with other implants that literally only work if they're undocked. |
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 20:06:13 -
[593] - Quote
Living in a noob corp, better than removing implants or other nonsnese, if you want encourage PVP, then I suggest make it easier to make Jumpclones. In CAS we have people with Rorq's that regularly hold "Jumpclone Sessions" for the newbies (and anyone else) who want to make one. Lots of those people then use their new clone to go down to the CAS/CAStabouts base in Null and play, if only for a little while.
If we want to accept the premis that says implants make people not want to PVP, then make it easier for them to get clones without implants. Lower the standings needed to get them, or make it so your "School" stations will always give you one.. hell make getting one part of the training missions. If you have one clone, you're gonna use implants in it, and not want to lose it. If you can get more, you're more likely to leave one free for PvP (IF your are interested in PvP.. obviously people that don't want to, won't.)
It takes a fair it of time to get a corp standing to 8 for your own JC Creation.. Many won't trust going into low/null to a Rorq or an outpost just to make them.. for sure not if their current clone is expensive.
Hell, my 'holy grail' would be for CCP to add a "clean clone", one that can't have implants, and have it's creation be during the training missions. You'd learn how to make it from a cap in deadspace, learn the whole procedure for jumping into one, etc. Then you'd be left with a clone that can't use implants, perfect for PvP. I doubt CCP would ever do it, but I think it would be a great addition. That way all new players would always have a clone ready to go. If they want to PbP then there it is, they have the original good clone that can put whatever they want in, and they have their clean one. If they don't want to PvP, then they can never look at it again. Done. |
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
919
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 20:52:49 -
[594] - Quote
Solhild wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Solhild wrote:This opens the door to an annual skill remap which means that players could deconstruct unwanted skills and load them into a new area ready for another year invested in the game. That would definitely be an improvement. Gimme, gimme, gimme We are still arguing whether CCP give you an inch or a yard, and your already staking your claim on a mile. Truly, some people are never satisfied. Not really sure what's wrong with you. I'm simply suggesting an opportunity to remove choice from the game. Ftfy.
Remove insurance.
This thread is the reason, why CCP should stop advertising any aspect of EVE PvE
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1074
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 21:13:55 -
[595] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:Removing learning implants and granting the full "max" possible SP/Hour for all skills would be the best for the game overall me.
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
372
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 21:51:42 -
[596] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Mr Omniblivion wrote:Removing learning implants and granting the full "max" possible SP/Hour for all skills would be the best for the game overall me.
All of your posts in this thread are dumb, you should stop, really. If you think I manually train new characters I want to play with instead of just buying them on the forums,
Since that previous comment will get ISD'd, I'm copypasting something I wrote on SA:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:New players get hosed as attributes are severely limiting for a newer player, and older players can just purchase a character if they want to move to a completely new specialization.
Basically, a new player to eve doesn't sit down and say "Hmm, I am going to specialize in Int/Mem because I expect to not actually fly my ship for a month while I train these support skills". A new player will just start training skills, likely what his corp tells him to train, and either Not Remap or Remap to an awful layout by accident, not knowing otherwise.
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. |
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
62
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 22:17:17 -
[597] - Quote
Let's table the remapping discussion for a bit. Surely the learning implants are a tad less contentious?
You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
|
Mathias Raholan
Lezaruss Industrial Systems Intrepid Crossing
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 22:18:49 -
[598] - Quote
I keep reading "New players won't understand... " a lot in this topic. While I'm all for doing stuff to retain people and make some things more simple, but for the love of god let them figure something out over time. I didn't know a lot my first days, neither did a majority of players. This is like some weird helicopter parenting.
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
167
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 22:30:01 -
[599] - Quote
Mathias Raholan wrote:I keep reading "New players won't understand... " a lot in this topic. While I'm all for doing stuff to retain people and make some things more simple, but for the love of god let them figure something out over time. I didn't know a lot my first days, neither did a majority of players. This is like some weird helicopter parenting.
The game will still remain nice and complex long after the learning attributes are gone. You still need to plan what skills to train, just that you finally can train them in a logical order without any penalty. You will still need to figure out what ship to fly and how to fit it. You will still need to figure out how to properly fly said fit.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Reiisha
Dawn of Transcendence
699
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 22:42:22 -
[600] - Quote
Attributes are a left over of an archaic game design idea, customization for the sake of customization.
The thing is, they worked when you couldn't change them! Remapping took away the point they had though (customization had been replaced with basically an annoying game mechanic).
Why not remove attributes and introduce something else to give players the chance to customize their characters beyond skills and their looks? Whatever that may be.
If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...
|
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
374
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 22:44:24 -
[601] - Quote
Mathias Raholan wrote:I keep reading "New players won't understand... " a lot in this topic. While I'm all for doing stuff to retain people and make some things more simple, but for the love of god let them figure something out over time. I didn't know a lot my first days, neither did a majority of players. This is like some weird helicopter parenting.
I don't even...
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
374
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 22:48:53 -
[602] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:Let's table the remapping discussion for a bit. Surely the learning implants are a tad less contentious?
The remapping/Attribute implants are hand-in-hand. Remapping is just another permanent form of attribute enhancer.
Solution
-Remove attributes affecting SP/hour. Give everyone the max SP/Hour for whatever skill
-Change attributes to give a small bonus to the actual skills that utilize them, with the same Primary/Secondary classifications
-Keep attribute implants in the game
Problem solved |
Memphis Baas
128
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 23:00:38 -
[603] - Quote
So if someone remaps to Per Wil then they get, say:
- 2% bonus to gunnery, missiles, drones (in effect 2-6% DPS bonus from the guns) - 2% bonus to whatever the ship bonuses are (typically DPS, sometimes ewar range, resists, or the like)
And if they remap Int Mem then they get, say:
- 2% bonus to armor, shields, capacitor, targeting, etc (support skills) - 2% bonus to refining, manufacturing, mining
Something like that?
It would be somewhat difficult to balance, mostly because ship bonuses are typically support type bonuses, so the Int/Mem mapping seems to have more bonuses than the Per/Wil mapping would give. I'm also guessing that they may prefer to introduce 2% implants to give the bonuses, rather than keeping, and complicating, the attribute programming. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1077
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 23:48:46 -
[604] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote: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.
If you ask those newbies "would you want a new character with 50 mil skill points, 20 bil isk and a free Nyx" they'll also answer positively so that doesn't mean much. People can train ships just fine with a normal remap or basic, if any, implants.
Just because clown fleets with monkeys who aren't potty trained yet get blown up a lot doesn't mean we have to do away with those options. It just means that , perhaps, one should aim less at quantity and more at quality. Removing implants favours the "lol fleets" approach, more blobbing. It's obvious why you prefer that. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29753
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 02:13:21 -
[605] - Quote
I'm wondering what CCP Karkur meant in the o7 show (two episodes ago), when she said removing medical clones allowed her to do something she can't talk about.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1907
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 02:50:08 -
[606] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I'm wondering what CCP Karkur meant in the o7 show (two episodes ago), when she said removing medical clones allowed her to do something she can't talk about. We could tell you, but we can't talk about it. |
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
63
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 03:36:36 -
[607] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I'm wondering what CCP Karkur meant in the o7 show (two episodes ago), when she said removing medical clones allowed her to do something she can't talk about.
Some ideas: More frequent clone jumps Jumps into Legion/Valkyrie clones Using NPCs to commonly pod capsuleers Rebalancing implants New type of clone insurance Some kind of special ships/modules [*]
You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
238
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 04:37:22 -
[608] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I'm wondering what CCP Karkur meant in the o7 show (two episodes ago), when she said removing medical clones allowed her to do something she can't talk about. My bet is it's NPC's killing Pod's. It's being seriously talked about.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1908
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 04:41:42 -
[609] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote: My bet is it's NPC's killing Pod's. It's being seriously talked about.
They already are. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
710
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 08:49:58 -
[610] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote: The remapping/Attribute implants are hand-in-hand. Remapping is just another permanent form of attribute enhancer.
Not really. Sure, Attribute Implants effect attributes now, but a simple rework can keep their function whilst removing the co-dependence that currently exists. Seriously, what would be the problem with:
Me wrote:The obvious is to replace the attribute increases with a flat % speed increase within certain skill categories. Most categories use the same Primary/Secondary (with the occasional exception), so say Attributes get binned, turn the Perception Implants in to Implants that increase training speed in the categories that used to have Perception as the main attribute.
Its hardly difficult to understand for newbies - want to train Spaceship Command skills faster, plug in a Spaceship Command Learning Implant. The only thing "wrong" with it, is it is maintaining its function, which is only wrong for people who want their +5's for free with no drawback. |
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
710
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 09:05:55 -
[611] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:So if someone remaps to Per Wil then they get, say:
- 2% bonus to gunnery, missiles, drones (in effect 2-6% DPS bonus from the guns) - 2% bonus to whatever the ship bonuses are (typically DPS, sometimes ewar range, resists, or the like)
And if they remap Int Mem then they get, say:
- 2% bonus to armor, shields, capacitor, targeting, etc (support skills) - 2% bonus to refining, manufacturing, mining
Something like that?
It would be somewhat difficult to balance, mostly because ship bonuses are typically support type bonuses, so the Int/Mem mapping seems to have more bonuses than the Per/Wil mapping would give. I'm also guessing that they may prefer to introduce 2% implants to give the bonuses, rather than keeping, and complicating, the attribute programming.
Wow, this is a new high on the greed-scale - free levels 6 and 7 across whole skill categories?
Thought experiment time. What would you expect an Implant to cost that gave gave a pilot 6% Rate of Fire (Gunnery and Rapid Firing), 7% Damage (Relevant Turret, Relevant Specialisation and Surgical Strike), 5% Tracking Speed (Motion Prediction), 5% Optimal Range (Sharpshooter), and 5% Falloff (Trajectory Analysis)? This is everything you would get for a +1 to skills in the Gunnery Category. Lets forget for a moment that Gunnery shares the attribute "set" with the Missile and Spaceship Command Groups (ok, Gunnery and Missiles is unlikely to benefit side-by-side, but those extra levels in every Ship Bonus would be neat too). Even if the "attribute bonus" was not a "true" skill level, the fact three skills add to Damage (discounting any ship skill bonuses) and two to Rate of Fire would make even the +1 bonus a massive increase in performance to an Implant wearer, well above anything the current Sets or Hardwirings provide. We are talking Billions for these Implants.
And this is for the benefit of new players?
|
Celestia Via
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance
39
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 09:50:59 -
[612] - Quote
having caugth this discussion late, its my simple minded opinion that what currently applies, paying a fixed amount for a fixed skill bonus, is... redundant. It can be removed completely with only result, us having less things to worry about when we "wake up" on medical clone and new players being abit less baffled in a game thats already too much to take in at first.
There's no place like space
|
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
47143
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 11:00:04 -
[613] - Quote
Sharise Dragonstar wrote:Although I don't personally like implants I agree with Celgar that it would be a bad implamentation. The medical clone change was fine. Eve needs risk to be Eve else it becomes just another run of the mill MMO.
Agree 100%.
Removing attributes and implants isn't going to increase the amount of people doing PvP. All it does is remove player choice and risk from the game.
As a paying customer I gotta say I'm really getting tired of CCP constantly fecking up this game. This game is supposed to be a harsh tough love type of game, not 'Hold my hand and sing Kumbaya' crap.
If CCP want's to 'Level The Playing Field' for everyone, then they need to remove all Implants and ISK, make all modules, ships, POS's, etc, freely available to everyone, both old and new player alike.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1050
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 11:05:01 -
[614] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:Rain6637 wrote:I'm wondering what CCP Karkur meant in the o7 show (two episodes ago), when she said removing medical clones allowed her to do something she can't talk about. Some ideas: More frequent clone jumps Jumps into Legion/Valkyrie clones Using NPCs to commonly pod capsuleers Rebalancing implants New type of clone insurance Some kind of special ships/modules No to more frequent jump clones. There used enough the way they currently are. Considered clone insurance, but people would mess with the market rates on implants.
Yaay!!!!
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29765
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 13:10:44 -
[615] - Quote
It would be super cool to pod jump into Valkyrie or Legion clones, but NPC pod killing makes more sense.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
100
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 13:15:43 -
[616] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:It would be super cool to pod jump into Valkyrie or Legion clones, but NPC pod killing makes more sense.
Whole heartidly support pod killing by NPC. Only in a few scenarios though.
Standing 'to' a Faction / corp is terrible, and your sec status is negative. Watch out doing missions if you loose it.
You should have a fair chance to run and hide like anyother PVP (unlike concord who can own your a.ss). but a pod, hanging in 1.0 space with ~ -10, should be found by concord and killed if caught.
Anyone with positive standing is always safe from NPC podding, regardless.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29765
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 13:18:05 -
[617] - Quote
Yeah, it's a fun change. Also welcomed for the removal of clone costs. It was getting rather severe for me.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
101
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 13:24:20 -
[618] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote: The attribute system is antiquated, based on a time when the concept of a mmo was based on d&d. The attributes hinder gameplay, and make people feel weaker because they can't afford the training buffs the veterans have.
actually ... just thought of this. The jealousy argument against vets is not really sound. Don't forget vets are already suffering from the lvl5 skill syndrome. Skill is designed to get massively slower for vets, to enable new players to catch up faster anyway, so the vets have got a big disadvantage there. Sure, points increase, but skill progression doesn't. If all levels of skill were equal in time, then yes, the implant bias would be obviously wrong. but, what the implanst do, to those that can afford/ want the risk etc... is just give a little boost in the level 5 ...(and there 'may' be some new skills that get caught up int it.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29765
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 13:25:48 -
[619] - Quote
Don't mind him, he's got cabin fever after being cooped up in that wormhole of his.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Intar Medris
Viziam Amarr Empire
221
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 14:08:24 -
[620] - Quote
Learning implants should have went the way of Dodo along with the learning skills when they were removed. To me it would just be getting rid of dead weight not dumbing down the game.
I try to be nice and mind my business just shooting lasers at rocks. There is just way too many asshats in New Eden for that to happen.
|
|
Memphis Baas
134
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 14:17:23 -
[621] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Wow, this is a new high on the greed-scale - free levels 6 and 7 across whole skill categories?
Relax, I wasn't sure what you were suggesting, and was trying to clarify, with fake numbers.
What I actually meant was IF someone remaps to max Per Wil and with +5 attribute implants, they get a total of 2%, compared to the balanced remap and no attribute implants. You were talking about getting a bonus from remapping, not about CCP introducing extra implants, and I wanted to express that the Int/Mem remap may be preferred across the board because it affects more skills.
If they introduce skill implants, I really doubt they will have across-the-board bonuses like that. More likely each implant will be matched to a skill.
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
375
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 19:55:57 -
[622] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:Sharise Dragonstar wrote:Although I don't personally like implants I agree with Celgar that it would be a bad implamentation. The medical clone change was fine. Eve needs risk to be Eve else it becomes just another run of the mill MMO.
Agree 100%. Removing attributes and implants isn't going to increase the amount of people doing PvP. All it does is remove player choice and risk from the game. As a paying customer I gotta say I'm really getting tired of CCP constantly fecking up this game. This game is supposed to be a harsh tough love type of game, not 'Hold my hand and sing Kumbaya' crap. If CCP want's to 'Level The Playing Field' for everyone, then they need to remove all Implants and ISK, make all modules, ships, POS's, etc, freely available to everyone, both old and new player alike. DMC
Sigh.
I 100% disagree with the above ideas. This is the false assumption when it comes to having to buy attribute implants.
We have hostile fleets roaming through Deklein on an hourly basis. Most of those hostile fleets are interceptors- If we want to fight them and be competitive, we generally would need to fly smaller ships to be able to brawl.
Most of us in Deklein have at least +4s or +5s installed in our clone. If we wanted to go brawl with those interceptors, we would probably be flying a ship that is several times less valuable than our clone. Why would we then go shoot at them if the High Risk of getting blown up would cost 5 times as much as the ship we lost, when the Zero Risk option is just to dock up when we see hostiles enter system?
It's not like there is an actual threat from these roamers except to people not paying attention. There is no incentive to actually stay and fight at all because the nature of their fleets means that they're roaming looking for easy kills. This means that in order for us to have fun, we'd have to risk a high amount of isk- the majority of which in our pod- just to be able to shoot them.
By removing the need for Attribute Implants, instead of docking up and waiting for hostiles to leave, we could actually go out and have fun shooting them in whatever ships without worrying about tens or hundreds of millions of ISK in our pods- just for learning skills faster.
More destruction = more consumption = better for eve as a whole.
People docking up because of their +5 learning implants does absolutely nothing but hurt the game. Saying "it's a risk blah blah blah" is a short sighted and ******** argument because very few people would actually give up the ability to train skills faster in order to participate in one-off PVP as the situation arises.
I have yet to see an actual argument with a logical reason why attribute implants should stay in the game. So far, they have only been "but it's a risk they have to take waaaah" "ccp you're turning this game into wow" "you're turning EVE into a run of the mill mmo" "but i had to do it so should they" etc etc.
All of these arguments are literally ******** because they are based on unfounded thoughts that show complete lack of knowledge about how behavioral mechanics in Eve actually work. Taking learning implants out means that there is less value to a ship and pod when a pilot evaluates whether or not to go out and shoot someone. If someone is wearing +5's they generally won't undock in a frigate or interceptor or even a cruiser and go shoot people. Thus, attribute implants actually reduce the amount of PVP and things destroyed in the game because of an inflated risk evaluation.
Don't get me wrong, something will need to be added into LP stores to make up for the loss of Attribute Implants (Geckos? haha). |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
177
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 23:48:48 -
[623] - Quote
There has been as little to support their removal as there has been to keep them. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29790
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 23:53:16 -
[624] - Quote
Make in-station clone jumps zero cooldown. Problem solved, everyone can use their +5 sets and PVP sets.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
cpu939
Eternal Darkness. Get Off My Lawn
82
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 01:29:44 -
[625] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:We can argue back and forth, but none of us have any actual data to back up the "facts" that keep being mentioned:
- newbies don't use remaps - newbies do use remaps - newbies don't understand remaps - the average attribute usage is a "balanced" remap - the average attribute usage is a "focused" remap - having implants discourages PVP - having implants doesn't matter - equal numbers of people pewpew with or without implants - jump clones are being used for quick bursts of PVP then back to training - jump clones are only being used for travel
these are the sort of question we should look at in regards to this issues maybe CCP Darwin can provide information by mining the data
1 - how many trail accounts not linked to an active account are remaped towards skilling 2 - of the player base how many have the attreibutes set as balanced 3 - how often are players loosing implants and what type of implant skills vs hardwires 4 - how often are people jc to training clones |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
710
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 09:51:43 -
[626] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote: We have hostile fleets roaming through Deklein on an hourly basis. Most of those hostile fleets are interceptors- If we want to fight them and be competitive, we generally would need to fly smaller ships to be able to brawl.
Most of us in Deklein have at least +4s or +5s installed in our clone. If we wanted to go brawl with those interceptors, we would probably be flying a ship that is several times less valuable than our clone. Why would we then go shoot at them if the High Risk of getting blown up would cost 5 times as much as the ship we lost, when the Zero Risk option is just to dock up when we see hostiles enter system?
It's not like there is an actual threat from these roamers except to people not paying attention. There is no incentive to actually stay and fight at all because the nature of their fleets means that they're roaming looking for easy kills. This means that in order for us to have fun, we'd have to risk a high amount of isk- the majority of which in our pod- just to be able to shoot them.
By removing the need for Attribute Implants, instead of docking up and waiting for hostiles to leave, we could actually go out and have fun shooting them in whatever ships without worrying about tens or hundreds of millions of ISK in our pods- just for learning skills faster.
People don't chase Interceptor fleets because they are afraid of losing Implants, they don't chase Interceptor fleets because its a fundamental waste of time, because Interceptor fleets are functionally uncatchable, and aren't designed to engage in any kind of fight, so aren't going to stick around for anything that has even the slightest chance of killing one. I'm not getting out of bed to spend an hour of my life running in circles to achieve sod-all, regardless of what Implant is in my head or not. In fact, chasing an Interceptor fleet is the one time you can guarantee your Implants are safe, since there isn't going to be a fight anyway. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
103
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 10:07:58 -
[627] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Mr Omniblivion wrote: We have hostile fleets roaming through Deklein on an hourly basis. Most of those hostile fleets are interceptors- If we want to fight them and be competitive, we generally would need to fly smaller ships to be able to brawl.
Most of us in Deklein have at least +4s or +5s installed in our clone. If we wanted to go brawl with those interceptors, we would probably be flying a ship that is several times less valuable than our clone. Why would we then go shoot at them if the High Risk of getting blown up would cost 5 times as much as the ship we lost, when the Zero Risk option is just to dock up when we see hostiles enter system?
It's not like there is an actual threat from these roamers except to people not paying attention. There is no incentive to actually stay and fight at all because the nature of their fleets means that they're roaming looking for easy kills. This means that in order for us to have fun, we'd have to risk a high amount of isk- the majority of which in our pod- just to be able to shoot them.
By removing the need for Attribute Implants, instead of docking up and waiting for hostiles to leave, we could actually go out and have fun shooting them in whatever ships without worrying about tens or hundreds of millions of ISK in our pods- just for learning skills faster.
People don't chase Interceptor fleets because they are afraid of losing Implants, they don't chase Interceptor fleets because its a fundamental waste of time, because Interceptor fleets are functionally uncatchable, and aren't designed to engage in any kind of fight, so aren't going to stick around for anything that has even the slightest chance of killing one. I'm not getting out of bed to spend an hour of my life running in circles to achieve sod-all, regardless of what Implant is in my head or not. In fact, chasing an Interceptor fleet is the one time you can guarantee your Implants are safe, since there isn't going to be a fight anyway.
yes, i was going to type a more detailed rationale, but actually, "yes" says it all.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Sir Substance
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
674
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 11:58:23 -
[628] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote: Most of us in Deklein have at least +4s or +5s installed in our clone. If we wanted to go brawl with those interceptors, we would probably be flying a ship that is several times less valuable than our clone. Why would we then go shoot at them if the High Risk of getting blown up would cost 5 times as much as the ship we lost, when the Zero Risk option is just to dock up when we see hostiles enter system?
>In Deklein >15 different stations with JC rights to choose from >Jump clone skills now a core part of recommended skills that everyone is requested to train for deployments >Could have half a dozen blank clones within two jumps of YA0 for just this reason >Still doesn't join home defence fleets
Implants are not why you aren't chasing down those inties. It's ok to not chase down inties, but let's not pretend you're concerned about implants.
The beatings will continue until posting improves. -Magnus Cortex
Official Eve Online changelist: Togglable PvP. - Jordanna Bauer
|
Tyrendian Biohazard
Ubiquitous Hurt
342
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 13:55:59 -
[629] - Quote
After a lot of discussions with friends concerning the current setup and the advantages/disadvantages to it, I can see the argument for a change. Rather than argue for keeping the current system, or hammer one specific point over and over again, IGÇÖd like to state a few things that came up in conversation that are liked and I feel should be considered for any future changes. Note: these points may have been brought up before, or arguments made against. IGÇÖve had a hard time keeping up with the thread and just feel that a basic contribution is better than none. I donGÇÖt intend to argue points back and forth for pages on end.
- Flexibility to train towards specific goals quicker
There is mention that the attribute system both rewards, and hinders players in their training. While it does allow us to train a specific type of skill quickly, it ultimately is very limited due to remap timing, and the attributes and can potentially hinder a long term training regiment because of prerequisites, or that skills necessary to complete their goals are too far spread out (attribute wise). However, the flexibility to train some skills quicker is a great boost, especially to new players who choose a goal and want enjoy their reward of reaching it. Not only accomplishing their training should be rewarding, but putting thought, research, and planning into setting your goals should be rewarded.
- Skills should be grouped appropriately, but separated enough to provide a unique experience and individuality to a character
Skills are one of the major aspects that make characters unique. Not only in the abilities they can offer to a corporation, but also in other areas such as the character bazaar. Cross training into skill groups should help in specific careers. Example, training into scanning skills would help a Data/Relic Explorer, but also benefit a DED site runner, someone who mines gas sites, or a combat scanner. However, chances are a person that does one of those things, doesnGÇÖt necessarily do the others and helps makes the character as unique as the person that is controlling it.
- A system that both persists through death of a clone, as well as one that is destroyed on the death of a clone
Having a system that contributes based on both time and money is nice for all players in the game. For those that have planned out their skill training, but donGÇÖt have money to drop on implants, a remap system is a great benefit to hitting their goals quicker (and rewarding for putting the effort into planning), while the implant system is great for those that want to remain flexible (flat attribute map) but donGÇÖt mind dropping money on increasing their training. Additionally, both provide a risk versus reward mechanic to the player. You can risk taking out a +5 clone and losing it in a PvP situation, but ultimately will train faster if you survive. On the other side, a heavily focused mapped player is rewarded by quicker training in areas they want, but donGÇÖt have the flexibility to train other areas.
- A training system should support multiple GÇ£typesGÇ¥ of training
From my point of view, there are three types of training that typically take place in EVE and the current system seems to work well for it:
Quote: A short term GÇ£bounce aroundGÇ¥ training A medium GÇ£good enoughGÇ¥ training A long term GÇ£max everythingGÇ¥ training
The GÇ£bounce aroundGÇ¥ trainers seems to be new players getting a feel for the game, or those who like to do a little bit of everything. If efficiency of a career were to be scaled from 1 to 5, they would be a 3. They see skills they need, or lack, and train them regardless of map. They donGÇÖt care about specialization and enjoy being well rounded.
The GÇ£good enoughGÇ¥ trainer likes to take specialization skills to almost max, but donGÇÖt want to spend 4 weeks of training on a 2% bonus. They tend to be more specialized, but like to be somewhat flexible. When asked to fly a HAC, they immediately hop in any one available and undock and are still effective.
The GÇ£max everythingGÇ¥ trainer wants the best capability to do the thing theyGÇÖve chosen. On the career scale they are a 6. They are the people that have perfect refining skills for everything, or max out large blaster specialization for that extra 2% damage for for their 10b isk incursion ship. They want to do be the best in a field.
My primary concern is the loss of choices. The attribute/implant system allows a lot of choices, and choices lead to gameplay experiences. Not only for the person doing the remap, but also the person sitting on station with a seboGÇÖd Thrasher about to destroy their +5 clone. I am not opposed to a rework of the system, provided that it allows the pilots to have options that our current system does, as well as a risk/reward factor that we love about EVE.
My twitch stream to help new players:
http://www.twitch.tv/biohazrd51
|
Morukk Nuamzzar
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
24
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 14:51:17 -
[630] - Quote
Little by little and EVE is slowly turning into Hello Kitty Online |
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29810
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 14:55:08 -
[631] - Quote
turning into? or is
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Thok'ra Brakis
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 15:58:25 -
[632] - Quote
Personally, I also think that skillpoints add little to the game besides making you feel like having to readjust them constantly. As for implants, I think they should stay. Skill learning speeds being baseline is fine for me because it allows to branch out at will, but being able to speed up certain things via implants is a good way of improving, optimizing and customizing your character.
However, I'm not a seasoned player, so I might see some things a little wrong. |
Wobblypops
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 20:06:39 -
[633] - Quote
Attribute implants have to go they're ******* stupid. Just let people play the damn game make all base attributes the same for everyone. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1574
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 20:09:33 -
[634] - Quote
Why is 6635 not beside 6636? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29825
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 00:59:33 -
[635] - Quote
Because by SP and born date, 7, 8, and 9 are the core of rainfleet. Seemed a more symmetrical arrangement.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
222
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 07:04:50 -
[636] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Make in-station clone jumps zero cooldown. Problem solved, everyone can use their +5 sets and PVP sets. Simple solutions are best solutions.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
Jishi Padecain
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 07:39:20 -
[637] - Quote
We really need a way to jump into clones in the same station without a cooldown. Even allow us to store several clones in a single station. Being able to hop in and out of clones with learning implants and into combat implants would be nice.
Want to move around a lot and be a mobile operation/fighter? Then you'll have to choose which implants you want to roll in.
Want to be able to swap clones more often and have more options? Then you'll have to settle into a smaller area of operations.
Just a quickly thought out idea. Whatever ends up happening with this whole thing though we need to retain the ability to make choices with each one having an upside and a downside. |
Kaely Tanniss
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
254
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 07:46:15 -
[638] - Quote
Wobblypops wrote:Attribute implants have to go they're ******* stupid. Just let people play the damn game make all base attributes the same for everyone.
Just because you don't like something or don't understand something doesn't make it stupid. Implants serve a purpose. They have benefits and drwbacks such as risk. If CCP keeps removing the risk factor of the game, it will lose the very core of what the majority of players play it for. If you're afraid to lose implants, don't fit them. Or grind you way to jc's and have an empty clone you can jump to. I, for one, like the implants. They make a charcter customizable and unique. If all chars are the same..what's the point. Eve is supposed to be complex. Eve is supposed to have risk at every turn. Eve is for those that can hack it..and not everyone can hack it. The biggest mistake, imo, that CCP can make is to change the game so much in an attept at a money grab, that they ruin what made it so great to begin with. Eve doesn't need to be "dumbed down"..players need to "smarten up".
If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
|
Memphis Baas
146
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 12:29:28 -
[639] - Quote
*snip* nevermind, sorry. |
Celestia Via
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 12:59:55 -
[640] - Quote
Thok'ra Brakis wrote:Personally, I also think that skillpoints add little to the game besides making you feel like having to readjust them constantly. As for implants, I think they should stay. Skill learning speeds being baseline is fine for me because it allows to branch out at will, but being able to speed up certain things via implants is a good way of improving, optimizing and customizing your character.
However, I'm not a seasoned player, so I might see some things a little wrong.
taking implants away does not necessarily mean you wont be able to speed up certain things in other ways, for example, having more skillpoints to distribute would be an easy workaround. And thats only to appease those who would feel cheated out of their extra points, I dont feel that way since actual learning speed is irrelevant, the point is in it being fair, ie the same for everyone. (same refers to the total pool of skillpoints, not actual learning speed, that would be against variety and customization)
learning implants are not really customization, they're just a one-way road of paying some isk to get a flat bonus, a mundane and sterile process everyone has to go through with every new clone.
Think of it this way : Skillpoints/day actually represent the game time you pay for. As it is now, the top learning implants cost a good deal of ISK, making them unavailable to newer players. I find this unfair, since people rich in ISK get more value for their real money (more SP/hour). And even that can be debated, since I myself for example, have bought the expensive ones but the clone that wears them hardly sees any use just because of its high value. My choice of course but i doubt anyone in their right mind would put a billion isk clone at (casual) risk.
Skill remaps actually are customization, they reflect the choices one makes of what skills to train and when, and how to better achieve their goals. I would support more remaps being available, one/year is very restricting.
There's no place like space
|
|
Sir Substance
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
678
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 13:40:45 -
[641] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Rain6637 wrote:Make in-station clone jumps zero cooldown. Problem solved, everyone can use their +5 sets and PVP sets. Simple solutions are best solutions. You can't have two JC's in the same station. If you try it by installing one JC, JC'ing away, flying back to the station and JCing to a third JC, the second JC will overwrite the first.
The beatings will continue until posting improves. -Magnus Cortex
Official Eve Online changelist: Togglable PvP. - Jordanna Bauer
|
Khan Wrenth
Hedion University Amarr Empire
103
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 13:51:44 -
[642] - Quote
Sir Substance wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Rain6637 wrote:Make in-station clone jumps zero cooldown. Problem solved, everyone can use their +5 sets and PVP sets. Simple solutions are best solutions. You can't have two JC's in the same station. If you try it by installing one JC, JC'ing away, flying back to the station and JCing to a third JC, the second JC will overwrite the first.
Perhaps we could make jump-cloning on-par with jump fatigue? As in, a sliding scale where the further you jump, the more fatigue you get before you can jump back? Within same star system = no fatigue, and from there, determine fatigue by number of jumps.
We could re-purpose the useless "informorph synchronizing" skill to provide a 5% per level reduction in the amount of jump clone fatigue you generate.
Frankly the hard rule of 24 hours seems needless and arbitrary to me, and that would alleviate a lot of problems that people have been bringing up.
HTFU.-á Adapt or die.-á Beware the falcon punch.
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
110
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 13:59:52 -
[643] - Quote
Sir Substance wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Rain6637 wrote:Make in-station clone jumps zero cooldown. Problem solved, everyone can use their +5 sets and PVP sets. Simple solutions are best solutions. You can't have two JC's in the same station. If you try it by installing one JC, JC'ing away, flying back to the station and JCing to a third JC, the second JC will overwrite the first.
pretty sure the implcation was to also enable in station jump cloning as well.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
127
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 16:26:24 -
[644] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:We have hostile fleets roaming through Deklein on an hourly basis. Most of those hostile fleets are interceptors- If we want to fight them and be competitive, we generally would need to fly smaller ships to be able to brawl. ... If we wanted to go brawl with those interceptors, we would probably be flying a ship that is several times less valuable than our clone. A couple of years ago most roaming fleets were battlecruisers. They were more expensive and far easier to catch. The risks were real. The stakes were high. The roams were fun.
I dont fly roams often now. Less destruction, less consumption, and stuff.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
224
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 16:36:06 -
[645] - Quote
Sir Substance wrote:You can't have two JC's in the same station. If you try it by installing one JC, JC'ing away, flying back to the station and JCing to a third JC, the second JC will overwrite the first. We can't now, maybe it's worth consideration to change it.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
Khan Wrenth
Hedion University Amarr Empire
105
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 16:57:25 -
[646] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Sir Substance wrote:You can't have two JC's in the same station. If you try it by installing one JC, JC'ing away, flying back to the station and JCing to a third JC, the second JC will overwrite the first. We can't now, maybe it's worth consideration to change it.
I can't claim to know this as a fact, but I suspect this is due to limitations within the legacy code, and the work required to fix it would be far beyond a "little fix".
Just guessing based upon previous conversations I've seen where "spaghetti code" was the reason things were the way they were.
HTFU.-á Adapt or die.-á Beware the falcon punch.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29833
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 17:03:31 -
[647] - Quote
multiple clones in the same station would be nice too.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
UberFly
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 18:04:46 -
[648] - Quote
I'd much rather scrap the attribute/remap mechanic than have to juggle more JCs. Either way, you are making it so people can get the max SP/hr and still PVP. Changing the jump timer would also negate the force projection changes that CCP made. Pilots would just have multiple clones in multiple stations as a way to avoid fatigue while still jumping all the way across the universe. |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
935
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 19:25:33 -
[649] - Quote
Kaely Tanniss wrote: Implants serve a purpose. They have benefits and drwbacks such as risk. If CCP keeps removing the risk factor of the game, it will lose the very core of what the majority of players play it for. If you're afraid to lose implants, don't fit them.
Note that learning implants provide greater reasons for risk-averse behavior than types that provide benefit for ship pilots. If you want to incentivize players risking valuable implants, the best you can do are implants that directly improve the experience of undocking in your ship. The worst you can do are implants that are just as effective even when you're logged-off.
It still seems to me that removing the concept of implants that speed skill training would increase people's willingness to spend money on implants that provide benefits to piloting a ship, and then undocking with those implants, thereby risking them.
Of course, as stated in my prior posts, I am not on the team developing this feature. I'm just offering these thoughts to contribute to the conversation.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
377
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 19:28:34 -
[650] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: Note that learning implants provide greater rewards for risk-averse behavior than types that provide benefit for ship pilots. If you want to incentivize players risking valuable implants, the best you can do are implants that directly improve the experience of undocking in your ship. The worst you can do are implants that are just as effective even when you're logged-off.
It still seems to me that removing the concept of implants that speed skill training would increase people's willingness to spend money on implants that provide benefits to piloting a ship, and then undocking with those implants, thereby risking them.
Of course, as stated in my prior posts, I am not on the team developing this feature. I'm just offering these thoughts to contribute to the conversation.
This- it's pointless to add value to a risk assessment based on an item that does not directly impact whatever you are undocking in. |
|
UberFly
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 19:32:19 -
[651] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: Note that learning implants provide greater rewards for risk-averse behavior than types that provide benefit for ship pilots. If you want to incentivize players risking valuable implants, the best you can do are implants that directly improve the experience of undocking in your ship. The worst you can do are implants that are just as effective even when you're logged-off.
It still seems to me that removing the concept of implants that speed skill training would increase people's willingness to spend money on implants that provide benefits to piloting a ship, and then undocking with those implants, thereby risking them.
Of course, as stated in my prior posts, I am not on the team developing this feature. I'm just offering these thoughts to contribute to the conversation.
Mr Omniblivion wrote: This- it's pointless to add value to a risk assessment based on an item that does not directly impact whatever you are undocking in.
QFT +1 |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
88
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 19:36:14 -
[652] - Quote
So what is this the argument for removing attribute / learning implants ?
- remove them so people will pvp more ? No care bears will not pvp and they will find another excuse to not pvp
- Learning implants doesn't give players a choice. Yes they do and they give lots of choices you could get plus 5 train faster ,but if u lose u lose a lot. You could get plus 4 train slower than +5 but don't lose as much , etc
- Newbies doesnt know how to save their pod / the importance of implants well they ******* should read or ask other to find out why implants are important we are were newbies and we all did our research to find out what implants are for .
- CCP I wanna train faster but i want to pvp you have two choices ******* pvp in your training implants you risk a lot, but you keep training and there is no cool down timer or jump clone your implants gonna be safe , but you don't train as fast and u have a jump clone timer |
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
377
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 19:41:22 -
[653] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:blah blah blah
Your arguments are quite stupid, see my earlier post.
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
88
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 19:46:34 -
[654] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:Jane Shapperd wrote:blah blah blah blah blah blah
they may not impact what u are flying directly but they do impact your performance in whatever you're training which will greatly impact what u are undocking or planning to undock . |
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
377
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 19:59:13 -
[655] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:they may not impact what u are flying directly but they do impact your performance in whatever you're training which will greatly impact what u are undocking or planning to undock .
The problem is that this is not the case in the majority of scenarios.
People generally do not get level 1 command ship and undock in their Damnation while the rest of the skills train. As mentioned earlier, one extra level of a 2% or 5% damage skill would hardly change any fight in eve on the grand scale. The vast majority of combat in eve is not 1v1, so a slight difference in skills as such would have no real impact.
Therefore, you're hurting newer players more by forcing them to maintain expensive implants, when they don't have ISK for it, to be able to train the basic skills they need to even be able to undock in most ships- not to mention fly them "well". People that are making your argument seem to forget that new players have a plethora of support skills that they must train before they can fly anything remotely close to competitive (except for gimmicky fits in fleet fights, which however do work well).
The vast majority of older players have enough money to purchase a pilot with the exact skills they are looking for- or close to it. A new player must grind out huge amounts of support skills that are frankly boring and don't contribute to keeping players in the game.
This isn't WoW where there needs to be a grind from 1-(whatever level is max now). People should be able to jump into Eve, the Spaceship Sandbox Game and be able to fly competitively and try out new things within reasonable amounts of time. Skills are a side note to the actual force in this game- consumption. Skill training times are a roadblock to consumption that needs to be redefined. Removing flat attribute implants and leveling out that bonus as base attribute points would go a long way towards a positive change- especially for new players. |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
937
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 20:03:01 -
[656] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:So what is this the argument for removing attribute / learning implants ?
To be fair, the discussion is really about removing attributes, remaps, and bonuses from implants to attributes. Learning implants are part of the picture but not the biggest part.
Quote:- remove them so people will pvp more ? No care bears will not pvp and they will find another excuse to not pvp
Increasing willingness to PvP with implants plugged-in would be a nice outcome, but it's not really the core reason for the proposal.
Quote:- Learning implants doesn't give players a choice. Yes they do and they give lots of choices you could get plus 5 train faster ,but if u lose u lose a lot. You could get plus 4 train slower than +5 but don't lose as much , etc
The problem isn't that attributes don't provide choice, the problem is that the choices do not have meaning. Let's say you have a desire to do a thing in game, like fly Logistics. As it turns out, training those skills optimally requires going deep into int/mem, training out ALL your support skills, then remapping to per/will and training out ALL your ship skills.
Without attributes, you would probably be training a little support and a little from ship skill categories so that you could get started quickly and improve as you play, but attributes provide what amounts to a large skill point reward for training things in a nonsensical order that makes you wait to play the game.
The current concept represented in the game today might be better if attributes mapped more cleanly to functional roles in EVE, but remember that even taking attributes out entirely and having a flat skill training speed wouldn't remove that choice of how to specialize. You still would have to train skills in an order that gets you somewhere you want to be, and the most efficient way to do that would be to train for the thing you'd like to do.
Quote:- Newbies doesnt know how to save their pod / the importance of implants well they ******* should read or ask other to find out why implants are important we are were newbies and we all did our research to find out what implants are for .
As my last post pointed out, if anything players would be more likely to risk a valuable pod without learning implants, because the alternatives (both currently existing hardwiring implants and maybe something new too) would reward not just using the implants, but flying ships while using them.
Quote:- CCP I wanna train faster but i want to pvp you have two choices ******* pvp in your training implants you risk a lot, but you keep training and there is no cool down timer or jump clone your implants gonna be safe , but you don't train as fast and u have a jump clone timer
It's also worth being clear that the idea behind removing attributes is about simplifying a current system that provides muddy and counterproductive incentives, where you spend a lot of money to speed up your training and after that skill training choices feel bad, because every path in the game requires training numerous skills for which you have the wrong remap and possibly wrong implants too.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Memphis Baas
151
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 20:38:55 -
[657] - Quote
Perhaps one way to buy the cake and eat it too would be to:
- get rid of attributes and simplify the skill training system with a flat training rate regardless of what skill is trained
- introduce implants that give a generic "Faster Skill Training" 2%, 3%, whatever the equivalent is when you take the current +1, +3, and +5 implants and recalculate their actual SP/hr bonus.
That way CCP gets the simpler server-side code, and everyone who wants "choice" gets to make the decision whether to plug in "Faster Skill Training".
Of course we will still have the "I'm not going to undock because I have these 5% implants plugged in" issue. |
Tiffany 'Tiffs' Succeed
Republic University Minmatar Republic
48
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 20:41:22 -
[658] - Quote
Thank you for this post. It shows that people at CCP, which includes you, are really putting a lot of thought behind what they are doing.
I just read your other post as well. I hope you share your thoughts with the colleages as well ... ... because you made a very smart, insightfull post up there, you know? |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
863
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 20:43:44 -
[659] - 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:
I would argue that too many revenue ideas have been removed or made uneconomic already.
CCP has been on continual crusade to eliminate income. Why stop them now?
CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff
CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
944
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 21:00:19 -
[660] - 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:
I would argue that too many revenue ideas have been removed or made uneconomic already.
The game designers working on this have made clear that economic considerations related to this proposal are a significant concern and need a good solution.
(Once again, I'm not one of them.)
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
247
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 21:04:31 -
[661] - Quote
Removing Learning Implants or Attributes will not make anyone more willing to lose a valuable pod. I mean sure, 5 people maybe, but no real numbers. You think you take away my +5's I'm gonna get a set of Snakes and head to low? Nope.
The bit about learning Logi and doing 2 remps to get there. Sure that's one CHOICE you have. You can also Chose to say at a more neutral remap, and train both sets of skills so you can get in the ship faster but with more mediocre skills. There's lots of options. On this account I generally live by the remaps, I spent a real just doing int/mem before spending the next year doing percep/will. But on my alts, this isn't always the case. Some have never remaped, cause I quickly alternate between types of skills. There are lots of choices that can me made for learning, and taking that away only dumbs down the game.
Is it complex? Yes. Wanna fix it, find better ways to explain it. Don't just say it's hard for some people to understand (or make choices) so we are gonna dump it. A lot of people find it Hard to fit their ships? Dump that too? Buy ships fully fit ready to go so you don't need to think. No. Leave the choices and the complexity in the game. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29834
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 21:05:49 -
[662] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Without attributes, you would probably be training a little support and a little from ship skill categories so that you could get started quickly and improve as you play, but attributes provide what amounts to a large skill point reward for training things in a nonsensical order that makes you wait to play the game.
The current concept represented in the game today might be better if attributes mapped more cleanly to functional roles in EVE, but remember that even taking attributes out entirely and having a flat skill training speed wouldn't remove that choice of how to specialize. You still would have to train skills in an order that gets you somewhere you want to be, and the most efficient way to do that would be to train for the thing you'd like to do. Darwin, I apologize for bringing in another issue right now, but that contradicts something else that is awkward about skills, and unexplained: The random selection of support skills for T2 ships and the waiting to fly a T2 ship without the option of flying a weakly-skilled one.
T2 level V prereqs table
Pragmatic arrangement of skill prereqs
I want to agree with you unequivocally, but why is such pragmatic logic applied to this situation, when there's another issue that is just as blatant and uncomfortable, and is not being considered for reform?
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
226
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 21:18:08 -
[663] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:The current concept represented in the game today might be better if attributes mapped more cleanly to functional roles in EVE, but remember that even taking attributes out entirely and having a flat skill training speed wouldn't remove that choice of how to specialize. You still would have to train skills in an order that gets you somewhere you want to be, and the most efficient way to do that would be to train for the thing you'd like to do. Instead of how fast i'll train my skills i'll have choice in what order i will train them. Same thing i have now with no implants pluged.
CCP Darwin wrote:Note that learning implants provide greater reasons for risk-averse behavior than types that provide benefit for ship pilots. If you want to incentivize players risking valuable implants, the best you can do are implants that directly improve the experience of undocking in your ship. The worst you can do are implants that are just as effective even when you're logged-off. Contradiction. "I won't undock with leanring implants but undock with hardwires". Just because i have no choices now doesn't mean whole system is wrong. Look at implants first. Simplest solution would be to remap learning implants with core skills like CPU or PG bonuses and bonuses to attributes.
I have choice now. Plug learning implants and learn skill to lvl V or plug hardwire that give me bonus to my lvl 4 skill.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29836
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 21:22:43 -
[664] - Quote
Sort of wrong. Before you can risk PVP implants, you have to forego learning implants. On top of the loss aversion factor, not having learning implants active is loss in itself. By plugging in PVP implants at all, you're already missing out on a potential degree of SP accumulation.
Using PVP implants is the same opportunity cost of losing a clone full of learning implants. Aside from CA-s, but they're a lot of ISK for wishy-washy half-PVP, half-learning implants. And they're limited issue.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
950
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 21:32:54 -
[665] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Instead of how fast i'll train my skills i'll have choice in what order i will train them. Same thing i have now with no implants pluged. Yes, that's why this change is being proposed, to simplify the skill training system by removing a part that adds little meaningful choice to the game.
Quote:Contradiction. "I won't undock with leanring implants but undock with hardwires".
Sniper Smith wrote:Removing Learning Implants or Attributes will not make anyone more willing to lose a valuable pod. I mean sure, 5 people maybe, but no real numbers. You think you take away my +5's I'm gonna get a set of Snakes and head to low? Nope.
The point is that removing learning implants would have a few effects:
1) The slots would be freed up for something else.
2) New implants would possibly be introduced for those slots that provided benefits while flying in space.
3) Players would be saving the money they currently spent on learning implants, and thus have it newly free to spend elsewhere.
Someone who has a 90 million ISK +3 training clone might only need to have a 15 million ISK new clone to entirely replace the +3s in the implant economy, if the implants in that 15 million ISK clone incentivize flying with it enough to lose 6 pods for every 1 before.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
377
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 21:33:28 -
[666] - Quote
Another example why the current system is not good:
- I examine every skill available to me and set up a plan. - I only need support skills for the next one year of play time, so I remap to Int-Mem - Two months after I respec, CCP announces a completely new game mechanic, t3 tactical destroyers. - These things look AWESOME and I really want to fly one as soon as possible. - Because I planned out an int-mem remap for one year with all available information at the time, I now take twice as long to get into a t3 tactical destroyer than other players who happened to be remapped properly already.
How is the above logical in the "risk vs reward" scenario?
As CCP continues to release and modify content, the environment of Eve continues to change. Locking players for one year into a "bad" remap means that they take twice as long to train a few missing skills for new content and forces them to take a net "sp loss" in order to do so.
As mentioned before, Attribute implants should be released with consumables for pve type gameplay and/or implants that specifically benefit undocked ships. If there was a 1 hour booster increasing damage against sansha by 10%, you could bet that most mission runners and ratters in that space would stockpile the stuff. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1483
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 21:37:32 -
[667] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Rain6637 wrote:I want to agree with you unequivocally, but why is such pragmatic logic applied to this situation, when there's another issue that is just as blatant and uncomfortable, and is not being considered for reform? To be honest, I have no idea what plans or thoughts the EVE game design team have for the future of the skill tree itself, but I can assure you that just because a thing isn't in the CSM minutes doesn't mean it's immune from scrutiny. If you have a specific suggestion (particularly one that doesn't shorten total training time for T2 ships) for making prerequisites feel more natural, I'd consider making it in the Features and Ideas Discussion forum so the game designers can read it.
It is very heartening to see That CCP are looking at even the most embedded systems in the game, and not following the "it always has been therefore it always will be attitude"
Resolving issues with old mechanics sometimes is best achieved by looking at what one wishes to achieve from the training system, and not trying to tweak a system riddled with inconsistancies, and choices that applied to a game, that was very different when originally introduced.
Whilst some players, may be upset, by the reduction in their killboard values when popping Pods, and some will be aggrieved that they have lost the percieved advantage over new players, doing what is right for the game, and what is right for the wide playerbase should take priority, after all an old and experienced player always has the advantages that come with that still.
I look forward with great interest as to where this ends up, and I would like to point out, that if licences apply to hardwires, and they are not destroyed on ship/pod loss, firstly, Let the implants show as a value forcibly and violently unplugged, even though actually not lost, to satisfy people keeping score. And for those who complain about how it is not hardcore enough, and all the usual comments. Losing one's ship, ones fittings, modules, weapons, and ones cargo, together with losing the fight, and being relocated far away from the action, is quite sufficient,
Unless the intention is to punish people for even daring to fight!? Time to undo that attitude and get people out there!
Good luck. Loving the new EVE attitude.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
722
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 21:43:52 -
[668] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:
3) Players would be saving the money they currently spent on learning implants, and thus have it newly free to spend elsewhere.
Someone who has a 90 million ISK +3 training clone might only need to have a 15 million ISK new clone to entirely replace the +3s in the implant economy, if the implants in that 15 million ISK clone incentivize flying with it enough to lose 6 pods for every 1 before.
Change every incidence of "Clone", "Implant", and "Pod" for "Ship".
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
952
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 21:51:36 -
[669] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Change every incidence of "Clone", "Implant", and "Pod" for "Ship".
If implants for slots 1-5 provided the same quality of benefit as spending that learning implant money on a somewhat more expensive ship would, why wouldn't implants be the smarter choice? After all, implants often survive multiple ship deaths, even in null.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
248
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 22:01:11 -
[670] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Removing Learning Implants or Attributes will not make anyone more willing to lose a valuable pod. I mean sure, 5 people maybe, but no real numbers. You think you take away my +5's I'm gonna get a set of Snakes and head to low? Nope. The point is that removing learning implants would have a few effects: 1) The slots would be freed up for something else. 2) New implants would possibly be introduced for those slots that provided benefits while flying in space. 3) Players would be saving the money they currently spent on learning implants, and thus have it newly free to spend elsewhere. Someone who has a 90 million ISK +3 training clone might only need to have a 15 million ISK new clone to entirely replace the +3s in the implant economy, if the implants in that 15 million ISK clone incentivize flying with it enough to lose 6 pods for every 1 before. These slots already have implants available that go beyond learning. The Geno's, and the pirate implants. I doubt weather much more will be added, as virtially all other attributes are already sorted out into the normal hardwire slots. I can't see CCP adding more implants for Damage, or anything up there.
Saving money? So rather than learning implants (of which you only require 2 at a time) now you are going to spend them on new hardwires? So what's the difference? Only now I can't learn faster by risking more?
Nothing Requires you have learning implants. The benefit to having them is actually fairly small unless you have a long plan and use them right. But now you would be punishing those of us who took the time to make the plan, or just as bad, giving everyone else who doesn't think ahead, a bonus to their training.
Learning Implants don't double your speed, we are taking about what for most is just days saved over a year.
And as I said, want to incentivise PVP? Give people Jumpclones Day ONE. You make people grind for ages to be able to make JC's at a station, or join corps with Outposts, Titan's, or Rorq's. Give people a clean clone early on. That way they can have their Learning Implant clone, AND one to fight with without grinding for it. We have people that do that for the newbies in CAS already, and lots of them get their second clone, and them head out for PVP. Now they have one with nothing to lose. Even if you remove the learning implants, they are going to get normal hardiwres, thus still, the clone will be more than they want to risk losing. |
|
Memphis Baas
154
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 22:24:48 -
[671] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote:Want to incentivise PVP? Give people Jumpclones Day ONE. I'm sorry, but giving people jump clones on day 1 would be punishing those of us who took the time to grind the standings, or join Estel for 1 day, or, in his case, establish his "free clones" service as a corporation and advertise it. Why should those who don't think ahead about standings benefit in any way?
Going by that reasoning, CCP should remove the Newbie Questions forum, because it's full of guides and advice for those who don't think ahead or can't figure out stuff on their own, and that's unfair to you, me, and the vets. It reduces this "thinking ahead" effort to just typing 48 characters (mindlessly): "What implants should I put in for skill plan x?" and the forum immediately blurts out advice, guides, and links to youtube videos. |
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
377
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 22:30:24 -
[672] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Want to incentivise PVP? Give people Jumpclones Day ONE. I'm sorry, but giving people jump clones on day 1 would be punishing those of us who took the time to grind the standings, or join Estel for 1 day, or, in his case, establish his "free clones" service as a corporation and advertise it. Why should those who don't think ahead about standings benefit in any way? Going by that reasoning, CCP should remove the Newbie Questions forum, because it's full of guides and advice for those who don't think ahead or can't figure out stuff on their own, and that's unfair to you, me, and the vets. It reduces this "thinking ahead" effort to just typing 48 characters (mindlessly): "What implants should I put in for skill plan x?" and the forum immediately blurts out advice, guides, and links to youtube videos.
hahahahah wow, this is dumb
You are literally saying "Don't make this improvement to the game because we had to do it the hard way, so everyone else should".
Go back to grinding level 4 missions because you have no concept of how this game functions. |
MainDrain
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
317
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 22:31:46 -
[673] - Quote
This post in inspired by a recent reddit thread
In it, it is suggested that we could do away with the standard attribute remapping system and instead use a grouped learning implant.
An implant for Gunnery could be broken down into the following, with the associated boost to training.
-Gunnery + 1% -Hybrid Gunnery Implant +3% -Projectile Gunnery Implant +3%
These basic implants would provide no boost to the skills effect (no hardwiring style bonus)
Advanced implants
Advanced Railgun Gunnery Implant + 5% to skill training +3% to damage/ROF of all railguns Advanced Blaster Gunnery Implant + 5% to skill training +3% to damage/ROF of all blasters
Similar would exist for projectile and all missile variants
The original reddit comment suggested faction implants, a Fed Navy Cadet was the idea suggested.
His original idea would be that this would provide implants of a certain level to a mixed selection of skills. Gallente Frigate, small hybrids and fitting skills GÇô light drones would fit perfectly here.
Again the basic level of this implant would provide less of a bonus, with more advanced (and expensive) versions providing greater boosts.
Higher ranks than cadet could be used for destroyer, cruiser, BC, BS etc etc.
This suggestion would provide both a learning and combat boost to pilots, fit perfectly with lore (you would buy implants that specifically impact how you want to fight and fly). I feel it would also encourage more people to engage in PVP, much in the same way that removing the clone upgrade/sp loss penalty has. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1484
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 22:33:04 -
[674] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Removing Learning Implants or Attributes will not make anyone more willing to lose a valuable pod. I mean sure, 5 people maybe, but no real numbers. You think you take away my +5's I'm gonna get a set of Snakes and head to low? Nope. The point is that removing learning implants would have a few effects: 1) The slots would be freed up for something else. 2) New implants would possibly be introduced for those slots that provided benefits while flying in space. 3) Players would be saving the money they currently spent on learning implants, and thus have it newly free to spend elsewhere. Someone who has a 90 million ISK +3 training clone might only need to have a 15 million ISK new clone to entirely replace the +3s in the implant economy, if the implants in that 15 million ISK clone incentivize flying with it enough to lose 6 pods for every 1 before. These slots already have implants available that go beyond learning. The Geno's, and the pirate implants. I doubt weather much more will be added, as virtially all other attributes are already sorted out into the normal hardwire slots. I can't see CCP adding more implants for Damage, or anything up there. Saving money? So rather than learning implants (of which you only require 2 at a time) now you are going to spend them on new hardwires? So what's the difference? Only now I can't learn faster by risking more? Nothing Requires you have learning implants. The benefit to having them is actually fairly small unless you have a long plan and use them right. But now you would be punishing those of us who took the time to make the plan, or just as bad, giving everyone else who doesn't think ahead, a bonus to their training. Learning Implants don't double your speed, we are taking about what for most is just days saved over a year. And as I said, want to incentivise PVP? Give people Jumpclones Day ONE. You make people grind for ages to be able to make JC's at a station, or join corps with Outposts, Titan's, or Rorq's. Give people a clean clone early on. That way they can have their Learning Implant clone, AND one to fight with without grinding for it. We have people that do that for the newbies in CAS already, and lots of them get their second clone, and them head out for PVP. Now they have one with nothing to lose. Even if you remove the learning implants, they are going to get normal hardiwres, thus still, the clone will be more than they want to risk losing.
You do make a number of valid point, based around what we currently have. The question is, although we are here, is this a place we want to start from? There is No good choice with learning, you learn or you do not, you learn slowly, or quickly. The negatives involved ape purely economic. pay money or learn slowly. And the effect is much more than a few days a year, it is significant, and does not improve gameplay in any way.
Hardwires are quite different, they improve one's abilities in space, in combat, and other ways. There are valid reasons to use them and risk them in space.
Whether that risk is a good thing or not I have addressed above, and can be seperated into a different discussion. Learning implants are unaffected either way.
Whilst there are many ways to juggle, modify, argue, as to how the current system can be twisted into some form of use, the reality is it needs a complete rework. And If new players can learn basic skills a little faster then that is a GOOD thing as long as they don't all start jumping into T2 ships as that would be completely undesireable and not something that CCP would countenace.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
955
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 22:42:24 -
[675] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote:Learning Implants don't double your speed, we are taking about what for most is just days saved over a year.
Optimal implants and remap give you a 50% bonus to training speed for the fastest skills over doing nothing (no implants, no remap.)
(1800 SP/hr for neutral remap and no implants, 2700 SP/hr for the best possible remap and +5 implants, 1530 SP/hr for off-map skills when you are optimally mapped and implanted only for something else.)
Over a year, you'd earn 15,768,000 SP at the base rate. Strict optimal mapping and implants get you to that point at 8 months. However, the moment you decide to deviate from your optimal remap, you're training at between half speed and two-thirds that optimal speed for the privilege.
These differences are more than just days per year. They're very significant.
As I said before, this system rewards a pile of skill points for training skills in an order that is explicitly wrong for whatever you want to do (because whatever you want to do will always include a substantial amount of off-remap skills.)
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1484
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 22:47:51 -
[676] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Learning Implants don't double your speed, we are taking about what for most is just days saved over a year. Optimal implants and remap give you a 50% bonus to training speed for the fastest skills over doing nothing (no implants, no remap.) (1800 SP/hr for neutral remap and no implants, 2700 SP/hr for the best possible remap and +5 implants, 1530 SP/hr for off-map skills when you are optimally mapped and implanted only for something else.) Over a year, you'd earn 15,768,000 SP at the base rate. Strict optimal mapping and implants get you to that point at 8 months. However, the moment you decide to deviate from your optimal remap, you're training at between half speed and two-thirds that optimal speed for the privilege. These differences are more than just days per year. They're very significant. As I said before, this system rewards a pile of skill points for training skills in an order that is explicitly wrong for whatever you want to do (because whatever you want to do will always include a substantial amount of off-remap skills.)
So very very glad you see this so clearly, please lock the dev team in a small cupboard with beer and food, and lock the door. Promise when they are done there's more beer in the fridge.
Sorted
Edit:- make sure to remember the food, or it will be "brainz yum" and all the learning skills in the world won't fix that .
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Memphis Baas
154
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 22:51:37 -
[677] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Optimal implants and remap give you a 50% bonus to training speed for the fastest skills over doing nothing (no implants, no remap). [...] Over a year, you'd earn 15,768,000 SP at the base rate.
And 23 million SP at the max rate. Character Bazaar sales are typically priced at 20 million SP / year converted to ISK via the subscription costs. So clearly the 16 m SP / year isn't considered the "average" or what everyone is doing.
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1484
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 22:57:56 -
[678] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Optimal implants and remap give you a 50% bonus to training speed for the fastest skills over doing nothing (no implants, no remap). [...] Over a year, you'd earn 15,768,000 SP at the base rate.
And 23 million SP at the max rate. Character Bazaar sales are typically priced at 20 million SP / year converted to ISK via the subscription costs. So clearly the 16 m SP / year isn't considered the "average" or "what everyone is doing."
The question is, why punish a new player? For not making smart friends who advise him well? Or search out of game for such wildly divergent options and suggestions? Or use out of game skill planners when he does not even know what those skills are? And God forbid, he wants to change path, locked into mining for the next year? This hardly encourages player development.
Are players meant to go through some punishing sort of hazing to show they are "worthy" to play the game? Because that it is all it actually achieves.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1060
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 23:00:26 -
[679] - Quote
I remember a lot of people actually arguing for the learning skills before they were totally removed. Should look back at those arguments and see if.. They are exactly the same as the ones here...
Yaay!!!!
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1484
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 23:01:43 -
[680] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:I remember a lot of people actually arguing for the learning skills before they were totally removed. Should look back at those arguments and see if.. They are exactly the same as the ones here...
Good point ^^^ I wish CCP had had the determination and courage then, that they have now, and this all would have been fixed in one go.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29843
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 23:17:45 -
[681] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Learning Implants don't double your speed, we are taking about what for most is just days saved over a year. Optimal implants and remap give you a 50% bonus to training speed for the fastest skills over doing nothing (no implants, no remap.) (1800 SP/hr for neutral remap and no implants, 2700 SP/hr for the best possible remap and +5 implants, 1530 SP/hr for off-map skills when you are optimally mapped and implanted only for something else.) Over a year, you'd earn 15,768,000 SP at the base rate. Strict optimal mapping and implants get you to that point at 8 months. However, the moment you decide to deviate from your optimal remap, you're training at between half speed and two-thirds that optimal speed for the privilege. These differences are more than just days per year. They're very significant. As I said before, this system rewards a pile of skill points for training skills in an order that is explicitly wrong for whatever you want to do (because whatever you want to do will always include a substantial amount of off-remap skills.) I see this as an issue of irl money value of a subscription. By playing, and taking risks, you're receiving less value for your sub money.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Memphis Baas
154
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 23:19:26 -
[682] - Quote
Shrug, arguments are ok; and while we argue back and forth, my saying "No" to something someone posted above me doesn't delete their post from this thread, and CCP will see it and make their own decision. |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
960
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 00:22:40 -
[683] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:And 23 million SP at the max rate. Character Bazaar sales are typically priced at 20 million SP / year converted to ISK via the subscription costs. So clearly the 16 m SP / year isn't considered the "average" or "what everyone is doing."
That's true, and I wouldn't characterize the 16 M SP/yr case as typical actual gameplay either. However, it does apply to new players who have no idea that remaps or attributes exist. :)
In fact, one issue with the current attribute system design is that doing the optimal thing (sticking to your remap, after remapping and implanting optimally) feels blah, because the accelerated skill speed (up to 2700 SP/h) is your "new normal" and any deviation just makes you feel like you're missing out, even if you're training faster than the no implants/no remaps case.
It's a bad sign when playing optimally is less fun (because you're forced not to take all the skills you want) than not knowing how to play optimally at all.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Shinzhi Xadi
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
93
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 01:24:41 -
[684] - Quote
CCP Darwin, you have thought of all the angles, and after reading your comments, and replies, I have to agree with you.
Get rid of attribs completely, give equal training speed for all skills.
I have been playing eve for almost 7 years, and yeah, the remapping and implants thing, has thrown a wrench into training plans many times. Having to train at half speed or whatever because I'm not specced for it has just been a required irritant. Push your changes thru, its good for the game, and good for new players especially. CCP should never do things or have policies that make the game confusing or harder for new players. EVE is hard enough, and newbros need to be eased into it so they can get up to speed and not quit from frustration.
Mac Pro 12 core 3.06ghz, 32gig ecc ram, Nvidia GTX 770.
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
250
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 02:06:24 -
[685] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:As I said before, this system rewards a pile of skill points for training skills in an order that is explicitly wrong for whatever you want to do (because whatever you want to do will always include a substantial amount of off-remap skills.) Which is why all new toons get 3 Remaps (Initial, +2 bonus). They also get free implants from the training missions, and any other pve they do.
And yes, comparing +5 +remap vs 0 + no remap is a huge difference, but that's someone being rewarded or screwing themselves for bad decisions. Now you want to adjust the SKILLS so that guns/ships are not totally different map from support skills. Great. There's an idea. But punishing players who are willing invest the time and isk in a toon to get it trained the way they want Long Term is not right. And I'm sorry, saying it's hard for a new guy isn't a good enough reason in my book. Eve is Hard. It's always been hard. It's SUPPOSED to be hard.
Remaps and implants are as risk reward as everything else in Eve. Do I fit my ship for the long fight or the burst DPS? Do I fit that shiny Scram and catch the targets others wouldn't, but risk a mod worth more than my frig?
It's all risk, reward.. Training new players to better understand it, sure. Great. I'm all for that. Changing the skill system so that half the skills for a ship are one remap, the other half are the exact opposite.. again, would be great. Taking it away, and removing one more choice, one more risk, one more reward.. no.
Also, this would be a good time to offer remaps. Atm they are only available a year after last.. or sometimes at Christmas. Put Remaps in the LP store, or NEX. There, no they are no longer tied to a remap for a year. Hell offer them as rewards for some Storyline missions or something to. Make them an in game item, tradeable, now I can remap every month if I want too.
Another one, make all implants like the pirate, have secondary bonuses, and then you can make all HG Pirate +5's like the current learning.. That way it's not a choice of Max Learning OR implants that benefit you in space. Leave the current learning implants alone, replace all drops and LP store one with, say, Empire Faction implants. With something that might benefit that race/faction. Hell even tie it to the Corp so different corps would offer different learning implants with a bonus that makes sense for them. Much the same way ORE, SOE, etc do.
Make implants have a salvage chance for capsule kills. So the prices go DOWN and it's not as big a risk anymore.
There's lots of ways to improve the system, rather than just nuke it. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
47259
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 02:35:37 -
[686] - Quote
Sorry CCP Darwin but I gotta call bullcrap on what you're saying. If new players don't know about attribute remaps and implants then that's ultimately CCP's fault. You guys need to fix the New Player Experience instead of constantly punishing us older players with this type of game change.
As for remaps, if people decide on a specific remap to optimally train certain skills and in the course of that incur sub-optimal training time on other skills then that's their fault for going that route.
I've never liked the idea of doing attribute remaps to increase rate of skill training. I've had my attributes set up as a 'Jack Of All Skill Training' for a long time now because I tend to jump around training various skills in different skill groups.
My Attributes : Intelligence = 22 Perception = 20 Willpower = 20 Memory = 20 Charisma = 17
I do however have a full set of +5 Attribute Implants to help decrease the training time. My average training time is 2,188.50 Skill Points per hour, sometimes higher, sometimes lower. I currently have 127,420,381 Skill Points. For my character age that equals to a little over 18 mill Skill Points per year. When I account for time of inactive skill training, the average is a little over 20 mill per year.
I also have expensive Hardwiring Implants that affect ship stats as well.
Hardwired Implants : Slot #6 = Zainou 'Gnome' Shield Upgrades SU-605 Slot #7 = Zainou 'Gnome' Shield Management SM-705 Slot #8 = Poteque 'Prospector' Astrometric Rangefinding AR-806 Slot #9 = Zainou 'Gnome' Shield Operation SP-905 Slot #10 = Zainou 'Deadeye' Rapid Launch RL-1005
Having those Implants in my clone doesn't make me stay docked in station and I am definitely not risk adverse. As an Explorer and Event Agent mission runner I will travel into Low and Null Sec systems whenever needed while actively engaging in my career. I even have access to various Jump-clones but I choose not to use them because I've learned how to pilot my ship and quite frankly, I like how my clone is currently fitted.
Do I engage in PvP ? Not directly but since I do travel around through various hostile systems I indirectly engage in PvP by not giving others a chance to engage me in direct combat. Even if I didn't have the +5 Attribute Implants, I'd still continue playing this game as I've always done.
So if you think removing my Attribute Implants is gonna incite me to engage in direct PvP combat with other players then you're sadly mistaken. Furthermore this game is suppose to be about player choice. Seems to me you guys at CCP are trying to remove all aspects of player choice from this game. In the past few years CCP has been steadily dictating how people should play this game. Whatever happened to you guys just providing the tools and letting us play this game as we see fit?
All I can say is that in my case and I'm sure others like me will agree, all you're doing is forcing us into a choice of un-subbing our accounts.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Memphis Baas
156
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 02:35:41 -
[687] - Quote
I'd play a PLEX for a bonus remap; if the rest of the player base values it as much, CCP can make a bunch of money, but it'll probably be too expensive for newbies. Maybe give new characters 5 remaps instead of 3, to offset that. Or give them 3 from character creation (as currently), and 2 more from the tutorial agents or SoE epic arc. |
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
558
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 03:33:57 -
[688] - Quote
really this is very simple
remove learning implants (reimburse in isk), leave pirate sets in but strip their attribute bonuses shift all hardwirings up 5 slots to 1-5 except mindlinks leave slot 6 open for pirate omegas and mindlinks, remove slots 7-10 if there are any conflicts, shift the hardwirings to redeem items (prefer pirate implants in case of conflict) remove learning implants from LP stores |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29848
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 03:45:23 -
[689] - Quote
aaaand the gameplay for people who acquire implants?
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
252
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 04:31:48 -
[690] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:you're forgetting about the gameplay for people who acquire implants.
Allowing zero-cooldown in-station jumps would even make learning implants more popular, due to the lack of overlap with PVP. It's zero risk, sure, but learning is a passive activity, and shouldn't impinge on active gameplay like it does right now. Having a chat with a few other people in game about my suggestion for a JC during the training..
Make a new class of Jump Clone, this would be clean clone, NO implant spots (aka an ideal PVP Clone for most people, at least early on). This could would not be affected by cool down, and would not count toward your normal max clones. Limit 1 (so you can't get 12 of them from the 12 rookie corp schools).
So this would be a clone you can't put learning or any other expensive implants in, thus ensuring that everyone has access to one clone they can PVP in from the beginning. Ignores the cooldown, so if you just JC'd from your Exploration Clone, to your Mission Clone, and suddenly have a chance to go fight, you can JC into it. Thus removing the Cooldown as a reason to be unable to PvP.. (Likewise you can jump back to the clone you were in before to wait out the rest of the cooldown from any normal jumpclone maneuvers)
So there you have it. That's my suggestion. It ensures that everyone in the game has the ability to have both a training, and a PVP clone, from day one, so that they can not worry about losing implants or other such nonsense. I for one have been caught on the cool down clock several times, missing a chance to go for a fight. Not sure the whole thing should be removed, as it is a feature in the game, but sitting it aside when limited to just an empty clone is a fair trade in my book.
And as I said before, and was supported again by other posts, give us a way to BUY remaps and then wasting or being stuck wouldn't be nearly as big as an issue. It's been what? 3? 4? years since CCP last gave out a bonus remap, so everyone else who used their original 2 bonus ones is on the yearly cycle. Yet we get the excuse that it locks them into sup-optimal training. Well CCP, YOU can fix that. I mean We have Dual-Char training as an ingame item. We have Resculpt as an ingame item. Why not Remap? |
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
4620
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 05:24:40 -
[691] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Memphis Baas wrote:And 23 million SP at the max rate. Character Bazaar sales are typically priced at 20 million SP / year converted to ISK via the subscription costs. So clearly the 16 m SP / year isn't considered the "average" or "what everyone is doing." That's true, and I wouldn't characterize the 16 M SP/yr case as typical actual gameplay either. However, it does apply to new players who have no idea that remaps or attributes exist. :) In fact, one issue with the current attribute system design is that doing the optimal thing (sticking to your remap, after remapping and implanting optimally) feels blah, because the accelerated skill speed (up to 2700 SP/h) is your "new normal" and any deviation just makes you feel like you're missing out, even if you're training faster than the no implants/no remaps case. It's a bad sign when playing optimally is less fun (because you're forced not to take all the skills you want) than not knowing how to play optimally at all.
This is an argument for removing attribute discrepancies and remapping. It's not an argument for removing consumables that accelerate SP accumulation and remove loyalty points and ISK from the economy.
I support removing attribute points but am not convinced removing 'faster training' implants would be a positive change. (I'm not implaccably opposed to it either).
Chaos. Opportunity. Destruction. Excitement... Vote #1 Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
|
Commissar Kate
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
393339
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 05:46:50 -
[692] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote:And as I said before, and was supported again by other posts, give us a way to BUY remaps and then wasting or being stuck wouldn't be nearly as big as an issue. It's been what? 3? 4? years since CCP last gave out a bonus remap, so everyone else who used their original 2 bonus ones is on the yearly cycle. Yet we get the excuse that it locks them into sup-optimal training. Well CCP, YOU can fix that. I mean We have Dual-Char training as an ingame item. We have Resculpt as an ingame item. Why not Remap?
CCP did have plex for remap on the test sever several years ago but people cried bloody murder that it was pay to win so CCP listened and scraped it.
Unlock all the clothes || My Fanclub
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29851
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 05:57:20 -
[693] - Quote
normalize attributes, keep attribute implants, zero cooldown local clone jumps.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Kaely Tanniss
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
258
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 07:30:57 -
[694] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Kaely Tanniss wrote: Implants serve a purpose. They have benefits and drwbacks such as risk. If CCP keeps removing the risk factor of the game, it will lose the very core of what the majority of players play it for. If you're afraid to lose implants, don't fit them. Note that learning implants provide greater reasons for risk-averse behavior than types that provide benefit for ship pilots. If you want to incentivize players risking valuable implants, the best you can do are implants that directly improve the experience of undocking in your ship. The worst you can do are implants that are just as effective even when you're logged-off. It still seems to me that removing the concept of implants that speed skill training would increase people's willingness to spend money on implants that provide benefits to piloting a ship, and then undocking with those implants, thereby risking them.Of course, as stated in my prior posts, I am not on the team developing this feature. I'm just offering these thoughts to contribute to the conversation.
Fair enough. I can see the reason to remove attribute implants..I just don't agree with it. To me it's something that can be used to increase skill learning depending on how much isk you want to spend. Which, or course, would benefit older/richer chars more than others..ut it is just another goal to work towards imo. What I would NOT want taken away are implant sets such as slaves, etc...but I don't think that is even something that had been considered..I hope. Sure, a full set of +5's may deter some people from wanting to PvP, i can see that...but that's why i have jc's. I'f I am going to low or null, i will switch clones to avoid losing an expensive set of implants should I get popped. Idk, it's really a preference thing imo. I think it works fine as it is...and if it's not broken...why fix it.
If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
230
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 07:38:51 -
[695] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Yes, that's why this change is being proposed, to simplify the skill training system by removing a part that adds little meaningful choice to the game. They are meaningful choices. I have to choose: remap and plug training implants or plug hardwires and focus on training something else. Just because we have so few remaps and very little implants choices doesn't mean system is wrong. There were some good ideas in this thread how to improve training system like: more JP per station without CD, more remaps, more mixed implants etc. CCP Darwin what will you choose: 1)plug learning implant and train the skill 2)plug +5% hardwire to skill Most of the skills (those who are not prequisites) are trained to lvl 4. Time to train to lvl 5 is often too long for respective bonus.
CCP Darwin wrote:1) The slots would be freed up for something else. Why freed up? Why not creating learning implant slots (5 slots) and hardwires implants slots (10).
If we remove learning implants, attributes and remaps what will we achive? Remaps are useless to me in current state i won't cry after them (likewise attributes). If i get something in return for removing learning implants (like +5 bonus to SP training) then sure. Will all above create meaningful choices?
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
47272
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 07:39:56 -
[696] - Quote
How about fixing all the damn bugs and unfinished content in this game first before jumping onto another aspect of this game.
Good gawd man, players still have to file Support Tickets after completing the Epic Arcs just to get their Faction standing increase reward.
Seriously, just stop messing round with the little things and get back to fixing the big things.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29854
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 07:49:54 -
[697] - Quote
Kaely Tanniss wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Kaely Tanniss wrote: Implants serve a purpose. They have benefits and drwbacks such as risk. If CCP keeps removing the risk factor of the game, it will lose the very core of what the majority of players play it for. If you're afraid to lose implants, don't fit them. Note that learning implants provide greater reasons for risk-averse behavior than types that provide benefit for ship pilots. If you want to incentivize players risking valuable implants, the best you can do are implants that directly improve the experience of undocking in your ship. The worst you can do are implants that are just as effective even when you're logged-off. It still seems to me that removing the concept of implants that speed skill training would increase people's willingness to spend money on implants that provide benefits to piloting a ship, and then undocking with those implants, thereby risking them.Of course, as stated in my prior posts, I am not on the team developing this feature. I'm just offering these thoughts to contribute to the conversation. Fair enough. I can see the reason to remove attribute implants..I just don't agree with it. To me it's something that can be used to increase skill learning depending on how much isk you want to spend. Which, or course, would benefit older/richer chars more than others..ut it is just another goal to work towards imo. What I would NOT want taken away are implant sets such as slaves, etc...but I don't think that is even something that had been considered..I hope. Sure, a full set of +5's may deter some people from wanting to PvP, i can see that...but that's why i have jc's. I'f I am going to low or null, i will switch clones to avoid losing an expensive set of implants should I get popped. Idk, it's really a preference thing imo. I think it works fine as it is...and if it's not broken...why fix it. Here's why it's clunky. If you want to play Monday through Friday, and not go out in your +5 set, you jump clone into your PVP set. Then you have to wait 18 hours before jumping back into your +5 set. Six hours after your jump cooldown expires, you're looking to go out again, so you stay out of your +5 set, then jump back into it after you PVP. 18 hours later, you jump back out to PVP, then have to spend the night out of your +5 set again.
So even though learning and a +5 set is a passive activity, and something you do when you aren't logged in, the timing of the jump cooldown (18 h minimum) means it will be forever out of sync with a consistent play schedule. You end up spending the night out of your +5 set every other day.
I don't think that can be considered meaningful. It is more like clunky and stilted, don't you think?
Adjusting the jump clone timer to anything other than zero is bad because it allows too much mobility for the conventional purpose of jump cloning to a different location. Even for the purpose of local jump cloning (to swap in and out of +5 sets), a shorter cooldown (non-zero) will still be out of sync with your sleep or work schedule, and you'll have to start setting alarm clocks to make best use of +5 sets while not logged in (which is a passive activity, remember).
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Ace Northmen
Sanctuary Reapers Holdings
3
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 07:50:56 -
[698] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:really this is very simple
remove learning implants (reimburse in isk), leave pirate sets in but strip their attribute bonuses shift all hardwirings up 5 slots to 1-5 except mindlinks leave slot 6 open for pirate omegas and mindlinks, remove slots 7-10 if there are any conflicts, shift the hardwirings to redeem items (prefer pirate implants in case of conflict) remove learning implants from LP stores
and what would that achieve ? everyone having the same training rate ? what about who wants to have an edge in trainning rate by risking more ? |
Kaely Tanniss
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
263
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 07:57:22 -
[699] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Kaely Tanniss wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Kaely Tanniss wrote: Implants serve a purpose. They have benefits and drwbacks such as risk. If CCP keeps removing the risk factor of the game, it will lose the very core of what the majority of players play it for. If you're afraid to lose implants, don't fit them. Note that learning implants provide greater reasons for risk-averse behavior than types that provide benefit for ship pilots. If you want to incentivize players risking valuable implants, the best you can do are implants that directly improve the experience of undocking in your ship. The worst you can do are implants that are just as effective even when you're logged-off. It still seems to me that removing the concept of implants that speed skill training would increase people's willingness to spend money on implants that provide benefits to piloting a ship, and then undocking with those implants, thereby risking them.Of course, as stated in my prior posts, I am not on the team developing this feature. I'm just offering these thoughts to contribute to the conversation. Fair enough. I can see the reason to remove attribute implants..I just don't agree with it. To me it's something that can be used to increase skill learning depending on how much isk you want to spend. Which, or course, would benefit older/richer chars more than others..ut it is just another goal to work towards imo. What I would NOT want taken away are implant sets such as slaves, etc...but I don't think that is even something that had been considered..I hope. Sure, a full set of +5's may deter some people from wanting to PvP, i can see that...but that's why i have jc's. I'f I am going to low or null, i will switch clones to avoid losing an expensive set of implants should I get popped. Idk, it's really a preference thing imo. I think it works fine as it is...and if it's not broken...why fix it. Here's why it's clunky. If you want to play Monday through Friday, and not go out in your +5 set, you jump clone into your PVP set. Then you have to wait 18 hours before jumping back into your +5 set. Six hours after your jump cooldown expires, you're looking to go out again, so you stay out of your +5 set, then jump back into it after you PVP. 18 hours later, you jump back out to PVP, then have to spend the night out of your +5 set again. So even though learning and a +5 set is a passive activity, and something you do when you aren't logged in, the timing of the jump cooldown (18 h minimum) means it will be forever out of sync with a consistent play schedule. You end up spending the night out of your +5 set every other day. I don't think that can be considered meaningful. It is more like clunky and stilted, don't you think? Adjusting the jump clone timer to anything other than zero is bad because it allows too much mobility for the conventional purpose of jump cloning to a different location. Even for the purpose of local jump cloning (to swap in and out of +5 sets), a shorter cooldown (non-zero) will still be out of sync with your sleep or work schedule, and you'll have to start setting alarm clocks to make best use of +5 sets while not logged in (which is a passive activity, remember). This is why I say the local jump cooldown should be zero. It's not useful for travel purposes, and also allows a player to switch implant sets like they switch ships. If you dock and it's in station, you should get to use it / change into and out of it.
These are all things that have to be considered by the player. It's all choice. Will you risk the expensive implants to avoid the 18hr cooldown..or will you jc to a cheap clone to avoid the loss in isk ut have to wait. This is where YOU, the player, have to weigh the risk vs reward. Risk: loss of expensive implants...reward: avoid the cooldown...
If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29854
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 07:58:50 -
[700] - Quote
I'm disappointed in you for applying a quaint cliche to such an important issue that can be solved.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
|
Mag's
the united
19015
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:01:06 -
[701] - Quote
I have said before in the past if we are going to change anything, then just remove atts and remaps all together and give everyone a base 2700 speed.
I do agree that at present it's poor game design for new players that means no matter how well you optimise your atts, you cannot optimise your skill training. As an old player this affects me far less. I have been set at full perc/will optimization for years and have almost completed all I wish for in those skill sets.
But that doesn't mean I agree however, when someone tells me that their +5 implants stopped them PvPing. That's just people looking for an excuse and that would continue even if such a change is made.
**Destination SkillQueue:- **
It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
725
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:01:35 -
[702] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: If implants for slots 1-5 provided the same quality of benefit as spending that learning implant money on a somewhat more expensive ship would, why wouldn't implants be the smarter choice? After all, implants often survive multiple ship deaths, even in null.
The problem with Hardwirings is that they are just as big an obstruction to going out and pvping that you believe Learning Implants are, because Hardwirings are module specific, so the vast majority of the time, useless to your current need (unless you literally only ever fly one ship).
Discounting my Supercap pilot who is stuck in his ship, so Hardwirings are an obvious choice for him, I have only two clones with Hardwirings in. One has a Medium Hybrid Turrent Implant (for when I fly Tengus), and another has a CPU Implant (for when I fly the alliance Apocalypse fit). Both of those Hardwirings are literally only useful when I undock the particular ship i need the Implant for. If I undock any other ship, those Hardwirings are just dead weight, extra money I am carrying in the pod, that does nothing to enhance pvp... you know, exactly like you claim Learning Implants are. So if a fleet ping goes out for a Harpy fleet, while I am in my Apocalyse clone, I have to make the choice of whether I go on the fleet and risk the Hardwiring for no benefit, or not go. Exactly like the choice the Learning Implant wearer has to make. If a deadweight Learning Implant is supposedly giving me incentive not to pvp because of the extra cost, then these deadweight Hardwirings are too.
The problem is Jump Clone timers - literally, every issue you have with Learning Implants goes away if you listen to Rains continual suggestion to do away with Jump Clone timers when switching to another clone within the same station.
|
Kaely Tanniss
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
265
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:08:02 -
[703] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: If implants for slots 1-5 provided the same quality of benefit as spending that learning implant money on a somewhat more expensive ship would, why wouldn't implants be the smarter choice? After all, implants often survive multiple ship deaths, even in null.
The problem with Hardwirings is that they are just as big an obstruction to going out and pvping that you believe Learning Implants are, because Hardwirings are module specific, so the vast majority of the time, useless to your current need (unless you literally only ever fly one ship). Discounting my Supercap pilot who is stuck in his ship, so Hardwirings are an obvious choice for him, I have only two clones with Hardwirings in. One has a Medium Hybrid Turrent Implant (for when I fly Tengus), and another has a CPU Implant (for when I fly the alliance Apocalypse fit). Both of those Hardwirings are literally only useful when I undock the particular ship i need the Implant for. If I undock any other ship, those Hardwirings are just dead weight, extra money I am carrying in the pod, that does nothing to enhance pvp... you know, exactly like you claim Learning Implants are. So if a fleet ping goes out for a Harpy fleet, while I am in my Apocalyse clone, I have to make the choice of whether I go on the fleet and risk the Hardwiring for no benefit, or not go. Exactly like the choice the Learning Implant wearer has to make. If a deadweight Learning Implant is supposedly giving me incentive not to pvp because of the extra cost, then these deadweight Hardwirings are too. The problem is Jump Clone timers - literally, every issue you have with Learning Implants goes away if you listen to Rains continual suggestion to do away with Jump Clone timers when switching to another clone within the same station.
I think the JC cooldown is fine as it is...however...one thing I could get behind would be 0 cooldown for jc's in the same station...and an increasing cooldown time the farther from the station you get..or even by region/constellation..up to the current max (adjusted by trained skills). This, imo, would help alleviate some of the issues people have with jc's.
If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29855
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:11:45 -
[704] - Quote
"risk vs reward" is a nice ideal, and it applies in a lot of situations, but in this case it's bullheaded. The reality of the choice is players choose not to undock, and this slows the pulse of EVE on a grand scale. It's not hard to follow the rationale.
It's a huge unknown. You don't know how much the game is suffering as a result because it's never been any other way. I could be wrong, but I think the local cooldown deserves a test period.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Mag's
the united
19017
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:12:53 -
[705] - Quote
Kaely Tanniss wrote:I think the JC cooldown is fine as it is...however...one thing I could get behind would be 0 cooldown for jc's in the same station...and an increasing cooldown time the farther from the station you get..or even by region/constellation..up to the current max (adjusted by trained skills). This, imo, would help alleviate some of the issues people have with jc's.
I agree completely. I have almost all my clones in the same system, I do not use them for jumping great swaths of space, but merely for their implants.
I would also be nice to have them all in the same station, one can hope.
**Destination SkillQueue:- **
It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Kaely Tanniss
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
265
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:17:15 -
[706] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:"risk vs reward" is a nice ideal, and it applies in a lot of situations, but in this case it's bullheaded. The reality of the choice is players choose not to undock, and this slows the pulse of EVE on a grand scale. It's not hard to follow the rationale.
It's a huge unknown. You don't know how much the game is suffering as a result because it's never been any other way. I could be wrong, but I think the local cooldown deserves a test period.
I agree..I could totally support that idea. Plus, having an increased cooldown by distance would prevent the "instant force projection" that CCP has tried to stop.
I think they should keep the attribute implants..teach new players how to use them...and adjust jc cooldown by distance..starting at 0 to the max by distance.
If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29856
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:18:51 -
[707] - Quote
If +5 sets weren't so damning, they'd be more popular. Win-win, right... more active and passive gameplay.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
255
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:38:14 -
[708] - Quote
Commissar Kate wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:And as I said before, and was supported again by other posts, give us a way to BUY remaps and then wasting or being stuck wouldn't be nearly as big as an issue. It's been what? 3? 4? years since CCP last gave out a bonus remap, so everyone else who used their original 2 bonus ones is on the yearly cycle. Yet we get the excuse that it locks them into sup-optimal training. Well CCP, YOU can fix that. I mean We have Dual-Char training as an ingame item. We have Resculpt as an ingame item. Why not Remap? CCP did have plex for remap on the test sever several years ago but people cried bloody murder that it was pay to win so CCP listened and scraped it. While I don't mind it costing a PLEX, I *personally* feel that anything other than PLEX/Dual-Char Training Time, should be made available In Game somehow. No I don't mean the NEX store, I mean LP stores, drops, mission rewards, whatever. I'd rather see Remaps ad Reseculpts being made available in LP Stores and the like rather than JUST via PLEX/AUR. That or have CCP seed AUR Tokens again.. (as above, LP Stores, Drops, Mission Items, etc.. however they feel as long as it becomes something someone can acquire)..
At this point though I don't care if people scream over it, just find a way to offer it. It's not Pay2Win however you slice it, as it doesn't give you ANY Advantage over someone with the same SP. And as far as I'm concerned, That's the deciding factor in Pay2Win for Eve. Not char age, but SP. If it's Pay2Win then so is Selling PLEX on the market to get the better ship and fit.. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29856
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:43:39 -
[709] - Quote
The way I see it, remaps for money or ISK is making a profit from a game flaw.
create uncomfortable situation -> charge for cure
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
90
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:55:11 -
[710] - Quote
Kaely Tanniss wrote:
These are all things that have to be considered by the player. It's all choice. Will you risk the expensive implants to avoid the 18hr cooldown..or will you jc to a cheap clone to avoid the loss in isk ut have to wait. This is where YOU, the player, have to weigh the risk vs reward. Risk: loss of expensive implants...reward: avoid the cooldown...
+1
You have a choice u could either pvp in you implanted clone or deal with jump clone timer. Which totally make since u want to have an edge training you'd have to risk more .
CCP Darwin wrote:
In fact, one issue with the current attribute system design is that doing the optimal thing (sticking to your remap, after remapping and implanting optimally) feels blah, because the accelerated skill speed (up to 2700 SP/h) is your "new normal" and any deviation just makes you feel like you're missing out, even if you're training faster than the no implants/no remaps case.
It's a bad sign when playing optimally is less fun (because you're forced not to take all the skills you want) than not knowing how to play optimally at all.
A good solution would be scrap the whole remap thing and give all characters same attributes. but keep learning implants as they are. That way people who wants to train faster could risk more , and for those who doesn't want to risk they have jump clone choice or not injecting implants at all .
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
The problem with Hardwirings is that they are just as big an obstruction to going out and pvping that you believe Learning Implants are, because Hardwirings are module specific, so the vast majority of the time, useless to your current need (unless you literally only ever fly one ship).
Discounting my Supercap pilot who is stuck in his ship, so Hardwirings are an obvious choice for him, I have only two clones with Hardwirings in. One has a Medium Hybrid Turrent Implant (for when I fly Tengus), and another has a CPU Implant (for when I fly the alliance Apocalypse fit). Both of those Hardwirings are literally only useful when I undock the particular ship i need the Implant for. If I undock any other ship, those Hardwirings are just dead weight, extra money I am carrying in the pod, that does nothing to enhance pvp... you know, exactly like you claim Learning Implants are. So if a fleet ping goes out for a Harpy fleet, while I am in my Apocalyse clone, I have to make the choice of whether I go on the fleet and risk the Hardwiring for no benefit, or not go. Exactly like the choice the Learning Implant wearer has to make. If a deadweight Learning Implant is supposedly giving me incentive not to pvp because of the extra cost, then these deadweight Hardwirings are too.
Well that's your choice to have these Hardwirings i personally have 5 Hardwirings ( i use all the time ) and i am sure they effect every ships i fly .( well most of them time )
1- 3% more cpu ( good for tight personal ship fittings , good for doctrine ships so i can improve on ) 2- 3% agility ( good for all ships i ever undock in faster warp times and less time turning ) 3- 3% Cap ( good for every ship from frigate to a capital ) 4- 3% turret Dps ( may not be that good for drone boats , missiles boats , but whatever ) 5- 3% armor ( its not that good on shield ships but still it gives u a buffer in everyship )
they may be dead-weight in some cases but hey i try as hard as i can to make use of it . and you should be smart about using them who knows u could find a way to improve on your harpy fit
Memphis Baas wrote: introduce implants that give a generic "Faster Skill Training" 2%, 3%, whatever the equivalent is when you take the current +1, +3, and +5 implants and recalculate their actual SP/hr bonus.
The problems with this having 1 implants that effect all skills are
1- They could be more costly than having two +5 or whatever implants you use. As the current system requires you to have 2 training implants to get the max SP/hour .
2 - It removes the punishment for training some skill out with attributes other than the 2 implants u are using .
if all pilots have same remap attributes ( considering we still have learning implants ), and they are using learning implant for .... let's say gunnery and they want to train for Armor after that . they would have at least 2 choices i can think of .
A - buy the 2 implants that effects armor skills and keep your gunny learning implants in . this could save you buying the gunnery learning implants again if u ever plan to come back training that . However it would not only hurt your kill-board if you lose your pod but also it would cost more to replace 4 implants , rather than 2 .
B - buy the 2 implants that effects armor skills and destroy your gunny learning implants in . It wouldn't hurt your kill-board as much and it will also punish you for destroying you implants if you ever plan to come back training gunnery. it would cost less to replace 2 implants rather than 4
i would suggest limited the training implants slots to 2 instate of 5 , giving in space bonus for those who have these 2 slots filled ( while keeping hardwiring implants slots )but that would conflict with pirate sets . Which is another issue since CCP issued geno implants 3 and 4 and they were given in special edition |
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
116
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 09:39:25 -
[711] - Quote
I should clarify, my iade previosuly on skill based implants, was that the implant would give a bonus to what the skill provides ... not the learning speed of said skill.
So, where the having of a skill gives 5% bonsu to somthing, the implants boosts that, by 1-5% ...
Not skills will be applicable, but it's an alternative to speedy learning, and attributes.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1486
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 09:53:09 -
[712] - Quote
I have read the recent replies with great interest. I notice that the giant elephant in the room is being somewhat ignored by some.
Whilst one can discuss ever more complicated, twisted, and convoluted ways to somehow shape the current learning system into a pretzel, one cannot escape the certainty of the following statement.
If one was to create a learning system to engage and delight the playerbase, what we have would certainly not be it.
I believe CCP Darwin is looking in the right direction.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
169
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 09:55:40 -
[713] - Quote
Set the training speed to 2700SP/h for everyone, make implants unpluggable just like ship modules and we won't have any issues with jump clones either.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1487
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 10:27:51 -
[714] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Set the training speed to 2700SP/h for everyone, make implants unpluggable just like ship modules and we won't have any issues with jump clones either.
This is a reasonable and sensible suggestion, resolving the implant issue, will also resolve most if not all of the issues with Jump clones.
However, if we did not currently have learning implants, would we create them now, I suggest going one step further, remove learning implants and the learning component of Pirate implants, and increase the training speed to take account of that, I suggest at +4 with a small adjustment to capital training base SP needs to compensate for the loss Of +5 as it is only there that they have the greatest impact, as sub this, the new base will compensate.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1768
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 10:40:53 -
[715] - Quote
Kaely Tanniss wrote:These are all things that have to be considered by the player. It's all choice. Will you risk the expensive implants to avoid the 18hr cooldown..or will you jc to a cheap clone to avoid the loss in isk ut have to wait. This is where YOU, the player, have to weigh the risk vs reward. Risk: loss of expensive implants...reward: avoid the cooldown...
You are wrong. The fundamental argument has nothing to do with risk of losing the implants. My +5 learning clone is much cheaper than my PvP clones. It is about choosing learning speed vs in game attribute enhancement such as speed, tracking, armour etc.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Xer Jin
Ancient Anomaly and Artifacts Recovery Explorators
123
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 11:39:22 -
[716] - Quote
its very simple remove attributes they aren't needed. they add complexity thats not need or fun. but in doing so allow us to train all skills at the current optimized attribute speed. that will make everyone happy. as for learning implants since there would be no attributes we could have implants that give a percentage bonus to reduction in training time. sound good every one ok good lets move along to qqing in another thread |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
94
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 11:45:21 -
[717] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Kaely Tanniss wrote:These are all things that have to be considered by the player. It's all choice. Will you risk the expensive implants to avoid the 18hr cooldown..or will you jc to a cheap clone to avoid the loss in isk ut have to wait. This is where YOU, the player, have to weigh the risk vs reward. Risk: loss of expensive implants...reward: avoid the cooldown...
You are wrong. The fundamental argument has nothing to do with risk of losing the implants. My +5 learning clone is much cheaper than my PvP clones. It is about choosing learning speed vs in game attribute enhancement such as speed, tracking, armour etc.
you are taking things out of context but i see your point
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Set the training speed to 2700SP/h for everyone, make implants unpluggable just like ship modules and we won't have any issues with jump clones either. This is a reasonable and sensible suggestion, resolving the implant issue, will also resolve most if not all of the issues with Jump clones. However, if we did not currently have learning implants, would we create them now, I suggest going one step further, remove learning implants and the learning component of Pirate implants, and increase the training speed to take account of that, I suggest at +4 with a small adjustment to capital training base SP needs to compensate for the loss Of +5 as it is only there that they have the greatest impact, as sub this, the new base will compensate.
good suggestion but it removes the whole concept of having a edge of training faster than others . The difference is good while being the same as any other player is bad
I think we all agree remap is bad and should be scraped or reworked so my suggestion is that all characters have the same attributes
also it would be move viable to remove the whole training learning attributes from implants that uses slot 1 to 5 ( including pirate faction implants )
Add new slots (11 and 12 ) these slots for training implants and if they are filled with learning implants toy get a bonus in space based on the value the implant give to your attribute . so at least it will be worth while to use learning implants while flying in space
that for those who say my pvp clone worth more than my learning could use the pvp clone and learning at the same time |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
116
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 11:54:39 -
[718] - Quote
I'm just shocked that for what must be the first time it seems that everyone is agreed that an age old thing within EVE (attributes/remapping) is screwed and needs either fixing or removing.
Not sure I've seen such universality.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1061
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 12:39:23 -
[719] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Kaely Tanniss wrote:These are all things that have to be considered by the player. It's all choice. Will you risk the expensive implants to avoid the 18hr cooldown..or will you jc to a cheap clone to avoid the loss in isk ut have to wait. This is where YOU, the player, have to weigh the risk vs reward. Risk: loss of expensive implants...reward: avoid the cooldown...
You are wrong. The fundamental argument has nothing to do with risk of losing the implants. My +5 learning clone is much cheaper than my PvP clones. It is about choosing learning speed vs in game attribute enhancement such as speed, tracking, armour etc.
And this is the core of the other argument. It is about choosing learning speed vs in game attribute enhancements such as speed, tracking, armor...
One gives you no practical ingame benefit except to learn faster, ala the old learning skills. The other has a actual pilot Impact benefit. you balance out the field, people can commit their game time and ISk to buying implants that will help them fly their ship.
Yaay I have a training implant I spent 50 million on... But it doesn't help me fly my frigate/destroyer any better...
Yaay!!!!
|
Memphis Baas
159
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 12:46:36 -
[720] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote:Make a new class of Jump Clone, this would be clean clone, NO implant spots (aka an ideal PVP Clone for most people, at least early on). This could would not be affected by cool down, and would not count toward your normal max clones. Limit 1 (so you can't get 12 of them from the 12 rookie corp schools).
So this would be a clone you can't put learning or any other expensive implants in, thus ensuring that everyone has access to one clone they can PVP in from the beginning. Ignores the cooldown, so if you just JC'd from your Exploration Clone, to your Mission Clone, and suddenly have a chance to go fight, you can JC into it. Thus removing the Cooldown as a reason to be unable to PvP.. (Likewise you can jump back to the clone you were in before to wait out the rest of the cooldown from any normal jumpclone maneuvers).
I believe that if they do this, they will have a new, more easily explained metric for measuring just how much of a PVP deterrent the attribute implants are: they can simply look at how many people use this clone vs. how many just ignore it completely and sit in station being irrational.
|
|
Anthar Thebess
863
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 13:09:33 -
[721] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
To throw a question back at you. Are learning implants a significant LP sink in the economy? A set of +5s is a lot of LP that someone has spent. What economic implications would removing that sink have?
Quite big. Many players live from selling those implants in many LP stores this is the only thing actually valuable that can be sold. So this is first and very big player group impacted . Next one is traders that buy and sell stuff. Last but very active are gankers - someone have to move those implants, so they will loose potential targets. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
116
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 13:10:57 -
[722] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Zappity wrote:Kaely Tanniss wrote:These are all things that have to be considered by the player. It's all choice. Will you risk the expensive implants to avoid the 18hr cooldown..or will you jc to a cheap clone to avoid the loss in isk ut have to wait. This is where YOU, the player, have to weigh the risk vs reward. Risk: loss of expensive implants...reward: avoid the cooldown...
You are wrong. The fundamental argument has nothing to do with risk of losing the implants. My +5 learning clone is much cheaper than my PvP clones. It is about choosing learning speed vs in game attribute enhancement such as speed, tracking, armour etc. And this is the core of the other argument. It is about choosing learning speed vs in game attribute enhancements such as speed, tracking, armor... One gives you no practical ingame benefit except to learn faster, ala the old learning skills. The other has a actual pilot Impact benefit. you balance out the field, people can commit their game time and ISk to buying implants that will help them fly their ship. Yaay I have a training implant I spent 50 million on... But it doesn't help me fly my frigate/destroyer any better...
better and sooner are two very distinct and desriable qualities.
Just look at teh queues outside an Apple shop when iPhone6 comes out ... because you get it earlier doesn't mean you'll be any better at using it when you get it ... but, importantly, some people wish to get their before other people (in EVE this can give you an advantage).
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Anthar Thebess
863
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 13:38:06 -
[723] - Quote
Don't mix RL and EVE. Eve is game , game that should give pleasure or challenge. Waiting ages for something that you need now can be only justified by ability to do something already.
New players needs lot of time before they will be able to do something.
From my perspective , new players should start with specific builds that could offer them to be : - warrior ( racial frigate and guns V) - industrialist (same for industry ) - miner ( barge from the beginning)
For new people ability to fly tech 2 frigate 5 days earlier is very important.
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
116
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 13:40:52 -
[724] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Don't mix RL and EVE. Eve is game , game that should give pleasure or challenge. Waiting ages for something that you need now can be only justified by ability to do something already.
New players needs lot of time before they will be able to do something.
From my perspective , new players should start with specific builds that could offer them to be : - warrior ( racial frigate and guns V) - industrialist (same for industry ) - miner ( barge from the beginning)
For new people ability to fly tech 2 frigate 5 days earlier is very important.
the 'time savings' provided by implants is not massive ... it's a tiny proportion.
And, real life attitudes often find their way into a virtual reality - wether genuine or contrived - it's part of the reason why it's a virtual reality. ;)
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
986
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 16:59:25 -
[725] - Quote
Leannor wrote:the 'time savings' provided by implants is not massive ... it's a tiny proportion.
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.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Serene Repose
2233
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 17:38:46 -
[726] - Quote
Personally, I think +5s and 10%s offered by devs in all games...add two to your strength, add 1.8 to your endurance...is BS. Always has been. Always will be. "Not overwhelming..." Yeah, not significant, and certainly not worth what it costs to get it. I've always wondered how stupid devs think players are, then I see scads of epeeners turn it into a religious precept:
"Thou must have this or thou is fail."
Then, cry about the implant losses. Add them to gankers loot so they can swell up with a fascinating sensation of diabolical accomplishment. Even the titillation factor is miniscule - but for the other tenet:
"Simple pleasures for simple minds."
Oh yes, but if you've got the +4 implant, and he's got the +5 you're guaranteed to lose, regardless of all your training, experience, support, skills...yeah, the intellect meter is riding high with this one. +5 Whatta boost. Oh yeah. It's higher than without it.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Treason never prospers. What is the reason?
Why, if it prospers, none dare call it "treason."
|
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
77
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 17:39:19 -
[727] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Don't mix RL and EVE. Eve is game , game that should give pleasure or challenge. Waiting ages for something that you need now can be only justified by ability to do something already.
New players needs lot of time before they will be able to do something.
From my perspective , new players should start with specific builds that could offer them to be : - warrior ( racial frigate and guns V) - industrialist (same for industry ) - miner ( barge from the beginning)
For new people ability to fly tech 2 frigate 5 days earlier is very important.
This is a genus idea.
You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
|
Pok Nibin
Filial Pariahs
487
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 17:45:00 -
[728] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:Anthar Thebess wrote:Don't mix RL and EVE. Eve is game , game that should give pleasure or challenge. Waiting ages for something that you need now can be only justified by ability to do something already.
New players needs lot of time before they will be able to do something.
From my perspective , new players should start with specific builds that could offer them to be : - warrior ( racial frigate and guns V) - industrialist (same for industry ) - miner ( barge from the beginning)
For new people ability to fly tech 2 frigate 5 days earlier is very important.
This is a genus idea. Did we redefine "genius"? Send me an update. I missed that memo.
Dont fight it; Rejoin your Amarrian patriarchs; You know you want to.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
179
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 17:46:13 -
[729] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Leannor wrote:the 'time savings' provided by implants is not massive ... it's a tiny proportion. 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.
Whats the difference between +3's and +5's and then include the training time to get cybernetics from that required for lv4-5
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1089
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 17:50:19 -
[730] - Quote
Lets just accept that 0.0 CSM shills and management get their way anyway and stop bothering & caring. And that all pretence of "discussion" is just that: pretence. |
|
Serene Repose
2233
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 17:55:57 -
[731] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Lets just accept that 0.0 CSM shills and management get their way anyway and stop bothering & caring. And that all pretence of "discussion" is just that: pretence. Now you're talkin'.
Treason never prospers. What is the reason?
Why, if it prospers, none dare call it "treason."
|
Pok Nibin
Filial Pariahs
488
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 18:14:05 -
[732] - Quote
There's this good movie, futuristic. Code 64. Rather than implants to boost abilities, these guys use a virus. Only one will work at a time, but, you get abilities way beyond your norm for a limited time.
See the idea here? Make implants active, like active ship modules. Let them significantly boost AN attribute for a limited time. Doesn't matter which, charm, aim, diplomacy, warpdrive. Make them task specific and exclusive. You can load the whole set, but run one at a time for say.... 24-hours.
AND, what'd be different than the virus is you can turn them off, and turn on another one. You won't have to wait for the virus to dissipate. Use them like switches.
Where EVE gets in trouble is these attributes in gaming tradition, charm/intelligence/wisdom, the standard rack, are handled through leveling - which we do not have. We could increase the attributes through study - which we do not do, rather than an annual shot at the attributes sliders...you get the idea.
EVE is using a very convoluted system to try to handle this feature. No matter how they try to implement this it'll always come out funky in some way or another. Like repairing bad plumbing, fix one leak, another appears - endlessly.
The urge is to get rid of the plumbing entirely, rather than be bothered by the reapproach and redesign. Not very bright, really.
Just a thought. I'm not begging to alter your game, so don't react like someone is trying to steal your bleggy.
Dont fight it; Rejoin your Amarrian patriarchs; You know you want to.
|
Memphis Baas
159
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 18:18:37 -
[733] - Quote
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. |
Vyl Vit
1046
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 18:25:27 -
[734] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Lets just accept that 0.0 CSM shills and management get their way anyway and stop bothering & caring. And that all pretence of "discussion" is just that: pretence. Judging by CSM participation on this forum of late, I'd vote for this before I'd vote for a CSM.
Anyone with any sense has already left town.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
179
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 18:28:26 -
[735] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote: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.
cloak + sit in dead space |
Celestia Via
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance
57
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 18:33:24 -
[736] - Quote
Even though I agree that the attribute system needs work and that, as is made obvious by my previous posts, the learning implants are indeed useless and even reason for some not to risk PVP, I disagree with removing attributes entirely.
Even if attributes are not a meaningful mechanic they do have one important role which noone seems to have brought up. (unless I missed it somehow, in which case im sorry)
They represent character investment. Dont forget, EvE is not all about numbers and calculations, its an RPG. With characters. Character attributes and the ability to alter them (remaps) are the main thing that makes your character feel abit different and unique from others. If we abolish them, all thats left to differentiate one toon from another is the mugshot.
EvE is an impersonal game as it is, since you cant actually see the character interact with anything else than the couch in officers quarters.
Taking away even the little things that make your Brutor different from a Civire would make the characters even more impersonal and harder to relate to, i.e. "be proud of". For that matter, we could just as well be spaceships rather than people.
In my opinion EvE characters need more human - relatable (is that even a word??) traits, taking away the few already there would be a mistake.
There's no place like space
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
172
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 18:50:19 -
[737] - Quote
Celestia Via wrote:Even though I agree that the attribute system needs work and that, as is made obvious by my previous posts, the learning implants are indeed useless and even reason for some not to risk PVP, I disagree with removing attributes entirely.
Even if attributes are not a meaningful mechanic they do have one important role which noone seems to have brought up. (unless I missed it somehow, in which case im sorry)
They represent character investment. Dont forget, EvE is not all about numbers and calculations, its an RPG. With characters. Character attributes and the ability to alter them (remaps) are the main thing that makes your character feel abit different and unique from others. If we abolish them, all thats left to differentiate one toon from another is the mugshot.
EvE is an impersonal game as it is, since you cant actually see the character interact with anything else than the couch in officers quarters.
Taking away even the little things that make your Brutor different from a Civire would make the characters even more impersonal and harder to relate to, i.e. "be proud of". For that matter, we could just as well be spaceships rather than people.
In my opinion EvE characters need more human - relatable (is that even a word??) traits, taking away the few already there would be a mistake.
Fine leave the attributes in but decouple them from the learning speed.
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Celestia Via
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance
57
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 18:58:29 -
[738] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote: Fine leave the attributes in but decouple them from the learning speed.
okay, but they have to mean something ingame.
I, the average player, "need" to imagine my high strength punching your high intelligence in the face :P unless there is actually any way of that happening, a high *whatever* character is meaningless.
any suggestions?
There's no place like space
|
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
921
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 19:00:29 -
[739] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Don't mix RL and EVE. Eve is game , game that should give pleasure or challenge. Waiting ages for something that you need now can be only justified by ability to do something already.
New players needs lot of time before they will be able to do something.
From my perspective , new players should start with specific builds that could offer them to be : - warrior ( racial frigate and guns V) - industrialist (same for industry ) - miner ( barge from the beginning)
For new people ability to lose expensive tech 2 frigates 5 days earlier is very important.
/fixed
In EVE "I want it all and I want it now" often ends in "I lost it all...".
Remove insurance.
This thread is the reason, why CCP should stop advertising any aspect of EVE PvE
|
Ace Northmen
Sanctuary Reapers Holdings
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 19:35:14 -
[740] - Quote
I think what people fails to understand learning implants are ment to have an edge on others in training .
it gives a feeling that you are better than someone else ,who started at the same time as you, skill point wise .
removing them will beat the whole concept of i wanna risk more in order to get more advanced ships faster. |
|
Rinai Vero
Moira. Villore Accords
409
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 19:36:12 -
[741] - Quote
Celestia Via wrote:Even though I agree that the attribute system needs work and that, as is made obvious by my previous posts, the learning implants are indeed useless and even reason for some not to risk PVP, I disagree with removing attributes entirely.
Even if attributes are not a meaningful mechanic they do have one important role which noone seems to have brought up. (unless I missed it somehow, in which case im sorry)
They represent character investment. Dont forget, EvE is not all about numbers and calculations, its an RPG. With characters. Character attributes and the ability to alter them (remaps) are the main thing that makes your character feel abit different and unique from others. If we abolish them, all thats left to differentiate one toon from another is the mugshot.
EvE is an impersonal game as it is, since you cant actually see the character interact with anything else than the couch in officers quarters.
Taking away even the little things that make your Brutor different from a Civire would make the characters even more impersonal and harder to relate to, i.e. "be proud of". For that matter, we could just as well be spaceships rather than people.
In my opinion EvE characters need more human - relatable (is that even a word??) traits, taking away the few already there would be a mistake.
Can you ever think of a situation where your stats actually had an effect on your roleplay in EVE?
Like, say you remap all your int into cha... do you all of a sudden start auto piloting billions of isk worth of assets through known gatecamps planning on charming any hostiles?
Character sheets have no impact on EVE as an "RPG" as you are presenting it... and they shouldn't. Your *actions* in game are your roleplay, and only your actions distinguish your character. If you care about RP, how you play should reflect that regardless of your stats.
Is your Civire character a Caldari Loyalist? Probably not consistent RP to be running missions for Fed Navy LP. That's impactful to your play in a way that a Civire racial stat bonus to Wilpower vs Brutor +1 to Strengh probably never will be.
EVE doesn't need game mechanics to make characters have "more human - relatable traits." That's your job as a human who plays EVE: to portray your own character in the sandbox. |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
96
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 20:07:28 -
[742] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Another idea could be:
- remove attributes and remaps, give everyone a flat training speed
+ 1 i've already suggested the very same thing in my earlier post , i am just gonna quote what i wrote
Jane Shapperd wrote: A good solution would be scrap the whole re. map thing and give all characters same attributes. but keep learning implants as they are( with minor editing in slots see the end of the post ) . That way people who wants to train faster could risk more , and for those who doesn't want to risk they have jump clone choice or not injecting implants at all
Memphis Baas wrote: - change attribute implants to just be implants that give a bonus to training speed
I have already posted why it was bad idea
Jane Shapperd wrote: The problems with this having 1 implants that effect training all skills are
1- They could be more costly than having two +5 or whatever implants you use. As the current system requires you to have 2 training implants to get the max SP/hour .
2 - It removes the punishment for training some skill out with attributes other than the 2 implants u are using .
Memphis Baas wrote: - 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.
as it was mentioned by 2 posts older than this post clock + deep dead space afking
Again the thing with implants is concept of having an edge on others by training faster . The difference is good while being the same as any other player is bad
I think we all agree remap is bad and should be scraped or reworked so my suggestion is that all characters have the same attributes
also it would be move viable to remove the whole training learning attributes from implants that uses slot 1 to 5 ( including pirate faction implants )
Add new slots (11 and 12 ) these slots for training implants ( since it takes only 2 implants to effect a speed of training a skill) and if they are filled with learning implants you get a bonus in space based on the value the implant give to your attribute . ( i don't like the bonus idea but hey many of the posts suggested that) so at least it will be worth while to use learning implants while flying in space .
that for those who say my pvp clone worth more than my learning could use the pvp clone and learning at the same time. aka pirate faction set in 1-6 , Hardwiring 7-10 and learning 11-12 |
Memphis Baas
159
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 20:21:33 -
[743] - Quote
Who is this "others" you think you have an edge on?
It's like "I'm going to buy a car so I have an edge compared to others" and you live in the New York suburbs. I suppose you can feel smug when passing the bicycle guy, but otherwise there's no edge; your car is just the average, expected thing you're supposed to have in today's world.
Meanwhile, you're arguing against free public transportation because you want to retain the choice to have an edge vs. the bicycle guy who can't get a car for whatever reason. Or because "choice is good." |
Seiko Sorrelius
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 20:36:44 -
[744] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: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.
I agree with everything that you've said thus far. I respond specifically to you because I'd rather not read 37 pages of text that probably go over the same few things 30 times, but I wanted to throw in my support for an implant and remap overhaul. Their effect on skill training being removed AND/OR replaced entirely is my ideal.
No game mechanic should ever place fun against permanent character growth: remaps.
No game mechanic should place isk loss against permanent charcter growth: attribute implants.
Isk is the lifeblood of the game and can almost directly correlate to fun, at least for the players for which attribute implants are a substantial investment.
I propose that to fix both of these issues, we detach attributes from skills and instead give them different bonuses as a traditional rpg does, but this is only one potential solution where many others could work.
I.e. perception = weapon damage, charisma = trading or industry bonus, intelligence = tank, etc. 1% per level.
Drop attribute bases down to 0. 10 allocatable points, 5 max per attribute. Essentially, attributes become powerful hardwires. Economy shouldn't change significantly, but will shift around. Remap code can be left in place. Implant code can be left in place. And primarily, skill training is no longer linked to a loss in fun. |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 21:32:15 -
[745] - Quote
So started up this topic in the features and idea's section because that's usually where future ideas are discussed I did not realize people were discussing in the general area. I had an idea though for removing attributes which i'll outline again since this forum is remaining open.
If they removed remapping and standardized all attributes to a flat value.
-It would not be fair to the people who spent time training cybernetics to 4 or 5 to suddenly have an increase in training time due to a low 'base' attribute value. -currently training cybernetics V takes over a year of training with +5's to make up for the 10+days it takes to train cybernetic V
It's for those reasons I recommend the following changes. -double the effect of all implants (2,4,6,8,10) -use standard implants (current +4) as the base to shape everything around
The end effect would be as follows assuming you currently have max mapping for a skill -improved implants users would see a slight buff to train time reducing the payoff time for cybernetics V to about half a year -standard implants users would see zero change -basic through limited implant users would see a slight increase in training time however that is only IF MAPPED PERFECTLY FOR SKILL as i'll explain below.
It may seem like the limited - basic implant users are getting a hard nerf keep in mind that nerf is ONLY if you are max mapped for a skill currently. Most people who are going for max training through aren't using these implants anyways. if you're currently mapped incorrectly or mapped evenly across all 4/5 you would still see a slight decrease in training as the base training rate would be raised across the board from the current 17points per attribute to a flat 23 across all attributes. The end result would look like this for attribute points with each implant.
improved - 33 standard - 31 basic - 29 limited beta - 27 limited - 25 none - 23
|
Bones Outten
Council of Economic Advisors Liga Hanseatica
10
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 21:39:11 -
[746] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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.
I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying.
o/ |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
96
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 21:42:26 -
[747] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Who is this "others" you think you have an edge on?
It's like "I'm going to buy a car so I have an edge compared to others" and you live in the New York suburbs. I suppose you can feel smug when passing the bicycle guy, but otherwise there's no edge; your car is just the average, expected thing you're supposed to have in today's world.
Meanwhile, you're arguing against free public transportation because you want to retain the choice to have an edge vs. the bicycle guy who can't get a car for whatever reason. Or because "choice is good."
i mean by and edge on other is that i am training faster than other pilots because i am willing to risk more.
to tie it with real world
no implants = public transportation +1 =bicycle +2 = motorcycle +3 = average car +5 = some sport or expensive ass car.
now i don't have anything public transportation nor any other choice people will use that so be it but i want to have the choice to chose one of these choices |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 21:43:06 -
[748] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote:The problem with learning implants is that they don't contribute to in game activities. Having them active means you are less likely to be doing something else which other people can interact with. So when I'm in my +5 learning I'm not in my snakes, or industry, or whatever else.
Encouraging people into learning clones rather than 'interacting' clones is bad game design. Thats not the implants that entirely down to you. True but why promote a feature that makes people chose inactivity for a large percentage of the playerbase? If the option for attribute implants didn't exist people wouldn't get themselfs locked in "in the wrong clone" in the first place.
This could be helped if they introduced a different timer for jumpcloning within the same station. Say 2 hours or something. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1090
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 21:57:09 -
[749] - Quote
Bones Outten wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh? 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. I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying. o/
You avoid it because you choose to be bad at it, your implants have nothing to do with it. |
Seiko Sorrelius
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 22:24:14 -
[750] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Bones Outten wrote:
I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying.
o/
You avoid it because you choose to be bad at it, your implants have nothing to do with it.
Yeah man, everyone is lying to you. You know them better than they know themselves. Good work! |
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
96
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 22:26:43 -
[751] - Quote
Seiko Sorrelius wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Bones Outten wrote:
I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying.
o/
You avoid it because you choose to be bad at it, your implants have nothing to do with it. Yeah man, everyone is lying to you. You know them better than they know themselves. Good work!
i think his point was care-bears will avoid regardless of the implant they have . they will always find an excuse to not pvp
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1090
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 22:42:13 -
[752] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:Seiko Sorrelius wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Bones Outten wrote:
I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying.
o/
You avoid it because you choose to be bad at it, your implants have nothing to do with it. Yeah man, everyone is lying to you. You know them better than they know themselves. Good work! i think his point was care-bears will avoid regardless of the implant they have . they will always find an excuse to not pvp
Apart from that, a cursory glance at his losses shows he has no clue which, given his character age, is a choice. So implants or not won't matter one bit. |
Seiko Sorrelius
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 22:45:22 -
[753] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:Seiko Sorrelius wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Bones Outten wrote:
I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying.
o/
You avoid it because you choose to be bad at it, your implants have nothing to do with it. Yeah man, everyone is lying to you. You know them better than they know themselves. Good work! i think his point was care-bears will avoid regardless of the implant they have . they will always find an excuse to not pvp
Except multiple people have pointed out they would pvp if attribute implants didn't exist. I don't pvp on seiko because she is my high-sp character, but I do pvp on my other characters. So you're simply ignoring the people saying they would pvp if it weren't for attribute implants. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
33015
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 22:53:35 -
[754] - Quote
Bones Outten wrote:I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying.
o/ Jump clones provide a solution to that and there are services that allow anyone to install a jump clone quickly and easily.
You could just as easily have an empty clone for pvp under the existing methods of interacting with the game. Choosing not to use those solutions isn't a game design fault.
So it's is an issue that has nothing at all to do with learning implants, it's just your gameplay that results in no pvp for you.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
725
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:00:16 -
[755] - Quote
Bones Outten wrote: I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying. o/
Which ship would that be? A Cruiser, that'd be about on par with a set of +3's? I hope you haven't wasted any xp on training Battleship, or T2 or T3 ship skills, because the cost of one of those must be terrifying, since it is far more than a Cruiser and a set of Implants. Or are you being, perhaps, a touch dishonest?
|
Seiko Sorrelius
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:00:32 -
[756] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Bones Outten wrote:I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying.
o/ Jump clones provide a solution to that and there are services that allow anyone to install a jump clone quickly and easily. You could just as easily have an empty clone for pvp under the existing methods of interacting with the game. Choosing not to use those solutions isn't a game design fault. So it's is an issue that has nothing at all to do with learning implants, it's just your gameplay that results in no pvp for you.
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. |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
97
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:02:41 -
[757] - Quote
Seiko Sorrelius wrote:Jane Shapperd wrote:Seiko Sorrelius wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Bones Outten wrote:
I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying.
o/
You avoid it because you choose to be bad at it, your implants have nothing to do with it. Yeah man, everyone is lying to you. You know them better than they know themselves. Good work! i think his point was care-bears will avoid regardless of the implant they have . they will always find an excuse to not pvp Except multiple people have pointed out they would pvp if attribute implants didn't exist. I don't pvp on seiko because she is my high-sp character, but I do pvp on my other characters. So you're simply ignoring the people saying they would pvp if it weren't for attribute implants.
I pvp with + 5 attribute implants injected in my head. It's not matter of implant is matter of not want to risk your implant now if you do not want to risk your implants jump clone .
like i suggested before adding a bonus to your ship when having 2 attribute implants injected
would encourage players to pvp in these attribute implants |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1092
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:04:54 -
[758] - Quote
Seiko Sorrelius wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:Bones Outten wrote:I avoid PvP purely because the implants cost as much as the ship I am flying.
o/ Jump clones provide a solution to that and there are services that allow anyone to install a jump clone quickly and easily. You could just as easily have an empty clone for pvp under the existing methods of interacting with the game. Choosing not to use those solutions isn't a game design fault. So it's is an issue that has nothing at all to do with learning implants, it's just your gameplay that results in no pvp for you. 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.
"this game takes effort, this is not right!"
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
33017
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:23:01 -
[759] - Quote
Seiko Sorrelius wrote:Except multiple people have pointed out they would pvp if attribute implants didn't exist. I don't pvp on seiko because she is my high-sp character, but I do pvp on my other characters. So you're simply ignoring the people saying they would pvp if it weren't for attribute implants. One question and one counter-point for consideration:
One Why does having high skillpoints lead you to chose not to pvp?
Two Gameplay is about the way each of us interact with the game. The more complex the options for gameplay that still work, the more opportunities there are for players to discover unique solutions (emergent play) as well as play the anticipated ways. Complex systems also usually provide for more non-linear play, which leads to a more varied and interesting game.
The trick is in ensuring that systems aren't complex just for the sake of it, so that they all provide for interesting gameplay.
Players stating they would pvp in the absence of learning implants doesn't itself mean the current game design is at fault. The current game design provides solutions to that, especially through jump clones. Choosing not to use that option is the way someone has chosen to play the game, not the games fault.
That doesn't make the current situation ideal in terms of game design, but learning implants aren't the cause of non-pvp. That is down to player choice because they don't use the other forms of gameplay available.
Let's not make the game more linear and less interesting on the whole, just because some fail to use all paths available.
One issue which CCP has already mentioned in the use of jump clones and the way they are used to change implant sets. So change that aspect of the play and those that could otherwise pvp might also have a solution. Make implants removable without destruction for example. That would solve the problem for those people. Without considering the impact on other areas of play, that isn't necessarily good design either, but there has to be more than one solution that still keeps interesting play in the game.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Selena Aldura
Team Evil
706
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:23:39 -
[760] - Quote
The current attribute system is fine and not broken. The thing that's broken is the people that are not smart enough to know how to use it.
God forbid you have to put some thought into your skillplan and remaps instead of just winging it if you want to train with some efficiency. If you can't grasp this simple concept you deserve to be punished with slow training.
Removing learning implants won't make much of a difference to encourage pvp either, not to mention all the people that make ISK from selling said implants. The whiners that don't want to loose ISK by getting podded with learning implants will just complain about something else. |
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
97
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:37:58 -
[761] - Quote
Selena Aldura wrote:The current attribute system is fine and not broken. The thing that's broken is the people that are not smart enough to know how to use it.
God forbid you have to put some thought into your skillplan and remaps instead of just winging it if you want to train with some efficiency. If you can't grasp this simple concept you deserve to be punished with slow training.
Removing learning implants won't make much of a difference to encourage pvp either, not to mention all the people that make ISK from selling said implants. The whiners that don't want to loose ISK by getting podded with learning implants will just complain about something else.
implants system is fine as it is but the proplem with remap system it is kinda dull to new players Say i am a newbie and i wanna train for a guardian assuming i have all +5 .
i'd have to ramp at least 4 times to be perfect guardian pilot
1- willpower -perception : to get my Amarr cruiser to 5 2 - Intel - memory : to unlock logistics skills and train cap , armor skills 3- perception - willpower : to train logistic skills 4- memory - perception : to train combat or logistic drones.
you would need 4 remaps to get the highest sp/hour which kinda bullshit |
Seiko Sorrelius
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:40:24 -
[762] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Seiko Sorrelius wrote:[ 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. "this game takes effort, this is not right!" Also, if we follow your.... logic... then we should do away with ship losses too. It just keeps ppl from pvping you know.
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. |
Kenshi Eto Uzamaki
The Coven's Spoon Corner Pub
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:44:02 -
[763] - Quote
Why change/do some massive overhaul, when you could just remove the clone jump timer and remap restrictions....problem solved. You can remap every week if you want to, and jump into your bank clone for pvp...if u pvp in a blank clone........ |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1361
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:44:46 -
[764] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Leannor wrote:the 'time savings' provided by implants is not massive ... it's a tiny proportion. 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. Whats the difference between +3's and +5's and then include the training time to get cybernetics that is required for +5's from lv4-5 Changing from +3's to +5's is about 180 SP/hour if I remember the applicable numbers correctly. Non-faction +3's only take level cybernetics 1 so 750 out of the 768k it takes to use +5's.
So for +5's to pay back the training investment from +3's in hours is (768,000 - 750)/180 = 4262.5 hours or 177.6 days.
After that the benefit is a flat 180sp/h. For reference being fully mapped to a skill without implants is 2250sp/h, add +3's and it's 2520sp/h, vs +5's at 2700sp/h.
I would do just from lvl 4 cybernetics to 5 but I don't know how much SP it takes to get to 4. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1093
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:45:53 -
[765] - Quote
Seiko Sorrelius wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Seiko Sorrelius wrote:[ 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. "this game takes effort, this is not right!" Also, if we follow your.... logic... then we should do away with ship losses too. It just keeps ppl from pvping you know. 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.
It's not a strawman at all, your logic easily allows for the removal of ship losses. Here's some other things that are part of EVE; choices, consequences to choices, risk and risk vs reward.
You just want implants gone because it suits you, not because it'll be "good for the game". |
Seiko Sorrelius
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:52:35 -
[766] - Quote
Selena Aldura wrote:The current attribute system is fine and not broken. The thing that's broken is the people that are not smart enough to know how to use it.
God forbid you have to put some thought into your skillplan and remaps instead of just winging it if you want to train with some efficiency. If you can't grasp this simple concept you deserve to be punished with slow training.
Removing learning implants won't make much of a difference to encourage pvp either, not to mention all the people that make ISK from selling said implants. The whiners that don't want to loose ISK by getting podded with learning implants will just complain about something else.
I think what you and everyone else who makes this same argument fail to understand is that it isn't a matter of a lack of understanding of the mechanic, it is that the mechanic forces you to make a stupid choice.
You either have fun playing the game.
Or you train optimally in a boring-as-hell manner.
And you can go between those two options and remap a few times, but then you're still going to get stuck in some boring remap at the end, and someone who trained optimally is going to be better than you. And the guy who didn't train optimally is going to have more fun than you in the mean time. |
Seiko Sorrelius
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 23:57:20 -
[767] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote: 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.
It's not a strawman at all, your logic easily allows for the removal of ship losses. Here's some other things that are part of EVE; choices, consequences to choices, risk and risk vs reward.
You just want implants gone because it suits you, not because it'll be "good for the game".[/quote]
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. |
Kenshi Eto Uzamaki
The Coven's Spoon Corner Pub
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:01:52 -
[768] - Quote
Examples: Perception = weapon (turret, missile) damage 0.5% per level Willpower = ship speed, 0.5% per level charisma = trading tax 0.5% per level intelligence = shield, armor, hull 0.5% per level. Memory = Manufacturing time 1% per level
Drop attribute bases down to 0. 10 allocatable points, 5 max per attribute. Default everyone to 2 each and give everyone a bonus remap. Essentially, attributes become powerful hardwires. Economy shouldn't change significantly, but will shift around. Remap code can be left in place. Implant code can be left in place. And primarily, skill training is no longer linked to a loss in fun.[/quote]
I like my idea moar! |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
33018
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:14:58 -
[769] - Quote
Kenshi Eto Uzamaki wrote:
Examples: Perception = weapon (turret, missile) damage 0.5% per level Willpower = ship speed, 0.5% per level charisma = trading tax 0.5% per level intelligence = shield, armor, hull 0.5% per level. Memory = Manufacturing time 1% per level
Drop attribute bases down to 0. 10 allocatable points, 5 max per attribute. Default everyone to 2 each and give everyone a bonus remap. Essentially, attributes become powerful hardwires. Economy shouldn't change significantly, but will shift around. Remap code can be left in place. Implant code can be left in place. And primarily, skill training is no longer linked to a loss in fun.
I like my idea moar!
The benefits of a simplified system seem great (I liked your idea when I first read it to).
But what about any negatives from this approach also.
- Let's say a guy maps to Charisma or Memory. Is he encouraged to do anything other than industry because min-max is not optimal and that makes it riskier for him (seems that optimal and risk are major themes running in this thread. I can't pvp because I'm in a learning clone. Not optimal. Too risky)? - Let's say someone maps to Percetion, but the FC of a fleet wants a logistics pilot. The player is happy to do it, but the min-max FC wants someone mapped to Intelligence for remote shield or armor reps. - A player is mapped to Perception because she pvps constantly. But also earns her ISK through PI and market trading. Is she required to have alts for manufacturing and trading just to compete on an even keel?
Not saying your idea is bad, just that any idea has both positives and negatives and you need to analyse the negatives just as much because all of those and more will end up being the reason someone else whines about the system.
Having thought about what you proposed, I don't personally think making attributes more like hard-wired implants provides much benefit over the current system, but that could just totally b me.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
97
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:19:00 -
[770] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Kenshi Eto Uzamaki wrote:
Examples: Perception = weapon (turret, missile) damage 0.5% per level Willpower = ship speed, 0.5% per level charisma = trading tax 0.5% per level intelligence = shield, armor, hull 0.5% per level. Memory = Manufacturing time 1% per level
Drop attribute bases down to 0. 10 allocatable points, 5 max per attribute. Default everyone to 2 each and give everyone a bonus remap. Essentially, attributes become powerful hardwires. Economy shouldn't change significantly, but will shift around. Remap code can be left in place. Implant code can be left in place. And primarily, skill training is no longer linked to a loss in fun.
I like my idea moar!
The benefits of a simplified system seem great (I liked your idea when I first read it to). But what about any negatives from this approach also. - Let's say a guy maps to Charisma or Memory. Is he encouraged to do anything other than industry because min-max is not optimal and that makes it riskier for him (seems that optimal and risk are major themes running in this thread. I can't pvp because I'm in a learning clone. Not optimal. Too risky)? - Let's say someone maps to Percetion, but the FC of a fleet wants a logistics pilot. The player is happy to do it, but the min-max FC wants someone mapped to Intelligence for remote shield or armor reps. - A player is mapped to Perception because she pvps constantly. But also earns her ISK through PI and market trading. Is she required to have alts for manufacturing and trading just to compete on an even keel? Not saying your idea is bad, just that any idea has both positives and negatives and you need to analyse the negatives just as much because all of those and more will end up being the reason someone else whines about the system. Having thought about what you proposed, I don't personally think making attributes more like hard-wired implants provides much benefit over the current system, but that could just totally b me.
the idea is taken out of context please return to the original idea post 2 or 3 pages earlier |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1093
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:23:53 -
[771] - Quote
Seiko Sorrelius wrote: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.
I can see why you don't like the comparison because it doesn't suit you, but the comparison is there. Your explanation as to why implants should be removed is nothing other than "waah effort", "waah risk" and "I like increased skill training at no cost".
Then we get to your points:
- well, if you don't like how not using implants gives you a disadvantage then you'll surely agree to a flat 2000sp/h, everyone will have the same rate. It doesn't matter what that rate is as everyone will be equal right? And we can't assume higher sp/h because per your statements people who pvp don't use implants.
- then don't use them, SP isn't that important
- factually untrue. Newbie can fly/pvp JUST FINE with skills at lvl 3/4. It's the older players and alts training for titans/Scaps etc who sit in station with +5.
The only ones helped by the removal of implants like that are the 0.0 lob blob terrible clown alliances making for cheap whelps, and high end 0.0 alliances who foresee the removal of learning implants to be followed by the introduction or really funky combat implants for slot 1-5. The first is a terrible quantity over quality and the second will most definitely NOT favour newer players. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
33018
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:24:01 -
[772] - Quote
Seiko Sorrelius wrote: No game mechanic should ever place fun against permanent character growth: remaps.
No game mechanic should place isk loss against permanent charcter growth: attribute implants.
Isk is the lifeblood of the game and can almost directly correlate to fun, ...
... And primarily, skill training is no longer linked to a loss in fun.
Fun isn't and hopefully never becomes the sole goal of the game designers.
Challenge, unique play, sense of achievement and accomplishment, diverse options, etc. These are all aspects of the game that different players gain out of playing the game.
I hope Eve never reduces every sub-game to fun. Then it will truly be a theme-park game.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29862
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:28:40 -
[773] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Seiko Sorrelius wrote: No game mechanic should ever place fun against permanent character growth: remaps.
No game mechanic should place isk loss against permanent charcter growth: attribute implants.
Isk is the lifeblood of the game and can almost directly correlate to fun, ...
... And primarily, skill training is no longer linked to a loss in fun.
Fun isn't and hopefully never becomes the sole goal of the game designers. Challenge, unique play, sense of achievement and accomplishment, diverse options, etc. These are all aspects of the game that different players gain out of playing the game. I hope Eve never reduces every sub-game to fun. Then it will truly be a theme-park game. what? Surely you realize that fun and all those other requirements are not mutually exclusive.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Memphis Baas
160
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:32:32 -
[774] - Quote
If it's not fun it won't be played. Mining, for example, 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. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1095
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:36:03 -
[775] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote: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.
So you mean to say that no one has been playing EVE the last 12 years, no one pvped at all because it was no fun with these darned implants? |
Memphis Baas
160
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:38:48 -
[776] - Quote
No, I don't mean to say that. |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
97
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:42:03 -
[777] - Quote
Seiko Sorrelius wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:
"this game takes effort, this is not right!"
Also, if we follow your.... logic... then we should do away with ship losses too. It just keeps ppl from pvping you know.
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. Scipio Artelius wrote: One question and one counter-point for consideration:
One Why does having high skillpoints lead you to choose not to pvp?
Two Gameplay is about the way each of us interact with the game. The more complex the options for gameplay that still work, the more opportunities there are for players to discover unique solutions (emergent play) as well as play the anticipated ways. Complex systems also usually provide for more non-linear play, which leads to a more varied and interesting game.
The trick is in ensuring that systems aren't complex just for the sake of it, so that they all provide for interesting gameplay.
Players stating they would pvp in the absence of learning implants doesn't itself mean the current game design is at fault. The current game design provides solutions to that, especially through jump clones. Choosing not to use that option is the way someone has chosen to play the game, not the games fault.
That doesn't make the current situation ideal in terms of game design, but learning implants aren't the cause of non-pvp. That is down to player choice because they don't use the other forms of gameplay available.
Let's not make the game more linear and less interesting on the whole, just because some fail to use all paths available.
One issue which CCP has already mentioned is the use of jump clones and the way they are used to change implant sets. So change that aspect of the play and those that could otherwise pvp might also have a solution. Make implants removable without destruction for example. That would solve the problem for those people. Without considering the impact on other areas of play, that isn't necessarily good design either, but there has to be more than one solution that still keeps interesting play in the game.
1. Because SP is almost like its own currency, and if I slow down my training (by losing implants/not buying implants) on Seiko then I lose a currency that I can't gain back (you can always gain more isk, but I can't gain lost SP due to time spent without implants). 2. Making implants removable would horribly upset the market and game mechanics, and jump clones are a bad mechanic for short-term use and were intended, as far as I am aware, for travel and whole sets of implants. I still think the best solution is to replace attribute implants with something else that is equally as valuable but doesn't affect skill gain: This would:
- Keep the implant economy stable
- Encourage PVP, especially amongst new players.
- Allow new players to train skills without loss, thus encouraging them to actually play the game and subscribe.
- Easier to program and implement than most options so far.
The problem with your solution is that all players will have same skill point gain. this unwanted as a lot of people would want to train faster than other people regardless of what they do in eve |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29862
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:42:38 -
[778] - Quote
As for fun, EVE has a huge problem in lacking visceral feedback. The target lock sequence is tame, and the following button press of F1 through F8 is tame, too. The damage calculation is not engaging (compared to manual aiming).
EVE very closely resembles a text-based game like Dungeons and Dragons. Stop calling PVE "dungeons", thanks.
There is plenty of room for fun. There are benchmarks for what qualifies an MMO as successful based on subscriptions, and EVE is what, 1/10th of that? EVE is not fun, we are not normal players. Make no mistake, we are all broken for playing this game and sticking to it.
Players who say they will leave if EVE becomes a Theme Park MMO, or even mention the term Theme Park MMO need to leave right now, for equivocating any improvement in EVE as something bad.
Successful games are enjoyed by everyone. Players who disagree with that statement need to leave, and have no place in a discussion such as this one.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
33020
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:42:52 -
[779] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:what? Surely you realize that fun and all those other requirements are not mutually exclusive. Absolutely. I just don't see fun as the primary reason to design every system in a game. It will be the primary goal for some systems and the by-product of good design for others.
But fun is so subjective that while in game design you certainly don't want to design un-fun elements, there are a lot of other goals that can have priority.
As a personal example. I don't find PI fun. Yet I run 6 planets at max upgrades on a max skilled alt because it allows me to produce 20,000 nanite repair paste a month that helps support my pvp habit. I do gain a sense of achievement from producing those repair paste and selling them on the market. That's why I do it for more than just income. PI has an element of challenge around the decisions of what to produce and where to produce them and there is a fair amount of interaction with the game (not the button pushing, but on a larger level).
Someone else might find PI fun just the way it is.
That to me is where fun has limitations as a game design goal. It's a by-product of good game design, not a primary aim because you can't meet everyone's idea of fun.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1095
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:43:49 -
[780] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:No, I don't mean to say that.
Given your earlier posts on the whole "implants are no fun" I'd say that it's exactly what you tried to say, you just didn't realise the scope of your statement. |
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29862
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 01:02:42 -
[781] - Quote
This is to no one in particular:
Playing EVE does not make you edgy, it certainly does not make you leet. EVE is essentially a turn based game. Adjust your perspective before considering an opinion in a change discussion thread.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Memphis Baas
160
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 01:15:09 -
[782] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Given your earlier posts on the whole "implants are no fun" I'd say that it's exactly what you said, you just didn't realise the scope of your statement.
I'm sorry, but you are arguing aggressively against people with different opinions; you're basically looking to start a fight. You've shitted up pages 12-20 with a prolonged flaming campaign vs. Dominique Vasilikovsky and others, then went away when the Dev posted.
Now you've come back with
Gregor Parud wrote:Lets just accept that 0.0 CSM shills and management get their way anyway and stop bothering & caring. And that all pretence of "discussion" is just that: pretence. followed by a multitude of posts containing what looks like a repeat of the sentiments and attitude displayed throughout pp. 12-20.
So I'm not going to explain what I meant, and will just ignore you. You can rant if you want, but it won't remove the posts of those you disagree with from this thread; all it will do is just close the thread due to ranting.
Which I believe is your goal anyway.
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
33020
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 01:23:48 -
[783] - Quote
Seiko Sorrelius wrote:1. Because SP is almost like its own currency, and if I slow down my training (by losing implants/not buying implants) on Seiko then I lose a currency that I can't gain back (you can always gain more isk, but I can't gain lost SP due to time spent without implants). I appreciate that you have that perspective, but not every player does. I certainly don't and since I can really only talk about me, I'll use myself as a different example and then hopefully draw a conclusion we can both agree on.
Here's my eveboard: http://eveboard.com/pilot/Scipio_Artelius
Implants are not hidden. They just don't exist and is my remap optimal? I guess clearly not.
And I don't care. When it comes to playing the game, I don't compare myself to other players that started at the same time as me (since that's the only measure of whether gaining more or less SP has any meaning).
I pvp and select targets on the basis of what ships I'm in, what ship they are in, whether they have friends or I do. Do I have links? Are they likely to? Am I using drugs? Can I get the engagement to start under optimal conditions for me, or will they be at an advantage initially? Not a single thing in my own personal decision making comes down to whether I am training skills faster than they are. I don't feel any sense of loss for training at the rate I train at, because I look for targets that I will be competitive against, regardless.
But skill training is still part of my game. I change my queue regularly to meet different goals. Sometimes I use implants, sometimes I don't. I have multiple clones (even if it's not a perfect system, it is what is currently available and I choose to use them) for different pvp fits. I also remap annually based on what my short-term goals are and accept that at different points in the year, my training won't be optimal because I'll switch to something else.
Overalll, I like the complexity of these choices to be made. The challenge of Eve on the whole is what attracts me to the game and in analysing my own play, I play the different elements that present the most challenge and avoid the simple ones.
So, for me personally if the system was made less complex, that would reduce my overall enjoyment of the game.
But I totally appreciate and accept that you have a different view. That you see the rate of SP gain as critical to you and the current system not optimal.
And there is the challenge that the devs face. To, on the whole, produce a game that interests as wide a group of people as possible, while never meeting all of the needs of any single person (that will never happen).
Recently, in my view, the trend has been to simplify and whenever we as players propose changes to systems, we always seem to propose changes that will benefit us individually, while not caring or considering broader effects, or the negatives of our ideas.
That doesn't mean don't propose. We all should, but we should all also speak up when we don't agree. The devs can then make their decisions based on total feedback. Hopefully (for my) that won't always be to simplify choices.
Quote:2. Making implants removable would horribly upset the market and game mechanics, and jump clones are a bad mechanic for short-term use and were intended, as far as I am aware, for travel and whole sets of implants. Sure. I agree with that. Those negatives would have significant effect and the idea is flawed.
The rest of your post I still personally disagree with. It would take more away from the game than it adds in terms of choice for players.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1095
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 01:26:27 -
[784] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Which I believe is your goal anyway.
No, I'm just exposing the fake arguments and hidden agendas people have and use. There's no point in having a proper discussion just as there's no point in actually reasoning with a 5 year old who so eagerly is trying to use :logic: to convince you why he really should get that cookie. Until people drop the "it would be better for the game" and "surely 'people' would start pvping more" and actually voice their, selfish, reasons I'll just out people's hidden agendas and mistaken logic.
Also, if a dev replied to what I stated I missed it and shall read back.
- edit -
The last dev who replied to me got a reply back.
- another edit -
Fun fact: In all the heated (balancing) discussions that happened over time; CBC nerf, CBC getting MJD, inties getting bubble immunity and all the others, everyone had their own hidden agendas as to why they started a drama rage. And every time I predicted the actual outcome and results using arguments based on logic and experience, every time the same thing happened; an avalanche of folks telling me I'm wrong, clueless and a troll. Mostly because I didn't help their agenda and also because they couldn't comprehend the outcome of changes.
And every time I turned out to be right, spot on. |
Amanda Compton
PIXEL Corp Nothing2Lose.
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 01:38:17 -
[785] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:
Again the thing with implants is concept of having an edge on other pilots , by training faster them . ( risk vs reward) The difference is good while being the same as any other player is bad The difference can be achieved by allowing pilots to pick only 2 training implants be it +1 or +5 doesn't matter also buy giving them choice to not buy implants if they want to .
I think we all agree remap is bad and should be scraped or reworked so my suggestion is that all characters have the same attributes
also it would be move viable to remove the whole training learning attributes from implants that uses slot 1 to 5 ( including pirate faction implants )
Add new slots (11 and 12 ) these slots for training implants ( since it takes only 2 implants to effect a speed of training a skill) and if they are filled with learning implants you get a bonus in space based on the value the implant give to your attribute . ( i don't like the bonus idea but hey many of the posts bitches about that their learning implant doesn't effect their ships) so at least it will be worth while to use learning implants while flying in space .
that for those who say my pvp clone worth more than my learning could use the pvp clone and learning at the same time. aka pirate faction set in 1-6 , Hardwiring 7-10 and learning 11-12
Might not be the best solution but its well balanced.
Considering newbies cant screw themselves by derp remapping ( since there is no remaps ) Encouraging people who just use attribute implants to pvp since they get a ship bouns from using learning implants . and giving the option to veterans to go balls deep wiith pirate faction set , hardwiring and learning implants . |
Noriko Mai
2059
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 02:14:37 -
[786] - Quote
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. And if you are at it remove attributes as well. Useless crap.
Come On Everybody, support Dark Opaque theme
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1095
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 02:16:05 -
[787] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote: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.
OK, would you agree to a flat 2000-2200 SP/h instead? |
Memphis Baas
160
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 02:17:28 -
[788] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote: No, I'm just exposing the fake arguments and selfish/hidden agendas people have and use. There's no point in having a proper discussion [...]
I agree with you that there's no point in having a proper discussion, because even if you manage to moderate one of these threads and keep it civil as a player with no ISD tools, CCP will still completely ignore whatever consensus the thread reaches (if any), and go for the one post with the one idea that they like, but implement what THEY want out of that idea, in about a year when we've all forgotten about it.
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. It also implies that CCP can't tell that all player posts are selfish, they're so incompetent that they need YOU to do that job for them. In reality they're probably going to print out this thread, cut away everything that is not a suggestion, and just post the suggestions in bullet form on their internal boards to consider. If we're so lucky.
So all my huffing and puffing, and yours, and everyone else's, will just get deleted. There are, what, 18 idea posts in this whole thread?
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
106
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 02:27:45 -
[789] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote: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. And if you are at it remove attributes as well. Useless crap.
you are just saying hey i don't undock because of them therefore CCP remove them .
Amanda Compton wrote:
Considering newbies cant screw themselves by derp remapping ( since there is no remaps ) Encouraging people who just use attribute implants to pvp since they get a ship bouns from using learning implants . and giving the option to veterans to go balls deep wiith pirate faction set , hardwiring and learning implants .
finally someone noticed my suggestion i know my suggestion has flaws like the combined boosts of all implants injected might be overpowered.
but hey i don't think you can make everyone happy |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1095
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 02:32:12 -
[790] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote: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.
If people want to be treated like adults where I'll honour their arguments (whether or not I agree with them) they probably shouldn't act like said 5 year old, I don't care one bit for a liar's perception of me or the discussion. There have been some actual ideas gone back and forth but 99% is just "it would be best for the game me if this would change", people like that are laughable and I'll happily react to that.
Your second point is right, to a degree anyway. Thing is that it is a discussion and input is asked for and if the only input is "well, we think it's better for the game to change it" then one would have to be an idiot to not counter it, if only by pointing out the (perhaps not so) obvious.
|
|
Noriko Mai
2059
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 02:42:02 -
[791] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Noriko Mai wrote: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. OK, would you agree to a flat 2000-2200 SP/h instead? I acutally don't care to be honest. If they can't or don't want to remove learning implants they should at least remove attributes. Its just useless pseudo-gameplay crap like clone costs. Do it and get max SP/h or don't and don't get max SP/h. I never did it because I couldn't care less about SP/h.
Come On Everybody, support Dark Opaque theme
|
Phoenix Czech
AZ Solutions CZ CZECH Alliance
24
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 02:54:42 -
[792] - Quote
Please do not brake working parts of this game. Better focus your attention to things which are broken and need to be fixed.
New players do not know, how to use implants and remaps? Realy stupid argument. It is your job to show them in player training (the same way as you show them how to mine asteroids for example). Removing it is not the solution. New player made bad decision and his remap is wrong? Yes it can happen. Simply add some skilles, which help players to remap more often. Or add possibility to activate bonus remap for PLEX (plyer is happy and you have your money). Problem solved. Removing atribute implants wil give free slots for some other implant types? Another stupid argument. Easy solution here - just add new shiny implant slots for this implant types - no need here to remove atributes.
Two things I do not like on this: 1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap. 2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1095
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 02:56:14 -
[793] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:I'm already sick of your crap.
That's ok, did you also notice the obvious lies and fake argument posts I aimed those replies at? |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
992
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 03:08:43 -
[794] - Quote
Phoenix Czech wrote:Two things I do not like on this: 1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap. 2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).
1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis.
2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer.
A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty.
Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid."
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
106
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 03:15:40 -
[795] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:Jane Shapperd wrote:Noriko Mai wrote: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. And if you are at it remove attributes as well. Useless crap. you are just saying hey i don't undock because of them therefore CCP remove them . No I don't. I say that they are just an XP-Boost that doesn't belong to the game and mention the docking thing as a side note.
in my opinion , removing is not the answer . Encouraging players to use them and undocking in them is the answer |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29865
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 03:30:37 -
[796] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Phoenix Czech wrote:Two things I do not like on this: 1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap. 2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).
1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis. 2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer. A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty. Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid." I reserve my right to call things stupid. For a lot of players, that is the best they know how to express themselves.
For players and devs: check your feelings at the door, etc.
For devs: do your job, read feedback.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1096
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 03:46:38 -
[797] - Quote
[preface]Over the years I have restarted so often I can't even list the "mains" I've had, let alone all the alts, side projects and whatnot, this STILL happens. So from my personal pov it would benefit me if I didn't have to buy them all implants and keep track of their remaps and whatnot. The reason I'm against these ideas is because it's not in the "spirit of EVE" and it doesn't help actual players.
Stated argument for removing learning implants:
- "pvping will be cheaper". Not the case, CCP already stated they will be making new combat related implants which will then become the norm (or at least will be used more) "forcing" others to use them as well. Clone cost will not change. This is also why higher quality 0.0 alliances are pushing for this, they will train faster to their next Scap while sporting funky combat implants, giving them another edge. Their CSM will of course ask for these changes
- "it would help newer players be in 0.0 and pvp more". Not the case, what is actually meant is "it would help lol blobs full of younger players to whelp without cost while they're training up for the next meta, since we didn't figure out that meta ourselves we're kinda behind and thus we'd like them to train faster". The question is if we should push younger players to lol blob alliances where they're taught to follow orders and be a tiny insignificant cog, a worker bee (how apt) in a cubicle. Lol blob alliances who do the "we care for newbies, this would help them" are lying: they don't care for newbies at all, they just care for a continuous stream of new players to boost their numbers. Their CSM will of course ask for these changes
- "people who now sit in station with +5 would actually start pvping". Not the case, people who do that are, by definition, min-maxers or alts. Neither of these will undock till he's "ready" (ie, max skilled or at least having attained a specific SP target). They're not sitting in station because they have +5, they're sitting in station because they haven't reached their goal yet. Nothing will change
- "choices suck, I want max benefit without having to think about it or having to make a risk vs reward assessment". No comment
- "I die a lot because I still haven't learned (after all this time) how not to be really terrible. This would help me". No comment
Implants are fine, they're risk vs reward which is what EVE is about. They're a choice giving different people with different motivations different options for different situations. Choice is good, even if some of those choices would not necessarily be beneficial because choices come with consequences. On top of that, removing them would create room for (already announced) combat implants which (for reasons stated) will NOT help newer players, they will only help older/richer/established players and groups. There is no valid logical reason to remove implants that isn't short sighted, selfish and/or very anti-newbie.
Stated reasons to remove remaps:
- "newbies might mess it up". Easily solved by a wiki link that pops up when you open your attrib window explaining the dos and don'ts.
- "I just ran out of remaps and I really need one so I'm posting in this thread hoping for change". No comment
- "I just want maxed everything". No comment
- "it's all a bit silly and arbitrary, it's not really a gameplay choice or feature and doesn't add anything of note". I partially agree with that, you could remove remaps and give everyone flat attribs meaning you could learn everything at the same speed (not counting implants). But is that really any different from players choosing a well balanced remap of their own? Doesn't it remove possible choice with its own possible consequences and risk vs reward? Would removing it actually solve anything, realistically?
I see no reason to remove implants and remaps/attribs. All I've read is lies, fake arguments and hidden agendas. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1361
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 03:48:49 -
[798] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Phoenix Czech wrote:Two things I do not like on this: 1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap. 2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).
1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis. 2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer. A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty. Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid." Question, is that the actual feeling here? That the attribute system doesn't add any good or useful form of complexity? To be honest I'd argue the opposite as the secondary effect of being encouraged into long term planning is that it promotes knowledge of skills and capabilities you may not otherwise be aware of as you look to build a plan. I can see how that's horrendously subjective and situational, but I'd be curious regarding the point that mechanical complexities are considered to not be adding value.
Just to turn the example, solving a math problem before adding a skill seems not too unlike solving a puzzle to get loot from hacking in my mind. The only change being that since the math problem of attributes and year long plans is actually applicable to the activity in a lasting way, it seems more relevant than the minigame to gameplay.
Lastly, if the issue is long term commitment to suboptimal skills, isn't part of the problem the infrequency of remaps? Could simply allowing them more often not alleviate a good portion of the issues noted? |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
107
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 03:50:11 -
[799] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Phoenix Czech wrote:Two things I do not like on this: 1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap. 2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).
1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis. 2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer. A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty. Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid." I reserve my right to call things stupid. For a lot of players, that is the best they know how to express themselves. For players and devs: check your feelings at the door, etc. For devs: do your job, read feedback. This is making me wonder if instead of starting forum discussions about topics, I should open support tickets with questions. I have enough accounts to have 10 questions running at a time. Yeah, that is a good idea. It's not very motivating to see such a lack of dev participation on EVE-O. Posting on the forums is tantamount to being a silent customer. Support tickets are dialogs with GMs directly, after all. Wish I had thought of this sooner. If players boycotted the forums as hard as devs, and used support tickets instead, do you think that would solve the lack of EVE-O participation?
The idea of using forums is to brainstorm your ideas , add and edit any idea you may have missed since others will give you ideas you might miss or don't realize , there is no need to fill GMs mail inbox with ideas that lacks many perspectives . |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6538
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 03:56:42 -
[800] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:Rain6637 wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Phoenix Czech wrote:Two things I do not like on this: 1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap. 2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).
1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis. 2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer. A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty. Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid." I reserve my right to call things stupid. For a lot of players, that is the best they know how to express themselves. For players and devs: check your feelings at the door, etc. For devs: do your job, read feedback. This is making me wonder if instead of starting forum discussions about topics, I should open support tickets with questions. I have enough accounts to have 10 questions running at a time. Yeah, that is a good idea. It's not very motivating to see such a lack of dev participation on EVE-O. Posting on the forums is tantamount to being a silent customer. Support tickets are dialogs with GMs directly, after all. Wish I had thought of this sooner. If players boycotted the forums as hard as devs, and used support tickets instead, do you think that would solve the lack of EVE-O participation? The idea of using forums is to brainstorm your ideas , add and edit any idea you may have missed since others will give you ideas you might miss or don't realize , there is no need to fill GMs mail inbox with ideas that lacks many perspectives . Or rather, you know do whatever.
But remember you can't share any GM replies with us, so don't ever post about it.
All problems solved?
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
|
Noriko Mai
2059
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 03:59:44 -
[801] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:[..] Question, is that the actual feeling here? That the attribute system doesn't add any good or useful form of complexity? To be honest I'd argue the opposite as the secondary effect of being encouraged into long term planning is that it promotes knowledge of skills and capabilities you may not otherwise be aware of as you look to build a plan. I can see how that's horrendously subjective and situational, but I'd be curious regarding the point that mechanical complexities are considered to not be adding value.
Just to turn the example, solving a math problem before adding a skill seems not too unlike solving a puzzle to get loot from hacking in my mind. The only change being that since the math problem of attributes and year long plans is actually applicable to the activity in a lasting way, it seems more relevant than the minigame to gameplay.
Lastly, if the issue is long term commitment to suboptimal skills, isn't part of the problem the infrequency of remaps? Could simply allowing them more often not alleviate a good portion of the issues noted? 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.
Come On Everybody, support Dark Opaque theme
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1096
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:04:47 -
[802] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:[..] Question, is that the actual feeling here? That the attribute system doesn't add any good or useful form of complexity? To be honest I'd argue the opposite as the secondary effect of being encouraged into long term planning is that it promotes knowledge of skills and capabilities you may not otherwise be aware of as you look to build a plan. I can see how that's horrendously subjective and situational, but I'd be curious regarding the point that mechanical complexities are considered to not be adding value.
Just to turn the example, solving a math problem before adding a skill seems not too unlike solving a puzzle to get loot from hacking in my mind. The only change being that since the math problem of attributes and year long plans is actually applicable to the activity in a lasting way, it seems more relevant than the minigame to gameplay.
Lastly, if the issue is long term commitment to suboptimal skills, isn't part of the problem the infrequency of remaps? Could simply allowing them more often not alleviate a good portion of the issues noted? 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.
You're fine to pick a well rounded remap, no one is forcing you to min-max. Sounds to me like you want the speed of specialised remaps without the possible consequences for when you want to train something else. Stating that the game is forcing you to do this is an obvious lie.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1361
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:05:38 -
[803] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:[..] Question, is that the actual feeling here? That the attribute system doesn't add any good or useful form of complexity? To be honest I'd argue the opposite as the secondary effect of being encouraged into long term planning is that it promotes knowledge of skills and capabilities you may not otherwise be aware of as you look to build a plan. I can see how that's horrendously subjective and situational, but I'd be curious regarding the point that mechanical complexities are considered to not be adding value.
Just to turn the example, solving a math problem before adding a skill seems not too unlike solving a puzzle to get loot from hacking in my mind. The only change being that since the math problem of attributes and year long plans is actually applicable to the activity in a lasting way, it seems more relevant than the minigame to gameplay.
Lastly, if the issue is long term commitment to suboptimal skills, isn't part of the problem the infrequency of remaps? Could simply allowing them more often not alleviate a good portion of the issues noted? 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. They aren't locked into anything. No one is. No one is mandated to min/max, and if they do but find they missed a skill to complete their current plan they can train it out of map. The reasoning you present is only valid of someone has to train at peak rates, which is only the case if self imposed, and someone who does that is just as likely to get caught up in any other aspect which has a clear highest numbers strategy even if not personally optimal.
If "locking in" is the only issue than there is no actual issue with the attribute system, just obsessive attitudes, which CCP can't fix. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29865
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:07:33 -
[804] - Quote
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.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1096
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:12:10 -
[805] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: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.
I think it's a bit different.
Most relevant threads get decent DEV activity, it's just that there's no point in faking interest if there's already a design decision made. We're Don Quichotting against something that's already decided. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1361
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:13:12 -
[806] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: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. Do you think calling something stupid to a GM has a better chance of favorable response compared to saying it to a dev on the forums? Do you think they will even reach a dev? Do you think people want my legitimate issues being put on hold because of ticket floods because some people can't be bothered to explain their objections beyond the word stupid? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29865
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:15:20 -
[807] - Quote
So your question is more important than mine? I was under the impression I get to ask questions for having a sub, just like you.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6538
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:19:30 -
[808] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:So your question is more important than mine? I was under the impression I get to ask questions for having a sub, just like you. Not on General Discussion, only the badposters get to post here.
Besides this whole "everyone start putting in petitions": thing belongs in the multibox update thread, not some slapfast about implants...
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29865
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:21:44 -
[809] - Quote
I wasn't the one who introduced the "be nice to devs" idea into this thread. The discussion is fine, but the addition of that excuse is a bit much. With it, what's the point?
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1361
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:23:09 -
[810] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:So your question is more important than mine? I was under the impression I get to ask questions for having a sub, just like you. Are you asking a question? Or are you calling something stupid? If it's the former I apologize for the post and tone, if it's the latter, insinuated by your post where this train of thought originated then yes, I'd say you are seeking further avenues to not only devalue our collective feedback, but also standing in the way of actual inquiries the GM's could be handling. |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1096
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:24:13 -
[811] - Quote
Actually, spamming GMs with lol nonsense they have no say on and isn't part of their job is fcking terrible and (imo) should result in trouble in case of abuse. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29865
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:25:34 -
[812] - Quote
Because I'm known for posting nonsense. If that's how you took it, that's your assumption. I plan to make use of it for well though-out, reasonable inquiries.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Noriko Mai
2060
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:29:09 -
[813] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Noriko Mai wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:[..] Question, is that the actual feeling here? That the attribute system doesn't add any good or useful form of complexity? To be honest I'd argue the opposite as the secondary effect of being encouraged into long term planning is that it promotes knowledge of skills and capabilities you may not otherwise be aware of as you look to build a plan. I can see how that's horrendously subjective and situational, but I'd be curious regarding the point that mechanical complexities are considered to not be adding value.
Just to turn the example, solving a math problem before adding a skill seems not too unlike solving a puzzle to get loot from hacking in my mind. The only change being that since the math problem of attributes and year long plans is actually applicable to the activity in a lasting way, it seems more relevant than the minigame to gameplay.
Lastly, if the issue is long term commitment to suboptimal skills, isn't part of the problem the infrequency of remaps? Could simply allowing them more often not alleviate a good portion of the issues noted? 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. You're fine to pick a well rounded remap, no one is forcing you to min-max. Sounds to me like you want the speed of specialised remaps without the possible consequences for when you want to train something else. Stating that the game is forcing you to do this is an obvious lie. 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 have 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.
Come On Everybody, support Dark Opaque theme
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1096
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:31:47 -
[814] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote: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.
How is you asking for the removal or remaps (and thus give everyone equal attribs) any different from you choosing to use an equal attrib, well rounded remap?
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6539
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:32:51 -
[815] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I wasn't the one who introduced the "be nice to devs" idea into this thread. The discussion is fine, but the addition of that excuse is a bit much. With it, what's the point? They hope you will just leave them so they can turn this thread into an echo chamber... which will be ignored anyway I guess?
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1361
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:33:07 -
[816] - Quote
In that case I apologize for making assumptions about your intent.
I would still say that the initial response I got the idea from still would have led me to that conclusion as it was pretty much in defense of slippery slope assumption reasoning summed up with the capacity to call something stupid. If that isn't what you wanted to do why get riled up? did you think other feedback was being overlooked for it? |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6539
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:33:38 -
[817] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Noriko Mai wrote: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. How is you asking for the removal or remaps (and thus give everyone equal attribs) any different from you choosing to use an equal attrib, well rounded remap? It means everyone else is forced to choose it as well.
Though that was obvious
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29865
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:33:47 -
[818] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Rain6637 wrote:I wasn't the one who introduced the "be nice to devs" idea into this thread. The discussion is fine, but the addition of that excuse is a bit much. With it, what's the point? They hope you will just leave them so they can turn this thread into an echo chamber... which will be ignored anyway I guess?
Yeah. Sometimes I just want answers, and this thread has revealed itself as being pointless.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1096
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:37:11 -
[819] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Noriko Mai wrote: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. How is you asking for the removal or remaps (and thus give everyone equal attribs) any different from you choosing to use an equal attrib, well rounded remap? It means everyone else is forced to choose it as well. Though that was obvious
Well yes, but it's always funny to see people twist and turn avoiding the truth, which in this case is "I don't like how choices might restrict me and thus I don't want others to have those choices either because :reasons:". Oh yeah that really sounds like "it would be better for the game and/or newbies". |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1362
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:38:12 -
[820] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote: 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 have 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 anything of value. Denying this is an obvious lie.
Picking a skill plan is fun to me. Why is your choice to become over obsessed with skill planning more important than the enjoyment I get out of it? And why are you blaming the game for your choice to adhere to that obsession?
|
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
255
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 05:00:20 -
[821] - Quote
So I missed the actual post where Darwin mentioned the 50mil per pod now vs without learning.. so I'll answer that now. Too many pages back now to find lol.
No. if I fly about with learning implants, it's to learn faster. If I PVP with learning implants or mission or whatever, that's the goal, even when I have other implants plugged in. But across all my alts, only One has implants other than learning, and that's Ascendancy. Most 1-5 slot implants are limited in use (apart from the Geno's). Snakes and Slaves are likely the most common, but they still are there for limited cases.
Eve doesn't even offer a far variety of all implants there. We have an Armor HP set, that works on all ships, then a Shield Boost set that only works on subcaps. There's no Armor Rep set, or Shield HP set. Others are very limited in use. Just for Mining. Just for Scanning. Just for reducing your specific races sensors.
But if I undock with implants and pvp, it's cause they benefit me, I don't set out a price point and say okay, pod's gotta stay under X isk. It's no, It's I'm training this still, so I'll drop in 2x +3's (or whatever), and maybe a 3% Damange 3% ROF. Take away the +3's, and I'm just gonna not spend that isk. Uping to 4%'s costs a hell of a lot more than 2x +3's, and other implants really aren't of the same level of benefit as the 2 damage ones.
It was also mentioned that removing learning frees up slots. We don't need them to be freed up. CCP can add more whenever they want. Just look at the Golden Pod - Auroral AU-79, it fits in, shocking I know, slot 79.
Again, if your reason is learning implants limit PVP, make them more like the Cerebral Accelerator boosters. Rather than plug and for life, make it so you need to plug them in every, say, month, or so? Then make it so they don't get destroyed with the pod. (I still think my suggestion of a implant-less pvp clone is better.. but this is just another option..) |
Mihnea Tepes
Astral Silence Don't Tell Me The Odds
43
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 05:01:12 -
[822] - Quote
If its working, don't fix it.
Like it isn't enough of changes already which are too much newbie friendly. If I will want to play newbie friendly game, I will install WOW. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
47332
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 07:42:08 -
[823] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid." Heh, what a crock.
Just like how 'scatter cans' spewing loot at hacking sites was such a great idea and even though the playerbase said it was stupid, the development team decided to implement the change anyway under the pretense that it would promote and incite fleet exploration. Obviously it didn't do that and consequently was removed due to reduced player participation in that content. That's just one example. There's been plenty of other stupid things the development team has done over the years as well.
Personally I'm getting sick and tired of people trying to dictate to me how I should play this game. I pay my subscription and what I do with my game time is my business. If I choose to sit in a station and do nothing but train skills all the time then that's my right to do so as a paying customer.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
1303
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 08:16:13 -
[824] - Quote
Why should we remove attribute implants? is it the risk of losing it in pvp? Have people not seen some of the pods being blown up in 0.0, they are sometimes worth more than the ships.
I learned a long time ago to use jump clones with cheaper implants in case i got podded in pvp, so you know I wouldnt feel bad. But implants today are not the same prices as they were 3 years ago. I dont feel bad losing a full set of +4s now. If you dont want to lose it, dont wear it. If you are afraid jump clones exist for a reason.
Why Can't I have a picture signature.
Also please support graphical immersion, bring back the art that brought people to EvE online originaly.
|
Celestia Via
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance
57
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 09:25:47 -
[825] - Quote
Rinai Vero wrote:
Can you ever think of a situation where your stats actually had an effect on your roleplay in EVE?
Like, say you remap all your int into cha... do you all of a sudden start auto piloting billions of isk worth of assets through known gatecamps planning on charming any hostiles?
Character sheets have no impact on EVE as an "RPG" as you are presenting it... and they shouldn't. Your *actions* in game are your roleplay, and only your actions distinguish your character. If you care about RP, how you play should reflect that regardless of your stats.
Is your Civire character a Caldari Loyalist? Probably not consistent RP to be running missions for Fed Navy LP. That's impactful to your play in a way that a Civire racial stat bonus to Wilpower vs Brutor +1 to Strengh probably never will be.
EVE doesn't need game mechanics to make characters have "more human - relatable traits." That's your job as a human who plays EVE: to portray your own character in the sandbox.
I was not talking about RP really, was I?
Roleplayers make their own stories, dont worry about them. Its non-roleplayers that need the extra investment. Lets be real, everyone for example cares what their toon looks like. Some are pretty, some are tough, some are deliberately ugly etc. but they all show that their owners spent time on their appearance. Thats because the character is a human and relatable. One does not have to be an RPer to relate to their character, it just happens to everyone at some level.
Edit: I cannot believe theres still people arguing on the implants cost issue.. The cost is irrelevant, the cost is a lie!! If you wanna risk your ISK theres plenty of ways to do it, from buying expensive ships to blow up to gambling it on a ISK casino site. Learning implant cost is irrelevant to everything.
There's no place like space
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
997
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 10:11:00 -
[826] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:For devs: do your job, read feedback. I resent the "be nice to devs or they won't read your comments" bit of logic, if you can't tell. It's a cop-out, especially in this player culture.
I think we can all survive a little impassioned language. My point was that solely dismissing an argument as "stupid" with no real discussion wasn't likely to carry the conversation forward. "That's a stupid idea because A, B, C" is different from "OK, that's stupid, let's move on."
Quote:This is making me wonder if instead of starting forum discussions about topics, I should open support tickets with questions. I have enough accounts to have 10 questions running at a time.
Please don't open support tickets about development-related questions, because the GMs won't be able to do much for you and it just gets in the way of other people's issues getting addressed. Of course, with practical in-game issues today, opening a ticket is quite welcome and appropriate.
Quote:Yeah. Sometimes I just want answers, and this thread has revealed itself as being pointless.
There are no answers at this time. No decision has been made yet on what any of these possible game changes would be, so all we can do is discuss implications of possibilities. If you wanted concrete information about what changes are going to be made to the game in this regard, you won't get it, but the developers don't have that either.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
112
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 10:48:14 -
[827] - Quote
My solution still up there and honestly no one seems to have anything against it . If you have anything against my solution please post explaining to me why its bad, i will post some frequent arguments and counter them. So please read them before you type the very same argument !!!
Okay.
A - Remap is horrible , It should be scraped as whole. the main problem with it its not forgiving if you screw it up , also it doesn't provide a good choice for new players to train into specific ships. For example say i am newbie and i wanna be a guardian pilot i'd have to remap 4 times to be perfect guardian pilot while maintain highest Sp/hour assuming i have all +5 implants .
here are the remaps :
1- Will power - Perception : to train Amarr cruiser to 5 2- Intel - Memory : to train armor tank . remote armor reps , remote cap , cap management , target management ,etc... 3- Perception - Will power : to train logistics to 5 4- Memory - Perception : to train combat and/or repair drones .
Don't get me wrong that is almost the same thing i done excluding Remapping for the last two things Memory - Perception and Perception - Will power . Basically my first year was a shot gun attributes spared among all attributes , 2nd year was Will power - Perception , 3rd year is Intel - Memory . ( i managed to be an almost perfect guardian pilot in my 2nd year ) i am currently training JDC 5 with half correct attribute ) used to be on Will power - Perception remap JDC 5 takes 34 days , i remapped half remap to ntel - Memory and managed to cut 4 days from JDC 5 (That not even full remap ). The reason why i didn't do Intel - Perception is because Intel - Memory skills way more longer than navigation skill tree and i would need to train that as soon as i am done from JDC 5.
Basically i am not bitching about the current system i know what the **** i am doing. But for newbies sake it doesn't help them at all. it just fucks them over and over for wanting to be a perfect pilot for a particular ship .
my suggestion is scrap the whole remap and giving all pilots the same attributes. This will achieve : I- people not feeling bad about their bad choice for a whole year. II - Giving newbies the same base training as veteran pilots and preventing newbies from screwing their self up .
B- Implants : I love implants as they are ( i am feeling sad just thinking about what would happen if they get removed). This is just an effort to keep them unchanged or minimize the change that is going to happen to them .
Now from the posts in this threadnaught many people established many problems with implants and they can be concluded in these points .
1- Learning implants does not help or give a bonus to the ship i am undocking in . I basically spend 105mills on +5 that wont help me when undocking. Basically it encourages me to stay docked. 2 - Learning implants fills some slots i use for my pvp clone. 3- expensive implants prevents me from undocking and joining frigate roams as they cost more than frigates .
My suggestion is : 1- Keep Hardwiring implants as they are. I don't see a problem with them they work well , there were some arguments against them but they don't hold up . 2- Remove attribute bonus from all faction implants.
3- Open new slots for learning implants 11-15.
4- Give a bonus when having at least two learning implants ( bonus doesn't get effected if u have more than 2 learning implants , as the current system requires you to have only two learning implants to get the max sp/hour)
The bonus is basically based on your learning implant , ship bonuses and size. (size for balancing reasons) Lets say +5 gives you 0.5 of your ship bonus , +4 gives you 0.4 of your ship bonus and so forth. t1 Small ships (aka frigates and destroyers) gets the full bonus from your implant. t2 , t3 small ships and t1 medium ships gets half the bonus from your implant. t2, t3 medium ships and large ships gets quarter the bonus from your implant. t2 large ships and capital ships get the one eighth the bonus from your implant.
So what does that mean ? lets take a ship as an example assuming you have +5 implant . First example , The Rifter .
It has two bonuses 5% to small projectile damage and 10% bonus to small projectile falloff the learning implant bonus would give you 2.5% projectile damage and 5% bonus to small projectile falloff. at max skills that's like having Minmatar frigates trained to 5.5. should be worth using an implants that is way more expensive than the hull.
another example is the Armageddon It has to It has two bonuses 10% to drone damage and 10% bonus to energy neuts and vamps range. the learning implant bonus would give you 1.25% to drone damage and 1.25% bonus to energy neuts and vamps range. at max skills it like having Amarr battleship trained to 5.125. Now should that be worth it since the implant you undocked is a bit cheaper than the hull.
What would achieve ?
I - Encourage people to undock in their learning implants. II- Solve the issue with undocking with expensive implants in frigates. III- Solve with being unable to use a learning and pvp clone at once.
Frequent arguments and counters :
A - I don't use pvp because my implants. well this bonus give u a reason to undock and pvp in you ships. If you don't like that , then ******* Jump clone
B - My pvp clone is more expensive than my learning and i don't mind risking either. Well now u have the ability to have both implants in 1 clone Risk as you like.
C- Jump cloning is not a viable choice because the cool down . Well jump clone provides you a very safe option to store your implants without fearing of losing them. The cool down time is a consequence of having you implants saved. YOU should weight the risk vs reward correctly before jump cloning .
If you have any arguments against my solution be my guest |
Mihnea Tepes
Astral Silence Don't Tell Me The Odds
47
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 11:06:45 -
[828] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Phoenix Czech wrote:Two things I do not like on this: 1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap. 2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).
1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis. 2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer. A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty. Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid."
I agree with Phoenix Czech.
Can I ask you one simple question? I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
112
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 11:20:15 -
[829] - Quote
Mihnea Tepes wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Phoenix Czech wrote:Two things I do not like on this: 1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap. 2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).
1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis. 2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer. A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty. Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid." I agree with Phoenix Czech. Can I ask you one simple question? I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.
Memphis Baas wrote:I don't own this game. All I have is a license to access this game's servers with its client. CCP doesn't owe me anything for being a player. Any time and effort I put in this game is a waste of my life.
Therefore CCP retains the right to change anything they want, including shutting down the servers for good when this becomes unprofitable, and they don't owe me anything.
Like any game.
This so when they say something will changed , you'd better have a good explanation to convince them not to . After all its their game not ours |
Thonys Visser
Green Visstick High
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 11:27:36 -
[830] - Quote
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 |
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
112
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 11:36:25 -
[831] - Quote
Thonys Visser wrote: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
That beats the risk vs reward and removes the joy of destroying some1's else implants |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
128
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 11:43:59 -
[832] - Quote
Mihnea Tepes wrote: I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.
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.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Thonys Visser
Green Visstick High
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 11:48:05 -
[833] - Quote
Quote: That beats the risk vs reward and removes the joy of destroying some1's else implants
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 |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
113
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 11:57:37 -
[834] - Quote
Thonys Visser wrote:Quote: That beats the risk vs reward and removes the joy of destroying some1's else implants 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 i get your point
which is why i suggested in my earlier post adding a bonus depending on your ships size and the implant bonus
u get better bonus as in smaller ships than larger ships and you get better bonus by better implants
|
Inovy Dacella
Yuvha
27
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 12:03:28 -
[835] - Quote
IMO, training implants are good because I find balancing the cost and risk verses reward interesting. They push you to think and make choices. Even so, I think they could be removed from the game if they are simultaneously replaced with something more interesting. For example different clone types, and more hardwire variety.
If you take away a toy, please replace it with another. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1110
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 12:31:19 -
[836] - Quote
Thonys Visser wrote: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
Stop lying. If you're still a miner after 3 years then it's not because of implants.
Thonys Visser wrote:Quote: That beats the risk vs reward and removes the joy of destroying some1's else implants 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
Nothing is keeping you from using jump clones for a (few) day(s) to pvp. You not PVPing doesn't have anything to do with implant cost. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1110
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 12:33:55 -
[837] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Mihnea Tepes wrote: I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.
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.
If people would come up with the idea that new characters should start with 50 mil SP, 20 bil isk and a free Nyx you'd probably get the same (amount of) people lobbying for it. |
Mihnea Tepes
Astral Silence Don't Tell Me The Odds
49
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 12:53:02 -
[838] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:Mihnea Tepes wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Phoenix Czech wrote:Two things I do not like on this: 1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap. 2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).
1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis. 2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer. A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty. Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid." I agree with Phoenix Czech. Can I ask you one simple question? I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you. Memphis Baas wrote:I don't own this game. All I have is a license to access this game's servers with its client. CCP doesn't owe me anything for being a player. Any time and effort I put in this game is a waste of my life.
Therefore CCP retains the right to change anything they want, including shutting down the servers for good when this becomes unprofitable, and they don't owe me anything.
Like any game.
^^This so when they say something will changed , you'd better have a good explanation to convince them not to . After all its their game not ours
Correct me if I am wrong, but this game is not for free and as I pay for something, I should be treated as a customer.
Regarding lobby, i can see you posting here mostly about how you want a change. Implants are not cheap, you need to skill them too (+5 implants especially) and its everyone's choice to have them or to not have them. If you are afraid to lose them or you don't know how to make isk in game, your choice, but stop putting your complexes or insecurity on other members in game. |
Diemos Hiaraki
Perkone Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 12:58:34 -
[839] - Quote
snip
Mihnea Tepes wrote: I agree with Phoenix Czech.
Can I ask you one simple question? I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.
IIRC Tippia had a thread in F&ID a couple of years back that ran for a while with comments from greater minds than my own about clone costs, implants and jump clones. Folks have been asking for changes to get more pilots out of high sec for years and with CCP in a risk taking mood they appear to be looking at all options that appear to young Eve pilots as a barrier; attributes and implants is only a tiny part of that problem.
I want new players to remain in game and if Eve is to thrive (and in a lot of ways appears to be getting better atm) I think a lot of the old perceptions will need to be challenged. The solution for this particular issue I think is to reduce the cost of learning implants by seeding Blueprints for and +3 and +4 (with +5 made through invention and associated an advanced implant indy skill.) Make the basic implants worthless and they are no longer perceived problem for the new/young character. No need to change the pirate ones or hardwiring under those circumstances (risk being a problem experienced players should worry about; new players should be empowered with their new immortal bodies imo.) For attributes introduce a skill (trained to 3 automatically for new players) called 'automatic neural mapping' or something akin to that which maps attributes without anyone having to worry about it. Jump clones also need standings requirements reduced imo, but that isn't something I'd worry about too much if the price of basic learning implants went down dramatically. |
Soltys
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 13:23:15 -
[840] - Quote
The proper solution is to enrich the mechanics, adjust what's not so well adjusted and put everything into players hands. Dumbing the game down to the lowest common denominator (remove this, remove that, equalize those) is not the solution.
E.g. what I orignally posted in the F&I section. Seems most answers there were mostly from "let's dumb everything down, it will be awesome and equalized then" crowd.
For simplicity repost here after edits:
On a related note - if the subject is on the platter - shouldn't there be some feedback sticky ?
Well, the current system is good. It perhaps needs a bit more flexiblity or - so to speak - control in the players hands. But not removal or dumbing down ...
1) Regarding remap points
Introduce something like "Remap pill". The only source are players - add BPOs, skillbook that enables its production (perhaps only in POSes) and consumption (with some sensible prerequisite skills).
Choose sensible materials (lots to choose from - rocks, gas, ice, planets, moons, drops) and settle the cost at some sensible value (say, 100m ? perhaps more ? something not utterly trivial, but still mattering).
Put it in booster group, consuming it enables the player for the following 15 minutes to freely play with its attributes. Last setup becomes permanent after the timeout, obviously.
After adding the above, get rid of all timed / bonus remap points. It's not like new players need to touch attributes for "baby" skilling up, and for most level 3s/4s (and low rank 5s) it's meaningless to do so either way. When they grow up and learn the game more, then they can focus on planning and remapping.
Example:
"remap pill" booster effects: - allows attribute remapping for 15 minutes side effects: - unable to take another pill for 30 days
Neurotoxin Control influences the cons. Neurotoxin Recovery doesn't work on this.
BPOs seeded in usual station, can be produced in POS only. Required resources for production T.B.D.
2) Implants
Introduce normal BPOs for only standard (+1 to +5, perhaps up to +7) implants with obvious stuff (skillbook(s) prerequisite) without going into too big complexities (except +5 and better ones). This will drive the prices down and patch the "risk aversion" factor to be more in common with losing T1/T2 junk than expensive faction bling.
Emphasis: the point is to turn +1 - +4 into something equivalent to T1 rigs, and +5 (and better ones) into equivalent of T2 rigs. With full control in players' hands.
This opens other (future) options as well - giving players ability to produce implants with other/bonus effects from all slots.
3) Other stuff
Cerebral Accelerators - these could be moved to invention and more complex production. From standard BPOs (see #2 above) to appropriate grade of cerebral accelerator (of only that particular attribute), then lift "newbies" only limitation. It's guaranteed hit and can be sensibly balanced.
Possible cons: 20% chance to have negative effect on other attributes (4 rolls, 1 roll per each remaining attribute, chance can be lessened with skills).
Example:
"neural boost - basic" BPO -> BPC -> invention -> "Neural Cerebral Accelerator - basic" BPC Can be produced in POS only. All cerebral accelerators share same slot.
effects: - +9 willpower for N days (t.b.d.) (overall x3 effect of equivalent implant) - duration 2 weeks
side effects: - 20% chance for each other attribute to go -9 for N days
Neurotoxin Recovery and Neurotoxin Control influence the cons.
This keeps existing system in place, makes it far more flexible, enriches existing industry disciplines. Cost/complexity/difficulty can be banally balanced at will by CCP. At the same time real new players don't have to worry about it in the beginning and will naturally discover it in time. |
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
114
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 13:23:40 -
[841] - Quote
Mihnea Tepes wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but this game is not for free and as I pay for something, I should be treated as a customer.
Regarding lobby, i can see you posting here mostly about how you want a change. Implants are not cheap, you need to skill them too (+5 implants especially) and its everyone's choice to have them or to not have them. If you are afraid to lose them or you don't know how to make isk in game, your choice, but stop putting your complexes or insecurity on other members in game.
Jane Shapperd wrote: I love implants as they are ( i am feeling sad just thinking about what would happen if they get removed). This is just an effort to keep them unchanged or minimize the change that is going to happen to them .
as i said earlier i don't wanna them changed or removed but CCP will change them no matter what u say so i am trying to find a solution that would suit their goals while keeping what i love about implants
i use +5 implants all the time and i pvp in them i don't give a **** if i lose them as long as i train faster than other players |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
114
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 13:37:24 -
[842] - Quote
Soltys wrote: 1) Regarding remap points
Introduce something like "Remap pill". The only source are players - add BPOs, skillbook that enables its production (perhaps only in POSes) and consumption (with some sensible prerequisite skills).
Choose sensible materials (lots to choose from - rocks, gas, ice, planets, moons, drops) and settle the cost at some sensible value (say, 100m ? perhaps more ? something not utterly trivial, but still mattering).
Put it in booster group, consuming it enables the player for the following 15 minutes to freely play with its attributes. Last setup becomes permanent after the timeout, obviously.
After adding the above, get rid of all timed / bonus remap points. It's not like new players need to touch attributes for "baby" skilling up, and for most level 3s/4s (and low rank 5s) it's meaningless to do so either way. When they grow up and learn the game more, then they can focus on planning and remapping.
+1 good idea
Soltys wrote:2) Implants
Introduce normal BPOs for only standard (+1 to +5, perhaps up to +7) implants with obvious stuff (skillbook(s) prerequisite) without going into too big complexities (except +5 and better ones). This will drive the prices down and patch the "risk aversion" factor to be more in common with losing T1/T2 junk than expensive faction bling.
Emphasis: the point is to turn +1 - +4 into something equivalent to T1 rigs, and +5 (and better ones) into equivalent of T2 rigs. With full control in players' hands.
This opens other (future) options as well - giving players ability to produce implants with other/bonus effects from all slots. .
This wouldn't change anything the price is not the problem making people undock/pvp in them is the problem well why not hammer the lp cost and isk cost when u buy them from lp store that would serve the same suggestion u suggested |
Memphis Baas
160
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 14:18:38 -
[843] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:If people would come up with the idea that new characters should start with 50 mil SP, 20 bil isk and a free Nyx you'd probably get the same (amount of) people lobbying for it.
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. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1110
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 14:25:13 -
[844] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:If people would come up with the idea that new characters should start with 50 mil SP, 20 bil isk and a free Nyx you'd probably get the same (amount of) people lobbying for it. 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.
Are you telling me you actually truly believe people's stated reasonings and motivations for why they want changes that will save them effort, risk and cost? |
Memphis Baas
161
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 14:39:46 -
[845] - Quote
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. |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
114
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 14:40:21 -
[846] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Memphis Baas wrote:[quote=Gregor Parud] blah blah blah blah
seriously guys cut this useless crap and grow up |
Memphis Baas
161
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 14:43:02 -
[847] - Quote
Ok. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1110
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 14:48:00 -
[848] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote: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.
My agenda is very simple and obvious. I like the old EVE where your choices can explode in your face, because it's a form of Darwinism which is what EVE (to me) is and should be. That doesn't mean I'm automatically against any sort of change but if that change consists of a loss of choices and consequences people better have some damn good arguments before they'll convince me. |
Grookshank
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
44
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 15:14:36 -
[849] - Quote
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. |
Seiko Sorrelius
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 15:19:13 -
[850] - Quote
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'
Either way, I still like the idea where we just change attributes to do non-skill related things.
- We can make them as desirable as current implants, but not much more or not much less as to keep the market impact low.
- Since learning implants aren't removed, and will still be used, the 'risk' that everyone is so concerned about won't decrease.
- Learning implants actually affect game play significantly
- Minimal recoding! Learning implants still exist, remaps still exist, just change what attributes do.
Here are my suggestions:
Intelligence: +0.5% power grid and cpu per level OR +0.5% shield, armor, and hull per level.
Memory: -0.5% manufacturing and research time per level
Charisma: -0.5% market order cost (like broker relations) and 0.5% mission reward per level
Willpower: Not sure yet. Maybe a tracking/explosion 'to hit' thing? Or spaceship command related. Agility? Or maybe even leadership related (On grid booster stuff??)
Perception: +0.5% turret and launcher damage per level |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1110
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 15:20:27 -
[851] - Quote
Grookshank wrote: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.
Why should removing cost, effort and risk of remaps not have any effect on stats?
According to many people in this thread people don't use learning implants because they might lose them in PVP, so we'll have to slash some sp/h off your estimate, lets say 200/h? Those people are also stating that newbies using remaps all wrong is a big reason for these changes, so we'll have to adjust your sp/h some more because to account for that.
Seiko Sorrelius wrote: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'
And understandable and logical assumption but not true in this case. My income is PVP and exploration and while a (small) portion of the exploration loot are actually implants they're not learning ones. Removing the learning implants would probably increase the value of the implants I tend to find. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
960
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 15:55:03 -
[852] - Quote
I'm not sure if I've responded in this thread already or not so I'll state my view here concisely.
I'm fine with remaps/attributes/implants as they are. I believe they are balanced and provide good risk/reward choices.
For those that say new players often mess up the remaps I say this: The NPC experience should make very clear how remaps work, indeed there should be an entire tutorial on it if required. A new player is most often best with a balanced map of skills for the first month or so anyone and also have two free remaps in case they screw up royally with the first remap (One error isn't a surprise early on in Eve, two errors are your own fault).
Attributes are not hard to understand in my opinion, a higher attribute in the primary or secondary slot on a skill will give a better training time. It is striaght forward and simple to understand.
Implants are perfectly fine and provide the risk of losing isk compared to the reward gained for using the implant. If a player complains that they don't undock due to the implant costs they a) bought the wrong implants as they can't afford to lose them and b) Would simply complain about the next cost in line stoppiing them undocking if implants were removed. Risk aversion is a player mindset not the result of a game mechanic.
Removing the current system will punish those who make the effort to learn the system and gain the rewards and those willing to risk high cost implants. Some say this is pay to win but what is using tech II or tech II ships and faction/officer mods if not paying for advantage? |
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
114
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 16:09:27 -
[853] - Quote
Seiko Sorrelius wrote: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' Either way, I still like the idea where we just change attributes to do non-skill related things.
- We can make them as desirable as current implants, but not much more or not much less as to keep the market impact low.
- Since learning implants aren't removed, and will still be used, the 'risk' that everyone is so concerned about won't decrease.
- Learning implants actually affect game play significantly
- Minimal recoding! Learning implants still exist, remaps still exist, just change what attributes do.
Here are my suggestions: Intelligence: +0.5% power grid and cpu per level OR +0.5% shield, armor, and hull per level. Memory: -0.5% manufacturing and research time per level Charisma: -0.5% market order cost (like broker relations) and 0.5% mission reward per level Willpower: Not sure yet. Maybe a tracking/explosion 'to hit' thing? Or spaceship command related. Agility? Or maybe even leadership related (On grid booster stuff??) Perception: +0.5% turret and launcher damage per level
The problem with your solution is that all players will have same skill point gain. this unwanted as a lot of people would want to train faster than other people regardless of what they do in eve
I want to still be able to say i train faster than the guy next to me because i am willing to risk more , i also wanna catch up ( sp wise ) with people who are playing longer than me but they don't use implants |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1492
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 16:13:10 -
[854] - Quote
It seems that some players are either requesting a significant increase in complexity of the learning mechanics, or are aggrieved that their experience and effort investing in the system will somehow lead to a degraded advantage.
Whilst It is a common thread that any mechanic, no matter, how bad, is defended with extrene vehemence,no matter how bad, annoying, or just insane, one really needs to look at what BENEFIT the said mechanic brings to the overall player experience.
The Usual buzz Phrases, usually rolled out at this time, just make the posts hilariously embarressing. And is hardly the way to convince either the Dev team or those who are reading the thread.
In Short, needless complexity, is not a desireable goal or achievement, meaningful complexity however can have value, but that value needs to be carefully weighed against the benefit.
The current skill system is heavily biased towards complexity. Balancing it so the value exceeds the sheer "jumping through hoops" parts of the mechanism, is a desireable goal.
Making the Skill training system, should be a desireable goal, this is something we should all be behind, and we should be pleased that CCP are looking to make it better.
However those who are seeking the experience of training skills and are heartbroken by there loss will no doubt disagree.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
114
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 16:21:15 -
[855] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:I'm not sure if I've responded in this thread already or not so I'll state my view here concisely.
I'm fine with remaps/attributes/implants as they are. I believe they are balanced and provide good risk/reward choices.
For those that say new players often mess up the remaps I say this: The NPC experience should make very clear how remaps work, indeed there should be an entire tutorial on it if required. A new player is most often best with a balanced map of skills for the first month or so anyone and also have two free remaps in case they screw up royally with the first remap (One error isn't a surprise early on in Eve, two errors are your own fault).
Attributes are not hard to understand in my opinion, a higher attribute in the primary or secondary slot on a skill will give a better training time. It is striaght forward and simple to understand.
from earlier discussion in this thread some flaws were outlined in the remap system one of them is having to remap more than 4 times to be able to train max sp/hour for a particular ship perfectly that is kinda crappy
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Implants are perfectly fine and provide the risk of losing isk compared to the reward gained for using the implant. If a player complains that they don't undock due to the implant costs they a) bought the wrong implants as they can't afford to lose them and b) Would simply complain about the next cost in line stoppiing them undocking if implants were removed. Risk aversion is a player mindset not the result of a game mechanic.
Removing the current system will punish those who make the effort to learn the system and gain the rewards and those willing to risk high cost implants. Some say this is pay to win but what is using tech II or tech II ships and faction/officer mods if not paying for advantage?
I don't want them removed either. |
Mihnea Tepes
Astral Silence Don't Tell Me The Odds
49
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 17:01:45 -
[856] - Quote
Jesus, really, stop touching things which are working.
If you cant afford it, dont fly it and stop bitching around.
Or are we going to have an option to join the guild soon? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29867
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 18:07:15 -
[857] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid."
CCP Darwin wrote:Rain6637 wrote:For devs: do your job, read feedback. I resent the "be nice to devs or they won't read your comments" bit of logic, if you can't tell. It's a cop-out, especially in this player culture. I think we can all survive a little impassioned language. My point was that solely dismissing an argument as "stupid" with no real discussion wasn't likely to carry the conversation forward. "That's a stupid idea because A, B, C" is different from "OK, that's stupid, let's move on." You conceded that devs are unwilling or unable to filter feedback. Unless you and every other dev who has attempted to put the onus on customers, wants to take it back, it means this discussion and posting on EVE-O at all is an exercise in futility.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Khan Wrenth
Hedion University Amarr Empire
106
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 18:31:47 -
[858] - Quote
The main problem I see in the whole leveling system is the remaps/lack of in-game support for skill planning. That you can remap is great and all, but the once-a-year limitation is rather outrageous with no in-game tools to help you plan out what you're doing. I could get on board with the idea of removing remaps entirely, giving everyone flat attributes, and using implants to boost it from there. This is because the game has interesting ideas for how to build a meaningful character but lacks the tools/follow-through/execution to see those ideas through, leaving them half-done at best and therefore need to be dismissed entirely (TL;DR explanation of that below).
As it stands right now, remaps themselves are the problem. Once a year seems beyond reasonable to me. Did I made it work? Yes. But I still see a problem with it. When I started this game, I didn't even get into remaps or learning implants for months. I just trained skills that I wanted to, never felt like I was missing out on anything. When I learned a bit more about EVE I decided to do a general remap, took out Charisma and distributed it to the others and just continued training a wide variety of skills (mostly starter skills and pre-req stuff). I didn't even remap immediately once that year expired, I did it months afterwards.
And yes, while I brought Charisma down to it's lowest, that never stopped me from putting a few social skills to level 4. And one of them to level 5. At no point did I feel cheated or that the system didn't work. For the long run, that remap, including training off-optimal skills, was still working out better for me than no remap because the diversion was insignificant in that year's time.
I was never inhibited from doing anything, I never felt left out or left behind.
I might have done things a little differently if I had access to EVEMON early on, but you know how this game is "trust nobody...but oh hey there's this awesome unregulated third-party app and you just have to give it your API info and...", well that explains my reluctance and probably others' as well.
I think that's the biggest problem here. The two programs I use, EFT and EVEMON, are dang-near necessary to be able to function in EVE. Moreso EFT than EVEMON, to be honest, EVEMON is better for those who care to do long-term planning and are OCD about maxing stuff out...which until this thread came along I would have guessed was a small minority...but damn a lot of people apparently are really into that maxing out stuff.
Anyway, I think this game's biggest problems is that it (pretty much) requires two third-party programs to function. That is absolutely inexcusable. I see there's a thread about hopefully bettering the fitting experience in EVE, but that's about 11 years too late. Putting ships together is a core function of this game, and you shouldn't need third-party support to help you figure out fits. EVEMON I'm a bit more lenient on, but if you're going to pigeonhole people into an attribute set for a year, you should already have a program in place that shows them how best to optimize their training like EVEMON does. 11 years and still waiting for in-game support for that.
If this game didn't have this reputation about "trust nobody but these third-party programs are necessary - use them now", then maybe this wouldn't be the big issue that it apparently is. New players shouldn't be required to use third party apps to make your game work. If this game had in-game training planning and support, I'd say keep the year remaps and everything is fine. But as it stands, I'd say I'd rather see remaps cut back severely. Maybe three months. But where and why do we draw that line? It's arbitrary no matter what, even at a year, so who is to say what is right there?
Due to lack of in-game support for EVE training plans, I'd rather see attribute points flattened for everyone, no remaps, with implants to boost what you need. When EVE gets around to proper in-game support for training plans, we can re-institute attribute points. Until then, EVE doesn't have the proper in-game tools to support its own ideas, so let's be rid of it.
HTFU.-á Adapt or die.-á Beware the falcon punch.
|
Seiko Sorrelius
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 18:41:08 -
[859] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: You conceded that devs are unwilling or unable to filter feedback. Unless you and every other dev who has attempted to put the onus on customers, wants to take it back, it means this discussion and posting on EVE-O at all is an exercise in futility.
Why address it at all? Isn't it a fact of life for you as devs? I know some arguments are empty, you know some arguments are empty. We should all know. Yet here we are, EVE-O is mostly bare of dev posts, and dev participation wouldn't even qualify as casual.
How difficult would it be to expect 1 post per day from devs, no matter how cursory.
Do devs not realize how powerful it is to engage someone who is irate, and talk them down? Or how about compassion, and simply letting players know their opinions were seen (no matter how emotional, as long as it is within the rules of the forum).
You might even get some solid player analytics after discussing issues and letting us know what type of concerns exist around an issue.
We want to like you, every last CCP. Sometimes all we're looking for is a reason for a thing, and not necessarily a hard justification. When there is a sensible reason for a thing, we can pass that on and reference it when others ask. Silence doesn't satisfy this curiosity. And don't worry, things like NDA and sikrit are OK as long as they are part of an effort to communicate.
People act right when others are watching, dev-involved conversations included. The problem is there's no baseline for the culture, and y'all practically never talk. Be human. Have a good time in some threads, participate in other more serious ones.
Player culture is probably immovably emotional, but you're game devs, this is part of your reality. You should be experts at communicating through player emotions, rather than masters of ignoring it.
I mean this in the most tender way: what happened to HTFU?
Firstly, he never said that devs are unable to filter feedback, and even if he did that by no means implies that devs don't pay attention to feedback.
Secondly, it is easy for non-developers to say how developers should act. You, and 99% of the people in this thread, have never had to fill their shoes. Being a developer is a pain in the ass. They get insulted and harassed, and nothing they do will change that.
The most vocal players are the least likely to change and the most likely to be negative, and so responding to them is practically pointless. If they respond, they're wasting their time and creating angst because the players get upset that they're not obeying their every whim, but if they don't respond, they're called out for 'lacking communication' or 'ignoring' the players.
Every developer for any vaguely popular game has likely experienced this. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29867
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 18:42:42 -
[860] - Quote
Yes we all understand this. The comment that we should be nice opened this door, now, didn't it.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
|
Vyl Vit
1049
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 19:03:58 -
[861] - Quote
"Daddy, daddy. Please make the lawnmower lighter, or the yard shorter. Daddy, daddy. Do we really have to paint the whole house? Can't you get a second job and pay "someone" to do it? Daddy, daddy. I was watching that cartoon. Your news isn't more important than my right to choose how I spend my free time. Daddy, daddy. Why is life so hard? Stop making me do my work. " -today's child-
I guess trying to convince a game developer to drop a timesink because you're in a hurry, or add a timesink 'cause some people just get there TOO fast for you...is a lot like climbing Mount Everest. Ever - rest.
I feel for all of you who think all of this takes too much of your precious time. I know you're busy discovering the cure for cancer and creating world peace, replacing the dry cell battery and perfecting means of actual interstellar travel in real life. Having a game demand your effort and time must be a real burden for you.
Pity party at my house, tonight. BYOB. The DJ is guaranteed to suck. (Imagine all those out of work bands. Whoever thought someone bringing his records from home would actually replace mu$ician$.) Let me know when your world is perfected. I'll be in the sauna.
Anyone with any sense has already left town.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29867
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 19:06:10 -
[862] - Quote
I.... just want to say that I've climbed over the 50 million SP core skills hump seven times. Not my problem anymore.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Otlichnick
Caliban Logistics and Storage Absolution Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 20:55:43 -
[863] - Quote
I cant speak for anyone but my self but i would like to make a few points concerning this topic.
1: Yes It is very frustrating to find out a year and a half later that something you were doing wasn't optimal. -> BUT that is what makes this game continually interesting!!! DON'T MAKE THIS A DUMB GAME. -> If there wasn't the huge need for knowledge in this game about how this game works ( because everyone "gets" it) you would lose most of your intelligent player base. There would be less obvious "leaders of corps" as they would know and be on a equal level as all the players in the corp. DON'T MAKE THIS A DUMB GAME
2: OMG the rush i get when i have 600m in implants and im fighting in a 35m isk ship! I doubt my blood pressure would rise at all if i stood to lose nothing (35m). The Implants give not only a edge in fighting/scanning/or whatever you do, they also add to the overall "EVE feeling" this game gives. Undocking in a empty system with a full set of slaves is still risky!! OMG SYSTEM CRASH LOG ON QUICK TO SEE IF I SURVIVED ****! ****! ****! haha That's FUN.
3. Right now I have PLENTY of ISK to buy +4's or +5 but im flying with +3's for 2 reasons. -> THE REASONS DON'T MATTER. Its part of the game to make educated decisions on a daily basis! -> The removal of areas to "Think about the game and make decisions according to your surroundings" is and always will be A BAD IDEA.
So as you can see even the smallest mechanic in this game may provide tons of "micro" fun which EVE is made up of. I fear there are some people pushing CCP in to creating another run of the mill game that appeals to kids.
Even in the simplest games there will be people that completely get dumbfounded by the way it works. If the game was so easy they can play it and succeed you wouldn't need to change the game anymore and there would be no need for staff or developers anymore. It would be an out of the box plug me and and lvl up to 99 and get bored but keep playing because it makes me feel good to be the most maxed skilled in game, WOW what a good game that would be.
In a game where you can have all skills maxed and still fail.. That's a REAL game. Keep it that way! |
Pok Nibin
Filial Pariahs
491
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 00:06:12 -
[864] - Quote
Otlichnick wrote: I cant speak for anyone but my self ... Undocking in a empty system with a full set of slaves is still risky!! OMG SYSTEM CRASH LOG ON QUICK TO SEE IF I SURVIVED ****! ****! ****! haha That's FUN. You have a funny idea of fun. I know a guy that watches them unload produce at Publix. Let's use HIS idea of FUN! Weee haaaa!
Otlichnick wrote: 3. Right now I have PLENTY of ISK to buy +4's or +5 but im flying with +3's for 2 reasons....
Ummm...you said "risk"...You almost had me till this.
Otlichnick wrote:So as you can see even the smallest mechanic in this game may provide tons of "micro" fun which EVE is made up of. I fear there are some people pushing CCP in to creating another run of the mill game that appeals to kids. For you to fear this means you think how YOU push will push CCP into something - the other guy is pushing so you have to push back 'cause CCP will fold like a cheap suit. "Smallest mechanic?" Obsession with detail is the bugaboo of the tiny mind.
Otlichnick wrote: Even in the simplest games there will be people that completely get dumbfounded by the way it works. If the game was so easy they can play it and succeed you wouldn't need to change the game anymore and there would be no need for staff or developers anymore. It would be an out of the box plug me and and lvl up to 99 and get bored but keep playing because it makes me feel good to be the most maxed skilled in game, WOW what a good game that would be. In a game where you can have all skills maxed and still fail.. That's a REAL game. Keep it that way!
Okay well. Now it's plain you're another of the masses who is afraid of change. I hope that works out for you. Life is change.
Dont fight it; Rejoin your Amarrian patriarchs; You know you want to.
|
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
108
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 05:54:23 -
[865] - Quote
Pok Nibin wrote:Otlichnick wrote: I cant speak for anyone but my self ... Undocking in a empty system with a full set of slaves is still risky!! OMG SYSTEM CRASH LOG ON QUICK TO SEE IF I SURVIVED ****! ****! ****! haha That's FUN. You have a funny idea of fun. I know a guy that watches them unload produce at Publix. Let's use HIS idea of FUN! Weee haaaa! Otlichnick wrote: 3. Right now I have PLENTY of ISK to buy +4's or +5 but im flying with +3's for 2 reasons....
Ummm...you said "risk"...You almost had me till this. Otlichnick wrote:So as you can see even the smallest mechanic in this game may provide tons of "micro" fun which EVE is made up of. I fear there are some people pushing CCP in to creating another run of the mill game that appeals to kids. For you to fear this means you think how YOU push will push CCP into something - the other guy is pushing so you have to push back 'cause CCP will fold like a cheap suit. "Smallest mechanic?" Obsession with detail is the bugaboo of the tiny mind. Otlichnick wrote: Even in the simplest games there will be people that completely get dumbfounded by the way it works. If the game was so easy they can play it and succeed you wouldn't need to change the game anymore and there would be no need for staff or developers anymore. It would be an out of the box plug me and and lvl up to 99 and get bored but keep playing because it makes me feel good to be the most maxed skilled in game, WOW what a good game that would be. In a game where you can have all skills maxed and still fail.. That's a REAL game. Keep it that way!
Okay well. Now it's plain you're another of the masses who is afraid of change. I hope that works out for you. Life is change.
If you are too afraid to pvp with implants don't use them. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
130
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 06:45:55 -
[866] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:
i use +5 implants all the time and i pvp in them i don't give a **** if i lose them as long as i train faster than other players
Interesting statement, if I check the killboard of Jane Shapperd ... I see ... many empty pods ;)
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29898
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 10:15:17 -
[867] - Quote
There's the possibility of emergency unplugging of implants under duress.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
D'Kelle
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
85
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 10:35:41 -
[868] - Quote
As I see I the whole purpose of implants and remapping of attributes is about CHOICE, in game Choice, i.e. part of the "fabled sand box" power given to the player to chose, or look at it another way you vote how to train your character in which ever way possible the choice allows within the mechanics. Take away the choice and you reduce the game individuality per player. Its akin to loosing your right to vote in RL so use it or loose it, some are indifferent to choosing, they are sheep,your freedom to choose that's bad either in game or in RL :The ability to move ahead a little bit faster in your personal direction empowers you as an individual depending upon how you game play style is. were we all newbies at one time same as the thousands of players over the last ten years or. If you want to see how much effect it has on newbies, then run a proper test allow 50% of any new players from this date forward to have access to the current system and the other 50% cannot remap or install implants over the next 12 months and see who complains the ones allowed or the ones denied. that would be far better than affect the total current player base. I would put money on it that the ones denied will complain like hell, that they had been disadvantaged. if you don't think that would be the case you have no genuine reason for not trying it. |
Rectile
Warped
6
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 12:37:58 -
[869] - Quote
Good idea if true and i welcome it
|
NeodiuM
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 14:46:49 -
[870] - Quote
I'm for the removal of attribute enhancing implants and the attribute map. 10+ years on I don't really see why people are going to complain about a slightly accelerated skill queueing.
Honestly.
Cons: 1) Its bad for veterans or industrialists who are heavily invested in the attribute implants. - some form of compensation for them. 2) People who have already done their skill training may complain because it should be hard for others. 3) Peepz will say "Don't make eve easy"
Pro's: 1) Get your mate into the game quicker. 2) New players wont have steam coming out of their ears just trying to sort out these menu's before undocking. 3) Reduced requirement for outside programs to manage your skill queue and assist in optimising it. 4) There is no easy way to put this in a new player tutorial, removal is good - really, how would you do it, if its overly complicated, it will be ignored while more basic game concepts are learned and then forgotten. 5) Less "mandatory" feeling implants to risk loosing, over and over. (I don't mind pvp'ing with learning implants in if i'm stuck in that clone, but when an FC says, lets go whelp this fleet and get a fight, its sad watching half of it drop out because they don't want to loose their pod.) ie. loosing a 40m pod in a 20m frigate.
It's a pain in the ass to work out and not much fun when I decide I want to try something else in eve. If I already had 100m sp I probably wouldn't care, but I don't, I have 20m sp and I'm only now starting to feel relevant outside of a blob.
Honestly, I love eve and I love the complexity of eve. These implants and the mapping attributes were another thing that I had to get my head around, they wern't fun, but I felt better for understanding them after reading up on it. And because I tend to switch my training around alot I went with a balanced map, I now just understand i'm not mapped as optimally as others. Its a trade off for fun.
TLDR; Its hard enough trying to get my mates into eve, without having this hurdle / giving them implants to help them / watching them loosing so many implants / watching them give up. The attribute system doesn't make sense anymore. |
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
115
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 15:40:27 -
[871] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Jane Shapperd wrote:
i use +5 implants all the time and i pvp in them i don't give a **** if i lose them as long as i train faster than other players
Interesting statement, if I check the killboard of Jane Shapperd ... I see ... many empty pods ;)
oh snap some1 noticed
when i lose my ship i consider the situation if i am going to lose my pod 100%( bubble , pipe bomb , gate camp smart bombs) i start upluging everysingle implant starting with learning +5s then hardwairing implants as all the 5 of them are cheaper than two +5.
i mentioned in one of my posts i mostly lose my implants by unpluging them not by being poded as i care more about kb rather than my wallet. |
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
108
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 16:08:05 -
[872] - Quote
NeodiuM wrote:I'm for the removal of attribute enhancing implants and the attribute map. 10+ years on I don't really see why people are going to complain about a slightly accelerated skill queueing.
Honestly.
Cons: 1) Its bad for veterans or industrialists who are heavily invested in the attribute implants. - some form of compensation for them. 2) People who have already done their skill training may complain because it should be hard for others. 3) Peepz will say "Don't make eve easy"
Pro's: 1) Get your mate into the game quicker. 2) New players wont have steam coming out of their ears just trying to sort out these menu's before undocking. 3) Reduced requirement for outside programs to manage your skill queue and assist in optimising it. 4) There is no easy way to put this in a new player tutorial, removal is good - really, how would you do it, if its overly complicated, it will be ignored while more basic game concepts are learned and then forgotten. 5) Less "mandatory" feeling implants to risk loosing, over and over. (I don't mind pvp'ing with learning implants in if i'm stuck in that clone, but when an FC says, lets go whelp this fleet and get a fight, its sad watching half of it drop out because they don't want to loose their pod.) ie. loosing a 40m pod in a 20m frigate.
It's a pain in the ass to work out and not much fun when I decide I want to try something else in eve. If I already had 100m sp I probably wouldn't care, but I don't, I have 20m sp and I'm only now starting to feel relevant outside of a blob.
Honestly, I love eve and I love the complexity of eve. These implants and the mapping attributes were another thing that I had to get my head around, they wern't fun, but I felt better for understanding them after reading up on it. And because I tend to switch my training around alot I went with a balanced map, I now just understand i'm not mapped as optimally as others. Its a trade off for fun.
TLDR; Its hard enough trying to get my mates into eve, without having this hurdle / giving them implants to help them / watching them loosing so many implants / watching them give up. The attribute system doesn't make sense anymore.
Implants aren't needed to play the game.
They are a luxury...not a necessity.
They are something a player makes the choice to spend their isk on knowing that they can be podded and have to replace them.
If you cannot afford to lose your implants and choose to be risk averse that is your choice.
|
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
418
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 17:05:28 -
[873] - Quote
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. |
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
108
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 17:42:59 -
[874] - Quote
Noxisia Arkana wrote: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.
PvP doesn't add anything of value to me. Lets get rid of it.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1116
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 18:13:48 -
[875] - Quote
NeodiuM wrote:TLDR; Its hard enough trying to get my mates into eve, without having this hurdle / giving them implants to help them / watching them loosing so many implants / watching them give up. The attribute system doesn't make sense anymore.
OR you could teach them about how SP isn't that important and how EVE is about risk, planning and reward. But I guess that's just way too difficult, right.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1116
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 18:15:22 -
[876] - Quote
Noxisia Arkana wrote: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.
It's a simple case of reading forums, asking questions, noticing your standings are dropping and... putting in some brain effort.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
180
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 18:53:12 -
[877] - Quote
Noxisia Arkana wrote: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.
there are ways to fix that once you have messed up. the easiest being a skill to train which only takes 6 days from 0lv-5lv and can be trained almost at the start of the game.
The equation: e=(10-(s))*(d*.04)+(s) where: s=Standing d=Diplomacy level e=Effective standing
at Diplomacy lv 5 you can have -8.7 standings and still run around in that factions space without them bothering you. As -10 is the lowest you can do and requires alot of work to get it there. once they are there I doubt they are newbies anymore
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29916
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 22:17:40 -
[878] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:Noxisia Arkana wrote: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. PvP doesn't add anything of value to me. Lets get rid of it. My suggestion for fixing faction standings is a tag system similar to clone tags for security status. F&I
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Seven Koskanaiken
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1409
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 23:40:41 -
[879] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Phoenix Czech wrote:Two things I do not like on this: 1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap. 2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).
1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis. 2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer. A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty. Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid."
Surely all XP systems can be gamed by using one's brain. If you had to grind for XP surely there would be a mathematically optimal solution to reduce travel time and do the quests or killing the right mobs (do mods x levels above you, etc). It's the equivalent of going to another MMO and ask the quest givers to all be placed at equidistant towns to be done one-by-one with no variation so everyone can skill at the same rate in case someone works it out and has an unfair advantage. |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
7778
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 23:54:30 -
[880] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote: Implants aren't needed to play the game.
They are a luxury...not a necessity.
They are something a player makes the choice to spend their isk on knowing that they can be podded and have to replace them.
If you cannot afford to lose your implants and choose to be risk averse that is your choice.
Time WAAAAARP!!
I could pull up those exact words posted about learning skills made by people like you to justify keeping them in the game.
How did that work out?
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass!
|
|
Seven Koskanaiken
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1411
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 23:56:49 -
[881] - Quote
While we are debating this change to learning implants can we have some data on the last clone change that was meant to "get people pvp'ing". Something like say
- how many clones in the top 20% of SP had more ship deaths/kills after the removal of clone costs, and by how much more - how many clones in the top 20% of SP without no little or no ship deaths/kills whatsoever had more after the change |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29922
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 23:59:08 -
[882] - Quote
sorta moot, considering the med clone cost was removed to allow sleepers and drifters to pod us. So not only was it purely an RP/ lore based change, it's also too soon for those metrics to show anything. There's too much habit and ingrained behavior for the recent med clone change to have affected much, I think.
the low end of the top 20% of SP characters is lower than you think. Perhaps you meant to say clones with more than x amount of SP, say, 200 mil +.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Seven Koskanaiken
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1411
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 00:01:39 -
[883] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:sorta moot, considering the med clone cost was removed to allow sleepers and drifters to pod us. So not only was it purely an RP/ lore based change, it's also too soon for those metrics to show anything. There's too much habit and ingrained behavior for the recent med clone change to have affected much, I think.
Fair enough but there's still a vocal base of "I don't pvp because of x" and I'm sure they are not totally ignored by CSM/CCP. |
ThaMa Gebir
Penumbra Institute
13
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 00:12:49 -
[884] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:I don't own this game. All I have is a license to access this game's servers with its client. CCP doesn't owe me anything for being a player. Any time and effort I put in this game is a waste of my life.
Therefore CCP retains the right to change anything they want, including shutting down the servers for good when this becomes unprofitable, and they don't owe me anything.
Like any game.
Which also means I can stop payment and deny them any more income from me.
Simple. :D |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1004
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 01:26:50 -
[885] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:sorta moot, considering the med clone cost was removed to allow sleepers and drifters to pod us.
This is not accurate. EVE Game Design has been looking at the entire clone and skill systems with an eye toward simplification and improving game design, and the removal of med clone cost was the first step of that.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1072
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 01:38:43 -
[886] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Rain6637 wrote:sorta moot, considering the med clone cost was removed to allow sleepers and drifters to pod us. This is not accurate. EVE Game Design has been looking at the entire clone and skill systems with an eye toward simplification and improving game design, and the removal of med clone cost was the first step of that.
Thank you for that btw. Keep up the good work.
I'd rather complexity in space flight and being a Eve Space God. Not micromanaging which clone has the +3 to train harder skill.
Yaay!!!!
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
33119
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 01:39:52 -
[887] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:EVE Game Design has been looking at the entire clone and skill systems with an eye toward simplification and improving game design, and the removal of med clone cost was the first step of that. It doesn't need to be simple, just intuitive.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
258
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 03:23:09 -
[888] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:EVE Game Design has been looking at the entire clone and skill systems with an eye toward simplification and improving game design, and the removal of med clone cost was the first step of that. It doesn't need to be simple, just intuitive. Or better explained. That's been the biggest flaw, not that it's complex, that it's complex AND you're on your own to figure it out.
It's one reason I want making a JC to be part of the Career Agent missions. I know of LOTS of PVE/Industrial placers that have no clue about them, how to get them, what they could be used for. Add to that the current ways to get them (Grind Standings, Join a corp with standings, join a corp in Null, or with a Cap that has a Clone Vat Bay). Teaching new players about it, AND giving them one so they can find uses on their own would be great. Added benefit of my previous idea of making it a JC that can't hold implants, and isn't limited by the JC Cooldown, means never again will "Implants" be an excuse for not being able to PvP. You'd always have a clone that you can hop into and lose at a moments notice. Leave the Cooldown for clones with implants/hardwires for either hard fits, specialist, or pve. And then have one that you can be mining, or running missions in, corpmate/friend/someone in a common channel says hey, lets go blow stuff up, and there you go.
We come back to removing +5 Implants will make people more likely to PVP, you think they are going to want to risk their 5% and 6% hardwires? Each of those costs as much or more than Attribute implants. My Mining clone is still going to have it's high end hardwires.. my Mission clone, Incursion clone, same thing. With-Without learning implants, none of them are going looking for a fight. I doubt I'm alone in this either.
The solution for dealing with people that won't PVP because of Pod costs is already in game. A little tweaking to it and it's removed as an excuse.
Another way, just remove the whole standing requirement to Make JC's. Make it so you can create one at ANY NPC station with Med Center. Set it to 8.0 standing is when you just pay the base 100k isk, and then work back, lower your standing, more expensive it is. Now everyone has access (for an upfront fee).. still want it to be a training mission but ya.
End of the day lots of options that imho would be far better for making people have quick access to being able to PVP, than just removing 5 out of 10 possible implants at any given time. |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1004
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 03:41:46 -
[889] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote:Or better explained. That's been the biggest flaw, not that it's complex, that it's complex AND you're on your own to figure it out.
Complexity is not a problem in itself, otherwise EVE wouldn't have survived as long as it has. Still, the idea that "if it were all just explained better, new players would be OK" is a little bit of a trap.
For example, double-clicking in space to steer your ship is clearly explained in the initial tutorial, before the career agents. But, the majority of new players miss it, because they're focused on interacting, not reading. It's right up in front of them in black and white, but my personal straw poll says that 100% of them (+/- 0%) miss it.
It's easy to say that one should overhaul the new player experience to make the introduction to the game more about doing things and less about reading blocks of text, but that's spectacularly hard to execute -- particularly when the basic game mechanics are as complicated as EVE's.
Some of EVE's complexity is essential to the experience. Ship fitting is one example. The range of modules and ship bonuses are so wide that it is possible to come up with innovative fits that do something interesting and new compared to what's been out there before.
What's troubling about the current state of the attribute system isn't its complexity, it's that (first) the choices don't have relevance to the rest of the game (because attributes usually don't map to things you want to do in game), and (second) that the punishment for not knowing about it is cumulative. If I spend a year learning good sources for information about ship fitting, I instantly gain an in-game benefit from that. If I take a year to get my head around the attribute system, I'm behind by a couple months, not just right then, but forever.
If a new player picks skills they don't want later, that's a different issue: at least their skill training has enabled some experimentation and gameplay that might satisfy their curiosity about things they ultimately don't wish to do in EVE. But, the attribute system is just complexity for its own sake.
And, of course, I'll repeat what I consider to be the best argument against skill training differences: When you don't know about attributes, you can train whatever you want. When you do, you're forced to train skills you don't want because an artificial system is forcing you to do so. EVE shouldn't systematically punish those who learn more deeply how the game works by forcing them to make decisions they don't like because of their deeper knowledge.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29924
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 03:58:39 -
[890] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:EVE Game Design has been looking at the entire clone and skill systems with an eye toward simplification and improving game design, and the removal of med clone cost was the first step of that. It doesn't need to be simple, just intuitive. I'm under the impression med clone costs were only removed to allow NPCs to pod us, and lore / RP.
Not the math of it and the fact that it made very little sense ten years in (and was basically a constantly increasing punishment for accumulating SP).
So no, I'm not buying it.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
963
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 04:42:49 -
[891] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:I often see people asking "Why don't we get to hear about future changes to the game early, when they're still being considered, instead of right before they happen?" This is an instance where you have heard about something that's far enough out that even the game designers aren't sure what they want to propose yet.
Yet at the current pace of releases it seems that as soon as something has a dev blog it is going in game within a week or two. Then again most of those changes were on a much smaller scale than some of the proposals like "fix sov" and "remove attributes"
@ChainsawPlankto
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29924
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 05:07:30 -
[892] - Quote
There's probably a concern about high sec mission runners being unable to make use of jump clones without sufficient Faction standings, or know-how. If that's the case and educating these independent randoms is not considered an option (which it probably isn't), CCP will probably use the solution that involves no further action from independents.
It's bullshit, but it would include the normalization of attributes and removing the remap mechanic. I can only hope they'll allow attribute implants to stay.
I mean, really, what does a high sec mission nobody need slots 1-5 for, other than attributes. Crystal sets for their Golem or Tengu character? Which, if you ask me, already meet their needs with the +4 attributes that have been added to HG sets.
Or you could make NPC corp jump clone installations free from a standings requirement, and swap the lore over to a profit-driven service, rather than a loyalty service to capsuleers. Similar to the changes to POS standings in high sec.
Suddenly, I get the feeling remaps are being removed, and all attributes will be set at 24, or whatever the average is.
What would make me happy is if HG sets had +5s to attributes, rather than +4. That would solve some dilemmas for vets and randoms alike, all over EVE.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Castor II
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 05:18:56 -
[893] - Quote
I'll be glad if they remove attributes and remaps and have all skills train at the same speed. Just seems like the wrong kind of complexity to me.
Maybe have implants that give a bonus to training speed of all skills instead? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29924
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 05:23:44 -
[894] - Quote
I'm all for simplification where it's needed, but that would be re-complicating things unnecessarily.
With super pilots unable to dock, at first glance they seem to miss out on training with +5s, but the smart thing to do is sit in that super with +5s in, and the appropriate HG set in cargo. That way if they get into some **** they can unplug their +5s and swap into slaves, or snakes, etc.
Or hold supers with sitters.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
258
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 08:24:29 -
[895] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Or better explained. That's been the biggest flaw, not that it's complex, that it's complex AND you're on your own to figure it out. Complexity is not a problem in itself, otherwise EVE wouldn't have survived as long as it has. Still, the idea that "if it were all just explained better, new players would be OK" is a little bit of a trap. For example, double-clicking in space to steer your ship is clearly explained in the initial tutorial, before the career agents. But, the majority of new players miss it, because they're focused on interacting, not reading. It's right up in front of them in black and white, but my personal straw poll says that 100% of them (+/- 0%) miss it. It's easy to say that one should overhaul the new player experience to make the introduction to the game more about doing things and less about reading blocks of text, but that's spectacularly hard to execute (not that the folks working on the new player experience aren't trying!) -- particularly when the basic game mechanics are as complicated as EVE's. I'll be the first to say Eve has come forward massively with improving the Career Agent missions to better explain things. But a lot of things are glossed over.
You use the example about double clicking in space is mentioned, but most people ignore it. Solution? Make part of one of the missions "head towards the Nebula" or something, somewhere in space that isn't an object you can click on and hit approach. This is basically what has been happening. The new player missions have been expanded on, better popups, better missions.
This is why I lean toward better explanation BEFORE simplification. I mean remaps are complex, they really are. IMHO they became even more computer when CCP moved some of the skills around, so you can no longer generalize that skills in Category X are always Y/Z Attributes.. obvious example, Weapon Upgrades being moved out of Gunnery, but still needing the Percep/Will remap. But we also need to be honest there, there's is almost NO explanation in game about it. It is probably one of the worst explained, yet important parts. Implants get a better overview, oh and we get given some early on too \o/
Hell maybe the ideal setup is to remove new remaps, and the whole idea of the yearly remap.. Then make it so you get them by doing specific things in game. Like trading in tags to an agent earns you one. Then you aren't going and play with it out of the blue. Also it would remove the whole being forced to wait a year to earn them. Or maybe give Interbus storyline missions, and have remaps be the reward. Make it an item (like resculpt) so you've made a market for them.
I see lots of ways we can improve this part of the game, without simply removing it.
On a side note, props on you for engaging in the topic :) Even if you aren't the one making the call. It's much appreciated :)
|
Grace Chang
Black Phoenix Legion The Fourth District
59
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 08:42:14 -
[896] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Or better explained. That's been the biggest flaw, not that it's complex, that it's complex AND you're on your own to figure it out. If a new player picks skills they don't want later, that's a different issue: at least their skill training has enabled some experimentation and gameplay that might satisfy their curiosity about things they ultimately don't wish to do in EVE. But, the attribute system is just complexity for its own sake.
It is not. It is something that forces a choice. Choice makes people (characters) differ. Notice any RPG worth its salt has attributes? For any of those games your reasoning applies as well. Ultimately it is not about complexity - it is about choice. The idea is, that as a player, you have to consider trade-offs that define your choice: essentially you choose between a short term benefit vs. a long term benefit. You have to THINK what is important to you and what might not be a priority.
What you essentially do here is arguing for the instant gratification crowd and sugar coat it by saying it is complexity without meaning. It could not be further from the truth. The attribute system is one essential component that separates the wheat (people who invest into their characters and the game) from the chaff (people who dabble).
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29925
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 08:47:03 -
[897] - Quote
False dichotomy alert.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
118
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 09:43:36 -
[898] - Quote
Grace Chang wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Or better explained. That's been the biggest flaw, not that it's complex, that it's complex AND you're on your own to figure it out. If a new player picks skills they don't want later, that's a different issue: at least their skill training has enabled some experimentation and gameplay that might satisfy their curiosity about things they ultimately don't wish to do in EVE. But, the attribute system is just complexity for its own sake. It is not. It is something that forces a choice. Choice makes people (characters) differ. Notice any RPG worth its salt has attributes? For any of those games your reasoning applies as well. Ultimately it is not about complexity - it is about choice. The idea is, that as a player, you have to consider trade-offs that define your choice: essentially you choose between a short term benefit vs. a long term benefit. You have to THINK what is important to you and what might not be a priority. What you essentially do here is arguing for the instant gratification crowd and sugar coat it by saying it is complexity without meaning. It could not be further from the truth. The attribute system is one essential component that separates the wheat (people who invest into their characters and the game) from the chaff (people who dabble).
I find myself agreeing with you.
What the attribute is missing then is relatvivity to choice ... cause and effect are far too distant from each other. And far to annoying to work out that most people don't even bother (unless they know they'r planning a major skill progression (ie Alliance creation or Titan flying) that they 'know' will 'ALL' beneift from a single neural map.
Even then, most skill tree don't last a full year, by which time the attributes are 'an accepted fix' and ignored.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1010
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 11:06:21 -
[899] - Quote
Grace Chang wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Or better explained. That's been the biggest flaw, not that it's complex, that it's complex AND you're on your own to figure it out. If a new player picks skills they don't want later, that's a different issue: at least their skill training has enabled some experimentation and gameplay that might satisfy their curiosity about things they ultimately don't wish to do in EVE. But, the attribute system is just complexity for its own sake. It is not. It is something that forces a choice. Choice makes people (characters) differ. Notice any RPG worth its salt has attributes? For any of those games your reasoning applies as well. Ultimately it is not about complexity - it is about choice. The idea is, that as a player, you have to consider trade-offs that define your choice: essentially you choose between a short term benefit vs. a long term benefit. You have to THINK what is important to you and what might not be a priority.
Player choice is not a value in itself. Imagine (for a moment) that the skill system required players to train one of two skills early on. One skill cuts their hit points in half, for all time, on all ships. Another cuts their damage in half, for all time, on all ships.
This would be a choice. It's even a choice between two things that directly affect how the core combat game plays out. But, it's a choice that feels bad because it's a choice between two options with no upside, and it's not fun. It would just be bad game design.
When you attempt to play optimally with attribute remaps, you either pick skills in line with your remap (yawn, of course you do) or you find yourself forced to deviate from your remap and it feels bad.
It's just like my hypothetical skills, where best case you'd be optimized for tanking and flying a freighter (where they would provide no benefit), and worst case you'd be bashing a POS for two hours while optimized for tanking (where it would actively make the gameplay less fun).
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
11793
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 11:15:01 -
[900] - Quote
Oh, now that's just hyperbole. I really don't think anyone is talking about the kind of consequences that cut your hitpoints in half for the rest of your character's life.
Attributes are meh. Yep.
Implants are not. They are a meaningful choice, and encourage decision making based on risk vs reward. (just because some people choose wrong and handcuff themselves is not reason to scrap that whole system)
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
|
Baneken
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
471
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 11:38:58 -
[901] - Quote
I don't mind the removal attributes but do like to keep learning implants in the game, why because they mean risk and risk makes people scared and doing improbable things.
Such as that yesterday we met or rather hunted & stalked some null bears in our wh chain, killed some, podded some and then the rest of them huddled in a tiny POS without stront ... in fear of dying for their expensive implants ...
They had cheap t1 battleships and (one baddon was worth 400mils so average priced) nothing bling just basic t2 with cheapo faction stuff but none of them were willing to come out and risk their ships + pods, if you remove the implants you remove one core element of risk from the game. If they had no implants they could had just stuffed their modules in to that prorator they had to set up that POS, self destructed those cheap t1 ships and get back home instantly and no fun for us.
We btw. shot that little POS as they logged out to escape from us; should had put up a death trap POS but no one was willing to 'waste' a scout for such a meagre loot as t1 BS's.
Remove the implants and nr1 one travel choice of travel in eve will be 'pod express', I know that if my choice is 'pod express' or jumping 30j in clone that has no implants nor expensive ship to be left behind it's 'pod express' every single time, no exceptions.
Also aside from 3billion slave sets and the omega, that is often worth more then the rest combined, the bonuses from implants sets are minor compared to learning time you save from learning attributes hence people rarely buy other then learning sets and also the fact that for learning implants you only need the two +5's to get most bang for your buck.
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2712
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 11:41:36 -
[902] - Quote
Learning Implants are just as bad as learning skills. They benefit older richer players more than the newer players who could use benefit from them the most. I know I spent a few days training up Cybernetics 4 just so I could use +4 learning implants which made my first few days very boring had I not had a friend helping me I would have quit.
I am all for the removal of both learning implants as well as attributes, there are plenty of choices with just as much consequence as learning implant use. |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1010
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 11:44:53 -
[903] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Oh, now that's just hyperbole. I really don't think anyone is talking about the kind of consequences that cut your hitpoints in half for the rest of your character's life. I was using an extreme example to demonstrate why something being a choice to customize your character didn't inherently make that a good design.
Although, replace "hitpoints" for "skill points" and you've almost described the attribute system. :)
Quote:Attributes are meh. Yep.
Implants are not. They are a meaningful choice, and encourage decision making based on risk vs reward. (just because some people choose wrong and handcuff themselves is not reason to scrap that whole system) While I wouldn't want to paint my game design colleagues into a corner, I don't believe that implants are going anywhere. Only learning implants are in question.
There have been suggestions in this thread and elsewhere that learning implants with flat learning speed bonuses might work in an attribute-free world. I think replacing learning speed implants with alternatives that encourage rather than discourage undocking is more likely, but I don't think anyone has yet come to any conclusions about what form that might take.
If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.")
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
11794
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 11:51:27 -
[904] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.")
Before I go off on this, I'm curious, why is "willing to undock with them" the criteria here?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
728
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 11:52:48 -
[905] - Quote
Baneken wrote: Remove the implants and nr1 one travel choice of travel in eve will be 'pod express', I know that if my choice is 'pod express' or jumping 30j in clone that has no implants nor expensive ship to be left behind it's 'pod express' every single time, no exceptions.
That's actually a very good point - with the removal of clone costs, and a following removal of learning implants, is there really any point to the whole pod-thing at all anymore? Might as well set an optional flag to auto-self-destruct the pod on ship destruction with no self-destruct timer since there is no point having the pod anymore. You are not protecting implants, you are not saving isk by avoiding the clone cost (literally, both things I have slowboated a pod home to do in the past which I wont need to anymore). You are just waiting two minutes til the self-destruct timer ticks down, hoping someone will shoot you first and save you the time (which they wont, for with valueless pods, its funnier to make the owner sit out the timer). Hilariously, we are creating another non-choice (do I try and get this pod home or not? why would you, you are just wasting time).
And sorry, I just don't buy the whole "well, you will have them filled with hardwires instead". Sorry, you wont. People just don't fly with Hardwires as much as they do learning implants (you can see this just by looking at any killboard anywhere), they'll just save the isk instead - Super pilots notwithstanding of course, but if a bunch of Supers go down they'll be ten bubbles deep so the pod isn't getting home anyway.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29926
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:04:10 -
[906] - Quote
Let's remember who we're talking about here. The group who are still stuck in the Intel Mem / Per Will support skill rut. This is a group of players who don't understand that armor repairs are free if they use a local repair module at the undock, rather than paying for in-station repair services after every mission. A few years ago, I met a rookie flying a Navy Raven with CN gear, who couldn't figure out how to come out of missions with a profit after paying for armor repairs. I was a bit envious of their gameplay, for making use of station repairs and taking them so seriously, but if they are to be helped by changes to make things smoother, it would look like standardized attributes at a minimum.
And free station repairs for anything not heat-related. I don't see why not, since the only people who use them are the uninformed, and repairs to armor and hull are free with modules. Shields could also use a button to request repairs, instead of letting this depth of gameplay fall through the cracks. (apparently rookies like that sort of thing).
A bit ago I mentioned I don't have these types of problems, and the hard decisions of Intel Mem or Per Wil. Looking at it from the perspective of someone who does, I'd say yeah it sucks, and it's unusual when it comes to game design.
There's something called Principle of Least Astonishment. It's a UI term, but I think it applies here. If it takes too long to figure out, or something looks unusual enough, after a certain point it simply qualifies as bad design. For being confusing or confounding.
I'll give it to EVE for being different, but attributes are just awkward. And why is the time limit a year, anyway. Another compromise aside from the ones already discussed would be more frequent remaps. Once a month, perhaps. I think that's fitting because it coincides with a unit of subscription (1 month).
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1010
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:07:27 -
[907] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.")
Before I go off on this, I'm curious, why is "willing to undock with them" the criteria here? The biggest concern about implants that affect training speed as such is that they don't make in-space gameplay more fun, and in fact provide an incentive to sit in station or log off instead. A better design would be one that encourages playing the game now instead of waiting for later to do so.
Quote:People just don't fly with Hardwires as much as they do learning implants (you can see this just by looking at any killboard anywhere) Implants can be almost anything you can think up, they don't have to be constrained to what's in the game now. Don't you think that's more a matter of an unfavorable cost vs. benefit tradeoff than something inherent about combat implants at all?
Remember that implants mostly come from the LP market, and can be as cheap or as costly (or as weak or as powerful) as makes sense from a game design standpoint.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1122
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:20:01 -
[908] - Quote
Seems to me that for a DEV who keeps repeating he has no part in the game design process regarding the subject, you sure are involved in this and seem to have facts on how "things are". Why aren't any of the DEVS who ARE responsible for this reacting here?
Personal bias showcasing as company policy? |
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
11794
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:21:13 -
[909] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.")
Before I go off on this, I'm curious, why is "willing to undock with them" the criteria here? The biggest concern about implants that affect training speed as such is that they don't make in-space gameplay more fun, and in fact provide an incentive to sit in station or log off instead. A better design would be one that encourages playing the game now instead of waiting for later to do so.
So your goal is to remove the fear of loss?
If that's the case, it's fairly tricky do so such a thing without also removing the meaningful choice of the mechanic, and trivializing it. You'd end up just removing any and everything that doesn't have an inherent combat or other statistical benefit.
Which honestly I think is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Now, if you want to make people more interested in actually getting out there and fighting with them, a potential avenue could be to attack their cost.
But whether you remove learning implants or slash their cost, you've basically committed to dealing a big hit to the value of LP throughout the game as well.
Ah, the perils of interconnected systems. I'll be back with a more concrete answer once I've mulled it over some more, but it's a lot to think about.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
730
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:22:44 -
[910] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Quote:People just don't fly with Hardwires as much as they do learning implants (you can see this just by looking at any killboard anywhere) Implants can be almost anything you can think up, they don't have to be constrained to what's in the game now. Don't you think that's more a matter of an unfavorable cost vs. benefit tradeoff than something inherent about combat implants at all?
Ultimately, you'll know this better than I - I would assume you have statistics you could easily find to see how much of what gets destroyed. Granted, as "combat" 1-5 slot Implants share slots with Learning ones, its hard to get a feel how much they would be used more if Learning ones were gone, but Hardwirings don't, so it should be fairly trivial to datamine how much people use and lose those things in comparison. Even the high-use hardirings (which I would guess would be fitting Implants) probably get lost by several orders of magnitude less than Learning Implants, and the damage ones (what you would probably consider a fairly highly-desired Implant type for someone with money to burn for performance), even less so than those.
|
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
730
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:27:46 -
[911] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Seems to me that for a DEV who keeps repeating he has no part in the game design process regarding the subject, you sure are involved in this and seem to have facts on how "things are". Why aren't any of the DEVS who ARE responsible for this reacting here?
Personal bias showcasing as company policy?
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 (since rightly or wrongly, people are going to see the party-line in his arguements, simple because he'll probably have heard it around the office), 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). |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1122
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:31:37 -
[912] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Seems to me that for a DEV who keeps repeating he has no part in the game design process regarding the subject, you sure are involved in this and seem to have facts on how "things are". Why aren't any of the DEVS who ARE responsible for this reacting here?
Personal bias showcasing as company policy? 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).
His expertise is elsewhere and, as he keeps stating, he has no say on the subject. So is he stating his own opinion? Company policy? Brainstormed ideas? And why isn't anyone who IS involved replying?
Just to be clear, I'm not saying he shouldn't (as if my opinion on that would matter) but I'd like to know who I'm talking to. The person CCP Darwin, CCP as a company or someone relaying between the responsible Devs and us? |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
118
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:34:02 -
[913] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Baneken wrote: Remove the implants and nr1 one travel choice of travel in eve will be 'pod express', I know that if my choice is 'pod express' or jumping 30j in clone that has no implants nor expensive ship to be left behind it's 'pod express' every single time, no exceptions.
That's actually a very good point - with the removal of clone costs, and a following removal of learning implants, is there really any point to the whole pod-thing at all anymore? Might as well set an optional flag to auto-self-destruct the pod on ship destruction with no self-destruct timer since there is no point having the pod anymore. You are not protecting implants, you are not saving isk by avoiding the clone cost (literally, both things I have slowboated a pod home to do in the past which I wont need to anymore). You are just waiting two minutes til the self-destruct timer ticks down, hoping someone will shoot you first and save you the time (which they wont, for with valueless pods, its funnier to make the owner sit out the timer). Hilariously, we are creating another non-choice (do I try and get this pod home or not? why would you, you are just wasting time). And sorry, I just don't buy the whole "well, you will have them filled with hardwires instead". Sorry, you wont. People just don't fly with Hardwires as much as they do learning implants (you can see this just by looking at any killboard anywhere), they'll just save the isk instead - Super pilots notwithstanding of course, but if a bunch of Supers go down they'll be ten bubbles deep so the pod isn't getting home anyway. EDIT - Actually, this post has just made me realise something else we'll lose. In a valueless pod world, where self-destruct is the only logical choice after a ship loss, that tense minute of trying to crawl your way out of a bubble field as a fight rages on past you, and that long lonely flight home (and the flipside, the amusing sight of seeing a random pod-fleet go scooting by to let you know something interesting just happened somewhere) is gone. That's a little sad.
that's what happens when corporates get in to a game and start messing with stuff to get numbners up by making it more attractive ... and don't realising by changing it away from it's core will make it less attractive to it's current players and change it into a WOW in space.
The Clone scrap was the thin edge of the wedge ... it's only down hill from here. Pods have already become near to pointless now. And thus the Crux of the EVE Lore is washed away, or sold out.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
118
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:41:58 -
[914] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.")
Don't these already exist? Learning implants that are paired with boosts to armour, sheild, etc etc.
There are two things that will encourgae you to undock. (re clone / SP / implants)
1) Push 2) Pull
The push will be a thing that makes your current position bad. Ie, with implants in your head you actually have a detrimental effect from them, until you undock.
The Pull will be where the implant only works outside, or works better outside, or is only 'useful' outside (ie in combat).
These can be mixed and matched as desire likes.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1010
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:45:20 -
[915] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Seems to me that for a DEV who keeps repeating he has no part in the game design process regarding the subject, you sure are involved in this and seem to have facts on how "things are". Why aren't any of the DEVS who ARE responsible for this reacting here?
Personal bias showcasing as company policy?
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.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1122
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:51:17 -
[916] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Seems to me that for a DEV who keeps repeating he has no part in the game design process regarding the subject, you sure are involved in this and seem to have facts on how "things are". Why aren't any of the DEVS who ARE responsible for this reacting here?
Personal bias showcasing as company policy? 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.
Technically that makes you a troll, using the CCP banner to make it, somehow, official. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29926
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:55:54 -
[917] - Quote
wat
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2131
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 13:20:43 -
[918] - Quote
Because as soon as they say one word, everybody is going to jump to the best conclusion that starts the next pointless argument =p |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1122
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 14:01:52 -
[919] - Quote
Kiandoshia wrote:Because as soon as they say one word, everybody is going to jump to the best conclusion that starts the next pointless argument =p
You mean like is happening in this thread with Darwin? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29926
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 14:09:07 -
[920] - Quote
Whenever I see someone posting with a righteous or indignant tone I assume it's a dev posting on an alt.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1122
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 14:20:23 -
[921] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Whenever I see someone posting with a righteous or indignant tone I assume it's a dev posting on an alt.
That's aimed at me?
Uhm nope. Would have been better for the game but not the case. But I do think it's hilarious. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29926
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 14:21:06 -
[922] - Quote
lol. no, not you. but come to think of it, maybe CCP Darwin should start posting on an alt for his own sake.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
457
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 15:21:18 -
[923] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Seems to me that for a DEV who keeps repeating he has no part in the game design process regarding the subject, you sure are involved in this and seem to have facts on how "things are". Why aren't any of the DEVS who ARE responsible for this reacting here?
Personal bias showcasing as company policy? 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. You seem to have a lot of interest in this. What are you figuring out how to sit at lunch with the people under whose area this topic does fall? Are you asking them to get rid of attribute implants?
The problem from my perspective with your involvement is that you appear to be unable to see risk aversive behavior for what it is. We all have risk aversive behavior, and even in this game. If there was no risk aversive behavior everyone's hangars would be essentially empty, because every time one acquired a new nifty ship one would be flying it into every situation.
If attribute implants were removed (and even replaced with something else) there would still be risk averse behavior, and even at the same level of it as is in the game now. People who don't put in implants presently will not suddenly be all willing to risk other implants or hardwires.
The best suggestion I've seen is Rain's about attacking the cost of attribute implants. But even then I do not think it would induce carebearing players to embrace pvp or start flying or living regularly in low or nullsec. What it might do though ironically is create more isk sink. This is because people who do regularly pvp, but just ignore implants out of a lesser risk averse (loss averse) motivation, may very well pop some in once the cost per pod loss is reduced. And on a macro level this might actually result in more isk loss.
However, one would have to consider the collateral effects on the eve economy for reducing the isk or lp investment for attribute implants.
tl:dr You appear to be starting the analysis with an erroneous supposition. Attribute implants create risk aversion (which is probably true), and therefore the removal of attribute implants will reduce risk aversive behavior (which is far from proven, and probably not, true). People that play in a risk aversive manner will only find other hooks upon which to hang their risk aversive behavior if attribute implants were removed.
Lastly, Eve is losing much of the unique "attributes" that made it the wonderful game it has been. Clone costs gone. Iconic ship parts gone. Attibutes and attribute implants gone? Slippery but more and more likely slope to removing the entire time based sp system and allowing skill remaps, etc. At that point you should be prepared to lose many of the players that have been with you for years. Good luck with surviving in the WoW genre of games. Eve is unique, will always be niche. The niche can grow some, but to try to become mass market will only result in ruin.
CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
|
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
110
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 15:23:20 -
[924] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.")
Before I go off on this, I'm curious, why is "willing to undock with them" the criteria here? The biggest concern about implants that affect training speed as such is that they don't make in-space gameplay more fun, and in fact provide an incentive to sit in station or log off instead. A better design would be one that encourages playing the game now instead of waiting for later to do so. Quote:People just don't fly with Hardwires as much as they do learning implants (you can see this just by looking at any killboard anywhere) Implants can be almost anything you can think up, they don't have to be constrained to what's in the game now. Don't you think that's more a matter of an unfavorable cost vs. benefit tradeoff than something inherent about combat implants at all? Remember that implants mostly come from the LP market, and can be as cheap or as costly (or as weak or as powerful) as makes sense from a game design standpoint.
Its the players choice to use implants or not.
Why is Eve moving in a direction of removing player choice?
|
Suede
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 15:55:21 -
[925] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Grace Chang wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Or better explained. That's been the biggest flaw, not that it's complex, that it's complex AND you're on your own to figure it out. If a new player picks skills they don't want later, that's a different issue: at least their skill training has enabled some experimentation and gameplay that might satisfy their curiosity about things they ultimately don't wish to do in EVE. But, the attribute system is just complexity for its own sake. It is not. It is something that forces a choice. Choice makes people (characters) differ. Notice any RPG worth its salt has attributes? For any of those games your reasoning applies as well. Ultimately it is not about complexity - it is about choice. The idea is, that as a player, you have to consider trade-offs that define your choice: essentially you choose between a short term benefit vs. a long term benefit. You have to THINK what is important to you and what might not be a priority. Player choice is not a value in itself. Imagine (for a moment) that the skill system required players to train one of two skills early on. One skill cuts their hit points in half, for all time, on all ships. Another cuts their damage in half, for all time, on all ships. This would be a choice. It's even a choice between two things that directly affect how the core combat game plays out. But, it's a choice that feels bad because it's a choice between two options with no upside, and it's not fun. It would just be bad game design. When you attempt to play optimally with attribute remaps, you either pick skills in line with your remap (yawn, of course you do) or you find yourself forced to deviate from your remap and it feels bad. It's just like my hypothetical skills, where best case you'd be optimized for tanking and flying a freighter (where they would provide no benefit), and worst case you'd be bashing a POS for two hours while optimized for tanking (where it would actively make the gameplay less fun).
Attributes is a bad system, just mean it locks you in the one side of traning plan where you have to wait to get new remap to change to set other skills |
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
110
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 15:58:53 -
[926] - Quote
Suede wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Grace Chang wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Or better explained. That's been the biggest flaw, not that it's complex, that it's complex AND you're on your own to figure it out. If a new player picks skills they don't want later, that's a different issue: at least their skill training has enabled some experimentation and gameplay that might satisfy their curiosity about things they ultimately don't wish to do in EVE. But, the attribute system is just complexity for its own sake. It is not. It is something that forces a choice. Choice makes people (characters) differ. Notice any RPG worth its salt has attributes? For any of those games your reasoning applies as well. Ultimately it is not about complexity - it is about choice. The idea is, that as a player, you have to consider trade-offs that define your choice: essentially you choose between a short term benefit vs. a long term benefit. You have to THINK what is important to you and what might not be a priority. Player choice is not a value in itself. Imagine (for a moment) that the skill system required players to train one of two skills early on. One skill cuts their hit points in half, for all time, on all ships. Another cuts their damage in half, for all time, on all ships. This would be a choice. It's even a choice between two things that directly affect how the core combat game plays out. But, it's a choice that feels bad because it's a choice between two options with no upside, and it's not fun. It would just be bad game design. When you attempt to play optimally with attribute remaps, you either pick skills in line with your remap (yawn, of course you do) or you find yourself forced to deviate from your remap and it feels bad. It's just like my hypothetical skills, where best case you'd be optimized for tanking and flying a freighter (where they would provide no benefit), and worst case you'd be bashing a POS for two hours while optimized for tanking (where it would actively make the gameplay less fun). Attributes is a bad system, just mean it locks you in the one side of traning plan where you have to wait to get new remap to change to set other skills
Risk/reward Choice/consequence
The foundations of Eve.
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
209
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 15:59:43 -
[927] - Quote
Suede wrote: Attributes is a bad system, just mean it locks you in the one side of traning plan where you have to wait to get new remap to change to set other skills
it's not a bad system. it's a system that you don't like. there is a differenece.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5111
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 16:10:42 -
[928] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Suede wrote: Attributes is a bad system, just mean it locks you in the one side of traning plan where you have to wait to get new remap to change to set other skills it's not a bad system. it's a system that you don't like. there is a differenece. In this instance, I think it's a bad system. The problem with it is that it's not really a choice. The only good way to do it is whatever is optimal for what you want to train, then it's locked you into doing that plan. If you are training for production and decide you want to do some PvP and need a bunch of skills for that, you can either train them slowly, use another remap and break your efficiency for training production, or just not bother trying the PvP. I'd rather it were just as efficient to choose to do anything you want to train for at any time without worrying about how you are going to use your remaps. You'd still have to think about training plans because you can't be the best at everything quickly, you can split out and be quite broad or you can specialise.
Implants are much the same. The best way to do your implants for training is to have attribute implants. There's no benefit to choosing to not have them. What that means is that people will avoid risk simply because they want the implants in to speed up training. Pretty much all of my characters have +5s and empty clones to do stuff in. If I've jumped into a training clone and I'm on cooldown, then I'm generally not going to be jumping into a brawl on that character.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
457
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 16:36:55 -
[929] - Quote
Suede wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: Player choice is not a value in itself. Imagine (for a moment) that the skill system required players to train one of two skills early on. One skill cuts their hit points in half, for all time, on all ships. Another cuts their damage in half, for all time, on all ships.
This would be a choice. It's even a choice between two things that directly affect how the core combat game plays out. But, it's a choice that feels bad because it's a choice between two options with no upside, and it's not fun. It would just be bad game design.
When you attempt to play optimally with attribute remaps, you either pick skills in line with your remap (yawn, of course you do) or you find yourself forced to deviate from your remap and it feels bad.
It's just like my hypothetical skills, where best case you'd be optimized for tanking and flying a freighter (where they would provide no benefit), and worst case you'd be bashing a POS for two hours while optimized for tanking (where it would actively make the gameplay less fun). Attributes is a bad system, just mean it locks you in the one side of traning plan where you have to wait to get new remap to change to set other skills Only if one is OCD about the whole thing. So, if attribute implants are removed a player that acts as you proposed has no outlet for a disadvantageous attribute setting. So here is a welcome function of attribute implants. An imperfect min/maxer has an imperfect workaround for his own "error" of lack of godlike knowledge of future desirable skill choices.
However, it appears you are also proposing doing away with all attributes altogether. But then at that point the risk aversive argument is moot, at least with regard to sp accumulation and allocation. How does removal of attributes result in a better game?
Or one could just accept that risk aversion will never be done away with and should not form the basis of game design in a game with real (in-game) loss. Likewise, in the case of attributes in general, perfect min/maxing OCD behavior should not form the basis of doing away with a game design which rewards and punishes choices such as where to set attributes. Nor should it in the case of whether to jump through the gate in front of you, without knowledge of what's in the near future on the other side.
If this whole thing is really boiling down to attribute choices and min/maxing OCD fixation, then how about making those players pay for it. Pay real currency (or plex) for more frequent attribute remapping (don't you even think such a thing for sp remapping or GET READY FOR A **** STORM OF EPIC PROPORTIONS, IF YOU EVEN PEEP IN THAT DIRECTION).
The problem with OCD game playing and min/maxing is it supposes a present player with perfect knowledge of future desires and states of the game. This of course cannot happen. So catering to min/maxers will never be satisfactory. They can start out setting a skill plan for the current fotm, and then rebalancing or other game changes come, and their "favorite" ship is no longer king of the hill. At that point they complain loudly for unfettered sp remapping (since attribute remapping no longer exists). Would you like to propose that as well? (see above in all caps, there are many threads from the past where this has been "proposed" by the WoW crowd and shot down in flames by the majority of eve veteran players with both logical and emotional arguments).
You cannot make all the people happy all the time, even in a game. Don't try. You will on the other hand continue to attract the players that value the freedoms and responsibilities for their own character development, and accept a state of lacking knowledge of the future. The present EVE character development through attributes and sp allocation can be subject to many wrong turns, blind alleys, and surprisingly beneficial happenstances, due to changes in one's own predilections as well as re-balances and other game changes. Leave it that way. It has been unique and successful.
CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
211
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 17:00:32 -
[930] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Suede wrote: Attributes is a bad system, just mean it locks you in the one side of traning plan where you have to wait to get new remap to change to set other skills it's not a bad system. it's a system that you don't like. there is a differenece. In this instance, I think it's a bad system. The problem with it is that it's not really a choice. The only good way to do it is whatever is optimal for what you want to train, then it's locked you into doing that plan. If you are training for production and decide you want to do some PvP and need a bunch of skills for that, you can either train them slowly, use another remap and break your efficiency for training production, or just not bother trying the PvP. I'd rather it were just as efficient to choose to do anything you want to train for at any time without worrying about how you are going to use your remaps. You'd still have to think about training plans because you can't be the best at everything quickly, you can split out and be quite broad or you can specialise. Implants are much the same. The best way to do your implants for training is to have attribute implants. There's no benefit to choosing to not have them. What that means is that people will avoid risk simply because they want the implants in to speed up training. Pretty much all of my characters have +5s and empty clones to do stuff in. If I've jumped into a training clone and I'm on cooldown, then I'm generally not going to be jumping into a brawl on that character.
there is choice, by using a remap you admit knowing it's use and it's effects. locking you into them attributes boost for the remap timer is the cost of the boost. if players have an issue with the remap and wants a more balanced training ability, they should not remap.
so here we are now, players claiming remaps are bad, attributes are bad, it can't be me, it must be the system. the system works fine. i'd like to see more proof that it isn't.
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5111
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 17:18:56 -
[931] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:there is choice, by using a remap you admit knowing it's use and it's effects. locking you into them attributes boost for the remap timer is the cost of the boost. if players have an issue with the remap and wants a more balanced training ability, they should not remap.
so here we are now, players claiming remaps are bad, attributes are bad, it can't be me, it must be the system. the system works fine. i'd like to see more proof that it isn't. 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.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
260
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 17:26:28 -
[932] - Quote
The biggest flaw with the whole talk about implants is the assumption that removing them will make people PVP More. Sure you may get a few cases. But for the most part all you will do it take implants away from people who have NO Intentions of PVPing.
There are people, lots of them, in Eve, who will NOT Willingly PVP, no matter what you do.
First it was take away medclone costs.. that'll make everyone PVP.. Nope. Now it's remove learning implants. Then all Implants. After that then what? Persistent ships? So losses don't mean anything and there is no fear at all?
Leave the Choice to us.
Also, I like how it's all about letting people get into pvp.. but there's been no comment on my idea for easing access to jumpclones or making a new implantless clone. Seeing as how it would get the same objective done, a clone with no implants or JC timer, without removing the options for all other situations. Not only does it solve the Learning Implant issue, but it also removes normal hardwires from the equation too \o/ |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1126
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 17:28:01 -
[933] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:there is choice, by using a remap you admit knowing it's use and it's effects. locking you into them attributes boost for the remap timer is the cost of the boost. if players have an issue with the remap and wants a more balanced training ability, they should not remap.
so here we are now, players claiming remaps are bad, attributes are bad, it can't be me, it must be the system. the system works fine. i'd like to see more proof that it isn't. 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.
If you or the group you're with isn't good enough to stay alive then don't use them, simple. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5111
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 17:45:28 -
[934] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:If you or the group you're with isn't good enough to stay alive then don't use them, simple. 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?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Grace Chang
Black Phoenix Legion The Fourth District
59
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 17:48:17 -
[935] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:
Player choice is not a value in itself. Imagine (for a moment) that the skill system required players to train one of two skills early on. One skill cuts their hit points in half, for all time, on all ships. Another cuts their damage in half, for all time, on all ships.
This would be a choice. It's even a choice between two things that directly affect how the core combat game plays out. But, it's a choice that feels bad because it's a choice between two options with no upside, and it's not fun. It would just be bad game design.
When you attempt to play optimally with attribute remaps, you either pick skills in line with your remap (yawn, of course you do) or you find yourself forced to deviate from your remap and it feels bad.
It's just like my hypothetical skills, where best case you'd be optimized for tanking and flying a freighter (where they would provide no benefit), and worst case you'd be bashing a POS for two hours while optimized for tanking (where it would actively make the gameplay less fun).
I disagree. Player choice is a value in itself, because choice is the one differentiating factor. The flip side of the medal "choice" is "consequences". That is what you describe with "no upside" which is the point. It is not true that there is just one way to go with this, if there was, everyone would have +5 in, which they don't. Also try not to define "fun", because you are not necessarily authoritative on this. For me, fun is to design an ideal character for something I planned carefully. For others, it is to jump into different activities with the attention span of a lab rat. Generally though, most people appreciate to look forward to something and tend to compare their "achievements" to others. If you cater to the instant gratification crowd (which incidentally most often is the base IQ level and lowest common denominator) and basically make everyone the same, people will soon look for another game. The original designers understood this, that is why we have this skill queues, attributes and such, because it forces people to invest into a character. It is not only time you invest, it is also the thought process you invest.
If anything attributes have too little consequences.The reason why we have this discussion at all is because you inflated remaps and now complain that attributes are meaningless. They are because you can remap at will. They would not be meaningless if you had just one choice at the start of the game or way less opportunities then today.
One good example how MMORPGs should deal with this is Anarchy Online. It is a crappy game today, but its skill system was and is still peerless. It actually meant that your character was unique. You had to make choices, think about the consequences down the road and you could enjoy the benefits. For me and many others this WAS the fun not necessarily the game play as such. Of course there is also games like WOW where there is no choice at all and you are hunter #14091503243, but do you really think EvE can successfully cater to that crowd without alienating people like me?
The last great game that tried to dumb down a "too complicated" mechanic with "great effect" was Starwars Galaxies. I recall this female Marketing Women saying "people want to be Han Solo, not Owen the farmer". When they changed the game to what they perceived as "fun" all the "Owen the farmer" people left and no "Han Solos" showed up. So to me this discussion has greater scope. Sure we can discuss the attribute system - it is not necessarily ideal. But I can't escape to notice a trend that several mechanics of this game were changed to make it "more fun" for a certain type of people that you usually find somewhere else. If I get the impression that this game changes into something that makes my investments into characters meaningless, I will just stop playing because "it is not fun to me any more".
|
Kleoptoleme
SPARES
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 18:04:42 -
[936] - Quote
Grace Chang wrote:
Player choice is a value in itself, because choice is the one differentiating factor. ... If I get the impression that this game changes into something that makes my investments into characters meaningless, I will just stop playing because "it is not fun to me any more".
Ditto |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
737
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 18:08:18 -
[937] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: I really don't get the problem here.
Just because you don't understand the other point of view doesn't make it irrelevant, or like you tried to paint it, ridiculous. I don't understand the appeal in covering every meal with enough spices that you can't taste the food under it, but I'm not going to tell everyone in the curry house they are morons.
Quote:CCP want to remove some of the boundaries that prevent people from readily engaging in content. Why is that a bad thing? What they want and what will happen is two different things. The boundary exists in the head of the person blocked by it, CCP can't magically wave that away. When this idea fails, whats the next invisible barrier they decide to cut down?
Quote: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. Because for every change made, there will be people who enjoy that part of the game. Personally, I enjoy the cost of participation. I want to fight, I have to put isk on the line. CCP has just decided I need to put 20-50mil less on the line (and more importantly, everyone I beat has to put that 20-50mil less on the line) every time I fight. That is removing some of my enjoyment. |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 18:11:54 -
[938] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote: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. And if you are at it remove attributes as well. Useless crap.
Right... lets all fly around PVPing with no risk whatsoever other than the ship.... no thank you |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3153
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 18:35:24 -
[939] - Quote
If we are worried about the LP market, maybe we should have something that speeds up training that is not an implant. Something that sells for LP. For example: Special skillbooks that give the same skill, but for fewer SP. Fill the LP store with those, and it would be a huge LP sink. License to a device that increases learning speed. As it's a license, you always have it, even after death.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1126
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 18:35:39 -
[940] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:If you or the group you're with isn't good enough to stay alive then don't use them, simple. 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?
You can engage in content just fine, just as you can choose to fit faction/DS gear on your pvp ships you can choose to use learning plants.... or not. No one is forcing you to use them and it's just another risk vs reward mechanic as there are so many in EVE. If you don't feel that your group is good enough to win fights regularly then you probably shouldn't use them and, I dunno, get better.
EVE is about risk vs reward and this is a pretty basic example of exactly that, why should we have the risk removed (and, weirdly, everyone wanting close to full reward as a replacement) just because some people are incapable of making the conscious decision or because of others who realised they'd probably fail a lot?
Perhaps you should just get more blues to hide behind. |
|
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 18:59:34 -
[941] - Quote
The risk of your ship blowing up impedes every type of play style.
Lets make it so no one loses a ship again.
I can guarantee this would lead to more pvp.
The consequence would be Eve would no longer be the game it is. |
Memphis Baas
166
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 19:46:44 -
[942] - Quote
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:Right... lets all fly around PVPing with no risk whatsoever other than the ship.... no thank you
And why not? Isn't that risk enough? If you could scan for implants like you can scan for cargo, would anybody STOP to scan before attacking? You're judging each encounter by the ships you see in the overview, and you're shooting or bugging out based solely on that information. The value of the killmail is merely a (sometimes pleasant) surprise, a few hours after the fact. EVE PVP is driven by the ships (and by strategic goals), not by the implants.
Regarding the question about incentivizing people to undock, if that's what you want CCP, then incentivize that directly. I did suggest giving SHIPS a skill training bonus as long as they're undocked in space, and got shot down because OMG everyone is going to afk cloak. That's still more exposure to PVP than remaining in station. But in any case, don't give the bonus to any ships that can cloak and people won't afk in them. Just give a big skill training bonus to T1 frigates (for the newbies), smaller bonuses to T1 cruisers (not so newbies), and then varying degrees of training bonus to other ships (T2, capital) as you see fit.
Or give some other incentive, I don't know; I just think the issue is a bit like getting people to go to lowsec: subtle solutions won't work.
|
Jane Shapperd
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
115
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 19:53:44 -
[943] - Quote
i already gave up on this topic , CCP are going to remove learning implants, and if they don't keep what i love about implants. i am going to shut down all my 8 charactars.
i already stoped paying by long term basis i now pay month by month basis things are indeed going downhill post phoebe or whatever expansion that removed clones costs.
what i love about implants :
1 - they are destructible ( aka you lose them when u get podded ) 2 - they make you train faster than avarage pvp (screw carebears ) player if u are willing risk and lose in combat .
i suggeated a way to keep learning implants as they are but add a bouns based on your ship but no body gave a **** to that suggestion nor CCP seems to give a ****. And No i wont give my stuff away.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1126
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 20:10:33 -
[944] - Quote
Clone cost removal made good sense, implant removal doesn't. |
Soltys
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 20:20:36 -
[945] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:I really don't get the problem here. CCP want to remove some of the boundaries that prevent people from readily engaging in content.
What boundaries ? It's all FUD so far "because we shall love dumb newbs". It's the same as suggesting removal of "Corelum A-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane" because it's expensive, rare and causes risk aversion.
It would be a boundary IF people were FORCED to plug implants before they were allowed to leave that station. And even then it would simply need fixing (allow leaving station without implants), not removal.
Other than that, like I said earlier, implants/attributes/reamps and related boosters need improvements, enchancing, far better granularity (timewise) and player control. Not removal. It's good stuff, just antiquated and full of dust at the moment.
|
Mharius Skjem
Opacity Circles
305
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 20:36:24 -
[946] - Quote
just got back from a long vacation only to read this:
I've been predicting this 'next step' for ages now.
CCP won't be happy until we have wow in space.
If I wanted to play WOW I would just play WOW or SWTOR, but you know what? WOW/SWTOR is for pussies, there's no risk, and no penalty for death and dying. If you go into battle you risk nothing.
Pretty soon stations will be nothing more than a COD Respawn point.
That's not the eve I fell in love with.
A recovering btter vet, with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...
Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...
|
Mharius Skjem
Opacity Circles
305
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 20:40:41 -
[947] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Clone cost removal made good sense, implant removal doesn't.
Making eve less harsh is not a good thing. This type of thinking won't make eve popular in the long run. It will only serve to increase the amount of churn.
It seems to me that nobody cares about the long term players that have been here for years.
It's hard to see noobs doing all of the things that you worked hard for with considerably less effort.
I am voting with my feet and cancelling my sub.
Can anyone recommend a game that is a bit more like Eve than Eve. PM me I'd be grateful.
A recovering btter vet, with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...
Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1013
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 21:22:02 -
[948] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:i suggeated a way to keep learning implants as they are but add a bouns based on your ship but no body gave a **** to that suggestion nor CCP seems to give a ****.
Why not wait to be angry until you see what's announced? Not even the game design team know what changes they plan to make with this. Don't interpret my making a case for the other side as an announcement that something specific is happening.
For what its worth, I think your comments have been a valuable part of the conversation.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Soldarius
Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent
1098
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 21:29:26 -
[949] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:i already stoped paying by long term basis i now pay month by month basis
So your solution is to give CCP more money? gj, I'm sure they have been properly incentivized to change their behavior.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
i am 2evil
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 21:30:38 -
[950] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Jane Shapperd wrote:i suggeated a way to keep learning implants as they are but add a bouns based on your ship but no body gave a **** to that suggestion nor CCP seems to give a ****. Why not wait to be angry until you see what's announced? Not even the game design team know what changes they plan to make with this. Don't interpret my making a case for the other side as an announcement that something specific is happening. For what its worth, I think your comments have been a valuable part of the conversation.
CCP is doing a good job and there only so many hr you can do the stuff, we are only the paying people more like the bar customers waiting for the drinks that we paid good money for, as CCP is eve game to change what they see fit for best of evey other player,
|
|
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
458
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 22:07:09 -
[951] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Jane Shapperd wrote:i already stoped paying by long term basis i now pay month by month basis So your solution is to give CCP more money? gj, I'm sure they have been properly incentivized to change their behavior. no it's not. it's telling CCP that you are not going to give them a blank check for a year to do whatever. If they hold off on stupidity sure they gain 12, 24, or 36 dollars. But only if they hold off on the stupidity.
CCP Darwin wrote:Jane Shapperd wrote:i suggeated a way to keep learning implants as they are but add a bouns based on your ship but no body gave a **** to that suggestion nor CCP seems to give a ****. Why not wait to be angry until you see what's announced? Not even the game design team know what changes they plan to make with this. Don't interpret my making a case for the other side as an announcement that something specific is happening. For what its worth, I think your comments have been a valuable part of the conversation. Apparently you've played a part in convincing them a change needs to be made. gg
Many of us will vote with out feet if such a change is made. Enjoy your hoped for many more, but ultimately short term customers, if such a change is made. Because people who go for this kind of thing are impatient and not very loyal. And certainly will never get used to actually losing ships and pods (implants or no implants).
CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
|
John Eod
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 22:41:17 -
[952] - Quote
Oh boy, no attributes, no learning implants? I really hope this idea develops. Frankly I think I had more fun before knowing about them... figuring out a plan in evemon can be entertaining, but having a suboptimal remap because you don't want to be locked trainining int/mem forever just feels bad.
The concerning part in my opinion is replacing that isk sink; most likely low/mid-grade pirate sets will see more use but I doubt that alone makes up for it.
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
4647
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 23:00:01 -
[953] - Quote
Out of curiosity, if implants were replaced by a different form of consumable that consumed ISK and LP and sped up skill training, but that had a fixed duration (say 7 days real time) rather than 'until you next get podded', how would people react? Assume typical skill training time was about the same.
Obviously that would have game balance issues - it would be a considerable buff to the desirability of nullsec and wormholes.
Chaos. Opportunity. Destruction. Excitement... Vote #1 Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29926
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 23:07:56 -
[954] - Quote
Depends, although initially it looks like a bad idea. Would it involve a debuff of attribute effects from pirate implant sets? Also, how low would you need to make the price point to agree with the current infinitely low / almost zero cost of attribute implants over time if you never undock or risk them.
If it's 2.5 million ISK per attribute at +5 per week, then okay. I would be agreeable with effectively buying another +5 implant per attribute, per year. But not more than that. Though regardless of the cost, moving a one-time cost to a recurring cost is just painful.
Maybe it's confirmation bias, but I really dislike that idea. I dislike it as much as med clone costs.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Ace Northmen
Sanctuary Reapers Holdings
7
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 23:24:01 -
[955] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:Out of curiosity, if implants were replaced by a different form of consumable that consumed ISK and LP and sped up skill training, but that had a fixed duration (say 7 days real time) rather than 'until you next get podded', how would people react? Assume typical skill training time was about the same.
Obviously that would have game balance issues - it would be a considerable buff to the desirability of nullsec and wormholes.
Yes make the players have to log in once a week on every ******* toon to inject that ******* booster
Why did CCP make unlimited trainning in the first place ? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29926
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 23:35:37 -
[956] - Quote
CCP Karkur is very clear in the November o7 show, in stating the extended skill queue enables some things which she couldn't discuss. So there is a reason for it, but it's secret. or something.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Shodan Of Citadel
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 23:40:18 -
[957] - Quote
sounds like bitter vets looking to screw new players to slower training. pretty bad after giving all those old farts the revamped cloning system without 'grades'.
I have full +4's in for a 292 day plan that will now take 357 days. CSM strips the implants and adds 3 months for no reason at all instead of considering how they can remove the implants and tweak the calculations so that 292 day plan is 219 days and we're not all bored off our asses with slow training time.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29926
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 23:41:57 -
[958] - Quote
Sabriz is a candidate, not an actual CSM. make sure to go and vote
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
4648
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 01:12:23 -
[959] - Quote
Ace Northmen wrote:Sabriz Adoudel wrote:Out of curiosity, if implants were replaced by a different form of consumable that consumed ISK and LP and sped up skill training, but that had a fixed duration (say 7 days real time) rather than 'until you next get podded', how would people react? Assume typical skill training time was about the same.
Obviously that would have game balance issues - it would be a considerable buff to the desirability of nullsec and wormholes. Yes make the players have to log in once a week on every ******* toon to inject that ******* booster Why did CCP make unlimited trainning in the first place ?
I am not suggesting that you can't consume multiples at once.
Chaos. Opportunity. Destruction. Excitement... Vote #1 Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6543
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 02:38:35 -
[960] - Quote
Mharius Skjem wrote:Pretty soon stations will be nothing more than a COD Respawn point. Walking in stations?
DUST? Or well it got laser headshot, so I guess ... Legion?
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
262
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 02:52:54 -
[961] - Quote
Ace Northmen wrote:Yes make the players have to log in once a week on every ******* toon to inject that ******* booster
Why did CCP make unlimited trainning in the first place ? Someone willing to pay CCP to NOT Play the game? Real question is what took CCP so long to add it.
Also, some of us have vacations, jobs, family, that may keep us away. Eve is a religion and a job for some, but there's also a huge group for whom it really is, Just a game. A casual one at that.. |
Warric NazGhoul
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 04:43:54 -
[962] - Quote
I have to agree with the people who thinks this is a bad idea.
The only thing removing implant does is making EVE more blend. Everything in eve is about risk/reward. Once you start removing those parts you end up with battlefield in space.
Sure you may have a few new players that jump in for a few months but they will be bored anyway and quit. Also someone explain why learning implants are different from lets say a high grade slave set. You could argue that slave set should be removed since its only gives rich old people an advantage.
You donGÇÖt have to use implants, thatGÇÖs your choice, again with the same argument you could take away pirate faction ships, or at least the cost since that sure would make more people undock in their pirate ships.
Please donGÇÖt make this into battlefield in space (everyone is the same, death means nothing, you can jump into a fight 2 minutes after you get into the game)
|
Diemos Hiaraki
Perkone Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 04:58:32 -
[963] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:i already gave up on this topic , CCP are going to remove learning implants, and if they don't keep what i love about implants. i am going to shut down all my 8 charactars.
i already stoped paying by long term basis i now pay month by month basis
i knew things will go downhill post phoebe or whatever expansion that removed clones costs.
what i love about implants :
1 - they are destructible ( aka you lose them when u get podded ) 2 - they make you train faster than avarage pvp (screw carebears ) player if u are willing risk and lose in combat .
i suggeated a way to keep learning implants as they are but add a bouns based on your ship but no body gave a **** to that suggestion nor CCP seems to give a ****. And No i wont give my stuff away.
I'd been meaning to reply to your post on page42 of this thread, but I've been really busy. I don't like most of what you propose. Here's why:
a) I think that while pilots would use your version of implants to PvP, they'd make some ships OP and would make re-balancing ships and modules harder than it is already. Balancing an implant for the hundreds of ships would not something I'd want to do as a game developer either. b) I'd expect the costs of learning implants to rise and I don't count that as a good thing. End result would be something like 80% of Eve would be grinding L4 missions in the hope of learning implant story missions in high sec to make isk. I'd also be worried about the prices of pirate implants - those falling would just be another buff to high sec. c) I think the whole system is complicated, and the wall of text that would have to be added for each to explain what the implant does to each ship would be biblical. d) Your system favours the old pilot much more than the new and increases the SP gap between the two (when the old will already have in game experience, and maybe fleet boosts, blue pill/crash, hardwiring etc on top of maxed skills anyway.)
There is a forum for features and ideas where your proposal would get attention from the more serious Eve players though. GD is just for shiptoasting so don't take it personally when folks ignore your ideas. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29927
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 05:01:21 -
[964] - Quote
have some balls. say shitposting.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2712
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 07:14:11 -
[965] - Quote
Mharius Skjem wrote:If I wanted to play WOW I would just play WOW or SWTOR, but you know what? WOW/SWTOR is for pussies, there's no risk, and no penalty for death and dying. If you go into battle you risk nothing. 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. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1127
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 08:53:16 -
[966] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Mharius Skjem wrote:If I wanted to play WOW I would just play WOW or SWTOR, but you know what? WOW/SWTOR is for pussies, there's no risk, and no penalty for death and dying. If you go into battle you risk nothing. 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.
Yeah, right. |
Mag's
the united
19058
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 09:00:16 -
[967] - Quote
I made a post some time ago, with a suggestion based on CCP removing atts, remaps and learning implants. We would have a flat 2700 for all skills.
This falls into line in regards to CCPs removal of clone costs and their use in the future also. Basically medical clones would be based on attributes and which ever one you buy, would help boost your profession in some way. This would take the atts out of training and place them directly into game play.
I.E.
- Gunnery clone: High perc and will.
- Logistics clone: High Perc and Intel.
- Trading clone: High Char and memory.
etc etc. All would work as now and could still be used as jump clones. But the medical application of attributes at creation, will help a certain profession.
**Destination SkillQueue:- **
It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Migui X'hyrrn
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
224
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 09:08:55 -
[968] - Quote
Learning implants need to go they only encourage risk aversion and favor staying docked or in safe areas punishing you for trying to skill a bit faster. Meaningful decisions are everything in Eve online. Learning clones that leave you on Jc cool down are in fact encouraging you to not play the game.
Replace this mechanic with something better like boosters but I look forward to see they go.
People tends to mistake gameplay balancing with making things annoying and counter intuitive.
Choosing between playing the game or sp per hour is not a meaningful decision it's stupid.
Migui is running for CSM10!
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 09:22:25 -
[969] - Quote
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... |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1128
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 09:30:40 -
[970] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: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...
"The most optimal way", as you put it, requires effort and planning just as the most optimal way of learning pvp, and pretty much everything else in EVE, also requires planning. "It leaves no room for me" is a lie, you can choose to not touch it for a while or choose to use a generic combat remap that will work just fine. It's a simple case of risk&effort vs reward. |
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 09:45:47 -
[971] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:"The most optimal way", as you put it, requires effort and planning just as the most optimal way of learning pvp, and pretty much everything else in EVE, also requires planning. "It leaves no room for me" is a lie, you can choose to not touch it for a while or choose to use a generic combat remap that will work just fine. It's a simple case of risk&effort vs reward.
So the first year of the game I have to pick between leveling up my ship or leveling up my support skills... Wow. Thanks.
Let me ask you this. Would you rather me enjoy the game and risk more and more ships because I have the skills to fly them somewhat decently.
-or-
Twiddle my thumbs being risk averse for the first year or so because I have to stick to a strict skill plan that only lets me work on one aspect of my skills at a time.
Which one do you think is going to be the one that keeps me logging in?
Ask yourself this; are you against the removal of learning implants, remaps and attributes because you had to suffer through it? |
Dave Stark
7360
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:11:03 -
[972] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:So the first year of the game I have to pick between leveling up my ship or leveling up my support skills... Wow. Thanks.
pretty much one of the biggest reasons why the attribute system is horrible.
when you need a broad range of basic skills, you basically get to either not train all of them optimaly for at least a year, or you just don't train half of them at all for a year. the fact that you're picking between two horrible choices should be enough of an obvious reason why the system needs removing, or at the very least a huge overhaul.
all the attribute system does is reward older players like myself who already have the core/fitting skills trained up and we can just sit in our per/will remaps and cross train all the guns/ships.
shame that the latter point is why all the older players will probably be against this change. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29929
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:15:55 -
[973] - Quote
Deacon Abox wrote:Soldarius wrote:Jane Shapperd wrote:i already stoped paying by long term basis i now pay month by month basis So your solution is to give CCP more money? gj, I'm sure they have been properly incentivized to change their behavior. no it's not. it's telling CCP that you are not going to give them a blank check for a year to do whatever. If they hold off on stupidity sure they gain 12, 24, or 36 dollars. But only if they hold off on the stupidity. That's exactly how I look at annuals. It's not really blank, as it's a clear amount ($131 USD per annual), but yeah, I feel the same way about making those payments.
Lately I've begun cancelling the recurring billing right away, and left my biggest gripe as the reason. "one year at a time ;-)"
If I seem especially vicious on EVE-O, just keep in mind that I'm a paying customer, to the tune of ten annuals per year, or $1,310.00 USD ;-)
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1130
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:16:05 -
[974] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:So the first year of the game I have to pick between leveling up my ship or leveling up my support skills... Wow. Thanks.
Show me where I said that, you can do a pretty normal and balanced per/int remap and train the majority of combat skills just fine. What's going on is your OCD going "I'm below optimal, this will not stand!" combined with "I'm not willing to risk but I do want full rewards" and of course the real issue being "I'm part of a group that uses me as cattle, quantity over quality, and because of that mind set I'm going to die a lot which means it won't be worth it to use implants".
Either accept that you're not training super optimal unless you put in effort to plan or effort to not die a whole lot.
|
Dave Stark
7360
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:20:17 -
[975] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:So the first year of the game I have to pick between leveling up my ship or leveling up my support skills... Wow. Thanks. Show me where I said that, you can do a pretty normal and balanced per/int remap and train the majority of combat skills just fine. What's going on is your OCD going "I'm below optimal, this will not stand!" combined with "I'm not willing to risk but I do want full rewards" and of course the real issue being "I'm part of a group that uses me as cattle, quantity over quality, and because of that mind set I'm going to die a lot which means it won't be worth it to use implants". Either accept that you're not training super optimal unless you put in effort to plan or effort to not die a whole lot.
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 hit anything with 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? |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1131
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:32:34 -
[976] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:So the first year of the game I have to pick between leveling up my ship or leveling up my support skills... Wow. Thanks. Show me where I said that, you can do a pretty normal and balanced per/int remap and train the majority of combat skills just fine. What's going on is your OCD going "I'm below optimal, this will not stand!" combined with "I'm not willing to risk but I do want full rewards" and of course the real issue being "I'm part of a group that uses me as cattle, quantity over quality, and because of that mind set I'm going to die a lot which means it won't be worth it to use implants". Either accept that you're not training super optimal unless you put in effort to plan or effort to not die a whole lot. 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?
That's a whole lot of sperging, hyperbole and lies.
|
Dave Stark
7360
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:39:21 -
[977] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:So the first year of the game I have to pick between leveling up my ship or leveling up my support skills... Wow. Thanks. Show me where I said that, you can do a pretty normal and balanced per/int remap and train the majority of combat skills just fine. What's going on is your OCD going "I'm below optimal, this will not stand!" combined with "I'm not willing to risk but I do want full rewards" and of course the real issue being "I'm part of a group that uses me as cattle, quantity over quality, and because of that mind set I'm going to die a lot which means it won't be worth it to use implants". Either accept that you're not training super optimal unless you put in effort to plan or effort to not die a whole lot. 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? That's a whole lot of sperging, hyperbole and lies.
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. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:47:24 -
[978] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:So the first year of the game I have to pick between leveling up my ship or leveling up my support skills... Wow. Thanks.
you knew this before you subbed, so now you're in the game, welcome btw you here to play EVE or try to change it ?
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: Let me ask you this. Would you rather me enjoy the game and risk more and more ships because I have the skills to fly them somewhat decently.
having the skills to fly a ship doesn't make you good at flying it. nor does it make you battle smart. if you're not enjoying the game as it is then why are you still here?
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: -or-
Twiddle my thumbs being risk averse for the first year or so because I have to stick to a strict skill plan that only lets me work on one aspect of my skills at a time.
this is EVE, you make choices, what you want is everything within a short time, you'll get bored of this game faster than you can train the skills, that's the real issue here, isn't it
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: Which one do you think is going to be the one that keeps me logging in?
erm, you log in because you want to play the game, perhaps you love it as much as i do. i've no idea. you want an incentive to log in ? that's just lol
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: Ask yourself this; are you against the removal of learning implants, remaps and attributes because you had to suffer through it?
no, i'm don't like the idea of turning EVE into just another space shooter that's not much different from the rest. EVE is supposed to be hard. if you are not enjoying the game then stop playing it.
I've met lots of guys that bought a toon that had 130M skill points, they couldn't be arsed waiting to train the skills, so out with the ole credit card and 30 minutes later they own a well trained toon. within a week they.ve killed off pretty much every ship they have and still can't understand why they are not WTF pwning everyone. so they grind to get their shite back and whine about how crap their isk income is. (no matter what space they are in) long story short they're gone out of the game within 6 months max a year,. never to be seen again.
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:48:43 -
[979] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:So the first year of the game I have to pick between leveling up my ship or leveling up my support skills... Wow. Thanks. Show me where I said that, you can do a pretty normal and balanced per/int remap and train the majority of combat skills just fine. What's going on is your OCD going "I'm below optimal, this will not stand!" combined with "I'm not willing to risk but I do want full rewards" and of course the real issue being "I'm part of a group that uses me as cattle, quantity over quality, and because of that mind set I'm going to die a lot which means it won't be worth it to use implants". Either accept that you're not training super optimal unless you put in effort to plan or effort to not die a whole lot. 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? That's a whole lot of sperging, hyperbole and lies. 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.
you are not forced to do anything, you make a chioce. there's the lie.
|
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:49:26 -
[980] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:EVE is supposed to be hard.
that's nice, but the SP system in EVE is totally detatched from the difficulty of the game. |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1131
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:50:59 -
[981] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote: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.
Go create a blank character in EFT, select a chosen path with decent skills that any newbie would be proud of. I made one for caldari with missile skills, T2 light med drones, T2 light missiles for frigate pvp and all lvl 4 ship skills, being able to decently fly a Raven for PVE. Total SP count just under 8 mil.
- with base attribs total training time is 175 days - with perc/int total training time is 160 days - with 3 remaps for perc/wil, int/mem and mem/perc (drones), which would be dumb as hell as it's a waste but lets go with it, total training time is 152 days
So, by not using a pretty standard perc/int remap and instead going for a ******** "lets waste all my 3 remaps right away" OCD attitude you gained.... 8 days, out of 160 total. That's like 5%? WHO GIVES A ****!
In short: less hyperbole, more facts and maths. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:51:32 -
[982] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:EVE is supposed to be hard. that's nice, but the SP system in EVE is totally detatched from the difficulty of the game.
incredible,, did you inform CCP of this, they'll be very interested to know how broke their game is, it's a wonder it's been playable at all the last oh,, 11 years.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29929
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:53:21 -
[983] - Quote
what he's saying and what you think he's saying are two different things.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:53:24 -
[984] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dave Stark wrote: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. Go create a blank character in EFT, select a chosen path with decent skills that any newbie would be proud of. I made one for caldari with missile skills, T2 light med drones, T2 light missiles for frigate pvp and all lvl 4 ship skills, being able to decently fly a Raven for PVE. Total SP count just under 8 mil. - with base attribs total training time is 175 days - with perc/int total training time is 160 days - with 3 remaps for perc/wil, int/mem and mem/perc (drones), which would be dumb as hell as it's a waste but lets go with it, total training time is 152 days So, by not using a pretty standard perc/int remap and instead going for a ******** "lets waste all my 3 remaps right away" OCD attitude you gained.... 8 days, out of 160 total. That's like 5%? WHO GIVES A ****! In short: less hyperbole, more facts and maths.
it's laughable isn't it.. lol
|
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:53:43 -
[985] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:you are not forced to do anything, you make a chioce. there's the lie.
once more, you are forced as your only 2 choices are to train things suboptimally.
your two choices are "train it all suboptimally" or "train half of it really suboptiamally". there's no lie in there what so ever.
you could just prove me completely wrong by letting the whole world what combination of attributes would let a new player train both his core skills, and his ship skills as optimally as us veterans single mindedly train 1 set of skills due to not being constrained by the need to train fitting/support skills any more.
however, we both know you won't let us know that combination of attributes; as it simply doesn't exist. no level of planning or effort will get around the painful fact that that the attribute system simply forces new players to train *something* suboptimally and the range of 'basic' skills they require is too large to avoid ending up having to train something suboptimally. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:55:16 -
[986] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:you are not forced to do anything, you make a chioce. there's the lie.
once more, you are forced as your only 2 choices are to train things suboptimally. your two choices are "train it all suboptimally" or "train half of it really suboptiamally". there's no lie in there what so ever. you could just prove me completely wrong by letting the whole world what combination of attributes would let a new player train both his core skills, and his ship skills as optimally as us veterans single mindedly train 1 set of skills due to not being constrained by the need to train fitting/support skills any more. however, we both know you won't let us know that combination of attributes; as it simply doesn't exist. no level of planning or effort will get around the painful fact that that the attribute system simply forces new players to train *something* suboptimally and the range of 'basic' skills they require is too large to avoid ending up having to train something suboptimally.
will you stop whining about a 5% difference. ffs |
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:58:08 -
[987] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dave Stark wrote: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. Go create a blank character in EFT, select a chosen path with decent skills that any newbie would be proud of. I made one for caldari with missile skills, T2 light med drones, T2 light missiles for frigate pvp and a Raven for PVE. All lvl 4 ship skills and proper support skills. Total SP count just under 8 mil. - with base attribs total training time is 175 days - with perc/int total training time is 160 days - with 3 remaps for perc/wil, int/mem and mem/perc (drones), which would be dumb as hell as it's a waste but lets go with it, total training time is 152 days So, by not using a pretty standard perc/int remap and instead going for a ******** "lets waste all my 3 remaps right away" OCD attitude you gained.... 8 days, out of 160 total. That's like 5%? WHO GIVES A ****! In short: less hyperbole, more facts and maths.
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. [edit, worded that sentence badly, but you get the point]
cheers, saved me doing the maths myself and still proved my point. |
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:59:02 -
[988] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:you are not forced to do anything, you make a chioce. there's the lie.
once more, you are forced as your only 2 choices are to train things suboptimally. your two choices are "train it all suboptimally" or "train half of it really suboptiamally". there's no lie in there what so ever. you could just prove me completely wrong by letting the whole world what combination of attributes would let a new player train both his core skills, and his ship skills as optimally as us veterans single mindedly train 1 set of skills due to not being constrained by the need to train fitting/support skills any more. however, we both know you won't let us know that combination of attributes; as it simply doesn't exist. no level of planning or effort will get around the painful fact that that the attribute system simply forces new players to train *something* suboptimally and the range of 'basic' skills they require is too large to avoid ending up having to train something suboptimally. will you stop whining about a 5% difference. ffs
i'm not whining about any % difference.
i'm just pointing out that new players shouldn't be forced to train things suboptimally due to simply being new to the game and that alone should be enough of an argument for wanting the attribute system revamped at minimum, and removed at best. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1131
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:02:36 -
[989] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote: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.
No, what we've proven is that your OCD and sperging about not being optimal is based on a 5% "loss" of sp, and that newbies can select a simple single remap getting them within 5% of super optimal training (which would be silly to do in the first place).
|
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:04:24 -
[990] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dave Stark wrote: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. No, what we've proven is that your OCD and sperging about not being optimal is based on a 5% "loss" of sp, and that newbies can select a simple single remap getting them within 5% of super optimal training (which would be silly to do in the first place).
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. |
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:05:55 -
[991] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
for a new player, 8 days is a long time.
8 days,,,, is a long time ?
i don't understand exactly what you want? you think 8 days of training is the difference in players sticking around or not?
you really believe this?
|
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:07:35 -
[992] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
for a new player, 8 days is a long time.
8 days,,,, is a long time ? i don't understand exactly what you want? you think 8 days of training is the difference in players sticking around or not? you really believe this?
I don't want anything. i was just stating a fact and people were like "that's a lie" now we've systematically gone through the whole thing and pointed out that i'm right i'm pretty much done here to be honest. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:07:47 -
[993] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
i'm not whining about any % difference.
i'm just pointing out that new players shouldn't be forced to train things suboptimally due to simply being new to the game and that alone should be enough of an argument for wanting the attribute system revamped at minimum, and removed at best.
again with the forced. did you never think it might designed that way for a reason, ffs.
and you are whining about 5% |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1131
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:07:58 -
[994] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Dave Stark wrote: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. No, what we've proven is that your OCD and sperging about not being optimal is based on a 5% "loss" of sp, and that newbies can select a simple single remap getting them within 5% of super optimal training (which would be silly to do in the first place). 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.
Based on what logic?
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29931
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:08:13 -
[995] - Quote
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.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
NeodiuM
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:10:16 -
[996] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:
For example, double-clicking in space to steer your ship is clearly explained in the initial tutorial, before the career agents. But, the majority of new players miss it, because they're focused on interacting, not reading. It's right up in front of them in black and white, but my personal straw poll says that 100% of them (+/- 0%) miss it.
It's easy to say that one should overhaul the new player experience to make the introduction to the game more about doing things and less about reading blocks of text, but that's spectacularly hard to execute (not that the folks working on the new player experience aren't trying!) -- particularly when the basic game mechanics are as complicated as EVE's.
Pretty much this.
When I posted earlier about trying to introduce friends to the game some of the replies stated that I should have taken the time to explain to him about the attribute system, SP per hour and skill planning.
I've thought about the point CCP Darwin makes which is "how do I explain this to him".
On the one hand, i've got a friend who's shooting things in space, learning to double click to move, lock enemies, activate modules. He doesn't understand the difference between the types of guns, has all sorts of things added to his ship because he got them as rewards but at least he's having fun.
When do I pull him up and say, its time I showed you how to map your attributes most efficiently so that in 6 months from now you can be flying some really cool things, fairly well?
The complexity is one of the things that got me hooked, as it was a game I came across that I didn't immediately understand, which was odd, most games are fairly straight forward.
But I can't figure out how I would introduce attributes in a tutorial sense or as another player to a newbro without turning them off the game or putting them to sleep.
Well aside from throwing 20m skill points at them in some expensive starter bundle, and a 1 time use free way of remapping skills for when he's stuffed them, with paid alternatives thereafter. But hey, I think if that were a reality it would just end up being every ones fifth account.
If anyone had a good suggestion? |
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:13:55 -
[997] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:again with the forced. did you never think it might designed that way for a reason, ffs.
and you are whining about 5%
i'm not whining about 5% at all, i'm not even whining. i just stated a fact that was called a "lie" then proved to be a truth.
sure it might be intentional; i'm also saying that intentional reason is stupid, especially in the climate of trying to improve new player retention.
Gregor Parud wrote:Based on what logic?
not logic; fact, you know the fact in the post that quite obviously pointed out you either train 8 days slower or blow 3 remaps to achieve the same level of sp/hour us older players enjoy because we don't have to worry about training off remap support skills any more.
****, pretty sure it was you who even presented the proof. how quickly you forget. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1131
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:15:44 -
[998] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: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.
8 days on a total of 160, compared to a super optimal remapping. Also, the numbers I stated are without implants. If you include implants then the % gain from remapping becomes lower making it even less than 5%. Seriously, the only ones caring about this are OCD math geeks (who'd probably never undock and do anything interesting anyway) and leadership of lol blob alliances who want their cattle to train up faster for a new meta which they weren't smart enough to figure out themselves first. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:17:22 -
[999] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:again with the forced. did you never think it might designed that way for a reason, ffs.
and you are whining about 5% i'm not whining about 5% at all, i'm not even whining. i just stated a fact that was called a "lie" then proved to be a truth. sure it might be intentional; i'm also saying that intentional reason is stupid, especially in the climate of trying to improve new player retention. Gregor Parud wrote:Based on what logic?
not logic; fact, you know the fact in the post that quite obviously pointed out you either train 8 days slower or blow 3 remaps to achieve the same level of sp/hour us older players enjoy because we don't have to worry about training off remap support skills any more. ****, pretty sure it was you who even presented the proof. how quickly you forget.
for someone that wants nothing you're sure pushing the agenda here.
8 days,,, ffs
|
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:17:40 -
[1000] - Quote
let me pose the question then;
why is it ok for new players to train skills slower? why is that a good thing for the game? |
|
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:18:31 -
[1001] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:again with the forced. did you never think it might designed that way for a reason, ffs.
and you are whining about 5% i'm not whining about 5% at all, i'm not even whining. i just stated a fact that was called a "lie" then proved to be a truth. sure it might be intentional; i'm also saying that intentional reason is stupid, especially in the climate of trying to improve new player retention. Gregor Parud wrote:Based on what logic?
not logic; fact, you know the fact in the post that quite obviously pointed out you either train 8 days slower or blow 3 remaps to achieve the same level of sp/hour us older players enjoy because we don't have to worry about training off remap support skills any more. ****, pretty sure it was you who even presented the proof. how quickly you forget. for someone that wants nothing you're sure pushing the agenda here. 8 days,,, ffs
i'm not pushing any agenda. i've just laid a fact out there and if you say you're fine with it. that's fine. although now i'm curious as to why you think it's fine that new players have no option but to train skills slower than vetrans? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29931
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:22:41 -
[1002] - Quote
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.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1132
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:30:07 -
[1003] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: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.
Jita was a thing long before Achura happened. Also, those early fixed attributes were pretty moronic to a point where the only not completely terrible combat option was being Gallente, we're talking easily 25-30% training speed differences here. Achura changed that. |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:30:26 -
[1004] - 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. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1920
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:34:29 -
[1005] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
not logic; fact, you know the fact in the post that quite obviously pointed out you either train 8 days slower or blow 3 remaps to achieve the same level of sp/hour us older players enjoy because we don't have to worry about training off remap support skills any more.
****, pretty sure it was you who even presented the proof. how quickly you forget.
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. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1132
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:35:28 -
[1006] - Quote
Tia Aves wrote: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.
Sounds like "it would favour me personally if they got removed".
Are you using learning plants as you pvp? |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1132
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:36:29 -
[1007] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
not logic; fact, you know the fact in the post that quite obviously pointed out you either train 8 days slower or blow 3 remaps to achieve the same level of sp/hour us older players enjoy because we don't have to worry about training off remap support skills any more.
****, pretty sure it was you who even presented the proof. how quickly you forget.
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.
Ah there it is "T2 doctrine" which translates to "I'm just just cattle", which comes back to my earlier points on that. |
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:38:05 -
[1008] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
not logic; fact, you know the fact in the post that quite obviously pointed out you either train 8 days slower or blow 3 remaps to achieve the same level of sp/hour us older players enjoy because we don't have to worry about training off remap support skills any more.
****, pretty sure it was you who even presented the proof. how quickly you forget.
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. Ah there it is "T2 doctrine" which translates to "I'm just cattle and fine with it", which comes back to my earlier points on that.
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? |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:39:37 -
[1009] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:again with the forced. did you never think it might designed that way for a reason, ffs.
and you are whining about 5% i'm not whining about 5% at all, i'm not even whining. i just stated a fact that was called a "lie" then proved to be a truth. sure it might be intentional; i'm also saying that intentional reason is stupid, especially in the climate of trying to improve new player retention. Gregor Parud wrote:Based on what logic?
not logic; fact, you know the fact in the post that quite obviously pointed out you either train 8 days slower or blow 3 remaps to achieve the same level of sp/hour us older players enjoy because we don't have to worry about training off remap support skills any more. ****, pretty sure it was you who even presented the proof. how quickly you forget. for someone that wants nothing you're sure pushing the agenda here. 8 days,,, ffs i'm not pushing any agenda. i've just laid a fact out there and if you say you're fine with it. that's fine. although now i'm curious as to why you think it's fine that new players have no option but to train skills slower than vetrans?
the system works fine, you suggest it isn't.
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
132
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:40:28 -
[1010] - Quote
Jane Shapperd wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:Jane Shapperd wrote:
i use +5 implants all the time and i pvp in them i don't give a **** if i lose them as long as i train faster than other players
Interesting statement, if I check the killboard of Jane Shapperd ... I see ... many empty pods ;) oh snap somone notices and actully wants to counter my points ;) when i lose my ship i consider the situation if i am going to lose my pod 100%( bubble , pipe bomb , gate camp smart bombs) i start upluging everysingle implant starting with learning +5s then hardwairing implants as all the 5 of them are cheaper than two +5. i mentioned in one of my posts i mostly lose my implants by unpluging them not by being poded as i care more about kb rather than my wallet. ( page 36 just under point B) Very interesting. You want to keep the benefits of +5 but are not willing to swallow the consequences? And no, losing ISK does not count as a consequence in your case, as you give a **** about it. To make it real, I would suggest the game should block unplugging implants during PvP combat timer.
IMO the game should never force you to risk game subscription time or real money (in case you can't effort losing +4/+5 twice a day with just grinding for ISK). Instead make everything about risk/reward sandbox related. Though your proposal (ship bonus instead of SP/h bonus) goes well in that direction, I don't see it's feasible for the aforementioned points. I'm confident CCP will come up with a well balanced replacement, if they remove attributes.
Regarding non-consequences of pod death and permanent skill point loss with T3 Cruiser, I propose thinking about a temporary skill point lock instead. For example instead of losing the skill level, it could be locked (not usable) for 1 week. Also on pod destruction the player should "lose" the highest rank skill level named in the pre-requisites of the ship he left for 1 hour. This would especially force T2 pilots to reship into another ship before coming back to the battle.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
|
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:42:09 -
[1011] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:the system works fine, you suggest it isn't.
i wasn't asking if the system worked.
i asked you why you think it's ok that new players are forced to train slower than the rest of us. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:42:31 -
[1012] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
not logic; fact, you know the fact in the post that quite obviously pointed out you either train 8 days slower or blow 3 remaps to achieve the same level of sp/hour us older players enjoy because we don't have to worry about training off remap support skills any more.
****, pretty sure it was you who even presented the proof. how quickly you forget.
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. Ah there it is "T2 doctrine" which translates to "I'm just cattle and fine with it", which comes back to my earlier points on that. 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?
once in your lifetime in EVE you'll miss 8 days training. you call this being shafted? |
Blacksuns
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Exit Strategy..
25
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:42:55 -
[1013] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:for someone that wants nothing you're sure pushing the agenda here. 8 days,,, ffs
There is no agenda, you simply don't understand Dave's point. Simples.
It doesn't matter if it 'only' differs 2 or 6 or 8 days. Unlike yourself a new player does not know the information a veteran player knows.
Sure they can go read about what is the most optimal way to max out training time but only a small portion of new players will do just that. Most new players just wanna play, shoot stuff, interact and learn as they go.
There is simply no gain in letting new players train slower than a veteran. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2712
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:43:10 -
[1014] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Sounds like "it would favour me personally if they got removed". You imply that only a group of people would benefit from there removal. |
Blacksuns
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Exit Strategy..
25
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:44:09 -
[1015] - Quote
double post |
Dave Stark
7361
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:44:59 -
[1016] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
not logic; fact, you know the fact in the post that quite obviously pointed out you either train 8 days slower or blow 3 remaps to achieve the same level of sp/hour us older players enjoy because we don't have to worry about training off remap support skills any more.
****, pretty sure it was you who even presented the proof. how quickly you forget.
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. Ah there it is "T2 doctrine" which translates to "I'm just cattle and fine with it", which comes back to my earlier points on that. 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? once in your lifetime in EVE you'll miss 8 days training. you call this being shafted?
we've been through this, it has already been proven that they earn less sp than us and have no choice in the matter.
now, answer the question; why is it acceptable that new players are forced to train skills at a lower rate than us, or forego training pretty much essential skills all together in order to enjoy the same levels of sp/hour we do? |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:45:21 -
[1017] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:the system works fine, you suggest it isn't.
i wasn't asking if the system worked. i asked you why you think it's ok that new players are forced to train slower than the rest of us.
because 8 days is nothing. you again make out that nobody else had to train the very same way when we did, so how is anyone being shafted ? |
Dave Stark
7364
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:46:55 -
[1018] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:the system works fine, you suggest it isn't.
i wasn't asking if the system worked. i asked you why you think it's ok that new players are forced to train slower than the rest of us. because 8 days is nothing. you again make out that nobody else had to train the very same way when we did, so how is anyone being shafted ?
you think it's ok because you don't regard 8 days as a long time. that's fine. glad we finally got to the bottom of that one.
"because we all had to endure a ****** system" is not justification for keeping a ****** system. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:47:55 -
[1019] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote: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?
They only get "shafted" (for 5%, nice hyperbole) compared to a vet who only trains specific attribs for a long time. And the only way for him to get to that point is to have done that the whole time is if that vet has been using that OCD "must be optimal" which will have resulted in said Vet to not have done anything of note for a long time. Besides, by that time we're talking about hilarious skills which aren't in any way important to newer players. And by the time said newbies get to that point they'll have 3 remaps left to toy with that, would they want to.
|
Mag's
the united
19060
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:48:01 -
[1020] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:the system works fine, you suggest it isn't. It works fine for me, because I only have level 5 games to play in regards to skill training atm. But working fine for me, doesn't mean whole lot in the grand scheme of things.
I can however, see there is a discrepancy between how the system treats me and new players. Even if I like the current system. But then my likes for it, may be rooted in how long I've played.
**Destination SkillQueue:- **
It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29933
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:49:49 -
[1021] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Dave Stark wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:the system works fine, you suggest it isn't.
i wasn't asking if the system worked. i asked you why you think it's ok that new players are forced to train slower than the rest of us. because 8 days is nothing. you again make out that nobody else had to train the very same way when we did, so how is anyone being shafted ? you think it's ok because you don't regard 8 days as a long time. that's fine. glad we finally got to the bottom of that one. "because we all had to endure a ****** system" is not justification for keeping a ****** system. dave's right on this one, xxtrust. The intel/mem per/wil dilemma is stacked against players who have to make the choice, and doesn't at all affect players who have trained those skills. Obviously. So this is very literally a problem that heavily/ nearly exclusively affects new characters. Just because you suffered through it, doesn't mean it should stay. It can be better.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Dave Stark
7364
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:49:50 -
[1022] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dave Stark wrote: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? They only get "shafted" (for 5%, nice hyperbole) compared to a vet who only trains specific attribs for a long time. And the only way for him to get to that point is to have done that the whole time is if that vet has been using that OCD "must be optimal" which will have resulted in said Vet to not have done anything of note for a long time. Besides, by that time we're talking about hilarious skills which aren't in any way important to newer players. And by the time said newbies get to that point they'll have 3 remaps left to toy with that, would they want to.
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. |
Mag's
the united
19060
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:51:09 -
[1023] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:They only get "shafted" (for 5%, nice hyperbole) 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.
**Destination SkillQueue:- **
It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:51:41 -
[1024] - 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. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:52:36 -
[1025] - Quote
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. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29933
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:52:47 -
[1026] - Quote
Trust is on tilt and not thinking straight. Gregor is on a witch hunt for no apparent reason.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:54:36 -
[1027] - Quote
Mag's wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:the system works fine, you suggest it isn't. It works fine for me, because I only have level 5 games to play in regards to skill training atm. But working fine for me, doesn't mean whole lot in the grand scheme of things. I can however, see there is a discrepancy between how the system treats me and new players. Even if I like the current system. But then my likes for it, may be rooted in how long I've played.
i could say the very same.
|
Blacksuns
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Exit Strategy..
25
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:56:13 -
[1028] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Trust is on tilt and not thinking straight. Gregor is on a witch hunt for no apparent reason.
Perhaps. Or they are just defending their market income. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:56:15 -
[1029] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:They only get "shafted" (for 5%, nice hyperbole) 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.
The 5% mentioned is based on the "newbies lose out on so much" that Dave brought up, after which I made up a perfectly good "newbie build" to 8 mil SP showcasing 5% total difference (again, not assuming implants which would make the percentage lower) between a base perc/int and completely using up all 3 remaps.
I'm not stating that it would only be 5% everywhere, that would be silly.
|
Dave Stark
7365
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:58:15 -
[1030] - Quote
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. |
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 11:59:49 -
[1031] - Quote
Blacksuns wrote:Rain6637 wrote:Trust is on tilt and not thinking straight. Gregor is on a witch hunt for no apparent reason. Perhaps. Or they are just defending their market income.
you'll never know. lol |
Lei Merdeau
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:07:04 -
[1032] - Quote
When I started, before remaps, but after a lot, I (newbie) googled optimal faction/clan (so advantage over many vets) but rejected Caldari and then prioritised learning skills = a civ shield booster on an armour tank made sense for months. Another example of warped priorities.
Could make base attributes optimal for whatever skill trained, then plus attribute implants. No disadvantage, and new players training faster than we did isn't a bad thing.
Then add more slot 1-5 implants that aren't attribute based giving more choices. Then its up to the market if attribute implants collapse or not. C'est la EVE. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:08:41 -
[1033] - 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.
That either happened by training up all int/mem etc first (which is a choice) or by having so much SP that you pretty much have "everything at 5" and that that point the only things left training for will have no impact on gameplay compared to newer players.
|
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:09:10 -
[1034] - 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. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:10:28 -
[1035] - Quote
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.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29933
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:11:51 -
[1036] - Quote
+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.
HG sets without attribute bonuses would be nice, too.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
213
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:13:40 -
[1037] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Trust is on tilt and not thinking straight. Gregor is on a witch hunt for no apparent reason.
rain we all faced the very same training when we begun the game. i'm confused as to why some think it's a factor in retaining new players when most if not all of the new players know nothing about the remaps or implants within the first month or so, some even longer than that.
i guess i see 8 days as nothing and in no way effects new guys sticking around.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29933
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:15:31 -
[1038] - Quote
unnecessary suck factor, mostly.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
3
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:15:41 -
[1039] - 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. |
Dave Stark
7366
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:16:12 -
[1040] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote: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. That either happened by training up all int/mem etc first (which is a choice) or by having so much SP that you pretty much have "everything at 5" and that that point the only things left training for will have no impact on gameplay compared to newer players.
the latter, i think this character is at like 70m sp or something silly now, i checked this morning and for the life of me can't remember the exact figure. over 70m though. think i worked it out at like 2400 sp/hour over the lifetime of the character.
yes, i trained a bunch of stuff off remap but i do that these days because i'm at the point where i mostly just want another rank of an off remap skill here or there (bit of extra scanning probe strength now i'm dabbling in exploration etc) but i'll very rarely train a rank V skill off remap. oh, and there was that one time when i lost a rank V skill because i forgot to update my clone and it was a prerequisite for a ship i flew quite a lot so i had to retrain it (off remap).
however what i personally train doesn't really matter. the fact remains new players either have to accept lower training times than what i, and many other veterans, are currently experiencing due to our masses of already accumulated SP, or forego training pretty essential skills just to enjoy the same level of SP/hour.
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? |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:16:12 -
[1041] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:+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.
Combat implants are a form of pay2win, many things are of course (in a way) but if we're talking about getting MORE newer players into PVP then it probably wouldn't help if more established players run around with funky implants.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29933
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:19:30 -
[1042] - Quote
yeah I edited that to include a suggestion for pirate sets that didn't have attribute bonuses.
The nice ones, though... the HGs with +4 are perfect for high sec lurkers, was my main point.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:22:14 -
[1043] - Quote
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.
Also, I "suffer" it still every day. I have many alts and projects with new characters. Not 2 weeks ago I opened a new account and and fully training up 3 characters on that one (ie 3 plex a month). As I stated earlier, it would benefit me personally if they'd remove remaps and learning implants.
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). |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29933
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:24:43 -
[1044] - Quote
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.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Dave Stark
7366
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:25:33 -
[1045] - 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.
ship loss is pretty much what drives the economy. kinda the same with losing access to a station when you have to replace all the stuff that was in there. high sec ganking is essentially ship loss - so again, stimulating the economy. not having local achieves a unique area of space with rules different to anywhere else.
execpt removing attributes doesn't make anything easier - it just removes an arbitrary punishment to new players. as i said earlier, the level of difficulty in eve is in no way tied to the SP system and as such removing attributes wouldn't influence EVEs difficulty one way or the other so "it would just be easier" isn't the logic.
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?
edit: this keyboard sucks more than a cheap hooker. |
Dave Stark
7366
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:26:21 -
[1046] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: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.
iirc they're 20s accross the board with 19 in charisma.
but i could be mistaken, been a long time since i made a new alt. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29933
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:30:46 -
[1047] - Quote
So with a +4 set across the board, they're at 24 out of a possible 32... 3/4 or 75% efficiency. Not a bad start. Cybernetics IV, 100 mil for the +4s. meh. I've used +4s in my 100 mil SP mains forever.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:30:57 -
[1048] - 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. |
Dave Stark
7366
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:32:35 -
[1049] - Quote
Tia Aves wrote: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.
indeed, arbitrarily picking which skills you're going to train slower than others is hardly the pinnacle of engaging gameplay. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:39:33 -
[1050] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: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.
Streamlining attribs makes a lot of sense. Dropping the dual attrib requirements would require less remaps to be "optimal", make it more logical and still give a sense of direction.
Perc (or whatever new name) for combat related including shields and armour int for support skills like navigation, drones, electronics etc. Hauler related training mem for industry related (including mining ship training) Char for leadership and social
Give enough points that you can't completely min-max in the way that you'd never really get one to lowest unless you pile it in the other 3.
|
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:44:19 -
[1051] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote: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 doesn't. See, it only does if you're CD about it and min-max like a true champ. "Come fly with us, remap to perc/int and stop bothering about it. If you really do want to get the last ounce of training then these are your options but honestly, it's just a choice" is a perfectly valid way to get newbies into the game and pvp.
|
Dave Stark
7371
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:47:32 -
[1052] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:But it doesn't,
but it does, you proved that in YOUR OWN post about 2-3 pages ago. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:49:14 -
[1053] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:But it doesn't, but it does, you proved that in YOUR OWN post about 2-3 pages ago.
If you find 5% important in any way, sure. Which leads back to "min-maxing like a champ". |
Dave Stark
7371
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 12:51:32 -
[1054] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:But it doesn't, but it does, you proved that in YOUR OWN post about 2-3 pages ago. If you find 5% important in any way, sure. Which leads back to "min-maxing like a champ".
sigh, pretending it isn't a problem doesn't change the fact that the system does nothing but put new players at a disadvantage vs the rest of us and that adds nothing to the game and you've yet to state why keeping it that way is a good thing; as you were asked.
honestly, it's easier to get blood out of a stone than to get you to answer basic questions. |
Commander Spurty
Dimension Door We need wards.
1420
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 13:00:15 -
[1055] - Quote
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!
There are good ships
And wood ships
And ships that sail the sea
But the best ships are
Spaceships
Built by CCP
|
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 13:04:09 -
[1056] - 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.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1133
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 13:04:18 -
[1057] - Quote
I did answer it but in an edit
Quote: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).
I'm not convinced it's better. Factually it's below optimal (duh) but that doesn't make it bad, all it does is give people choice and the option to either not bother too much with because they don't care enough for it or for the people who DO enjoy the min-maxing game to play EVE "their way".
Don't get me wrong, I love newbies and over the years have helped them in so many ways it's not even funny but at the same time I love EVE and a EVE, to me, is part tough love, "deal with it", "HTFU", "think before you act", "you can't have your cake and eat it" and "if you're gonna be dumb you gotta be tough". |
Dave Stark
7374
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 13:31:10 -
[1058] - Quote
the problem is, the choice isn't meaningful. don't get me wrong - i'm all for choice, if it has meaning. the problem with SP is as i keep saying - you're just picking between two bad outcomes.
things i think are done right that are closely related to this topic - hardwirings.
Hardwirings are risked in combat, and also give you an edge in combat. do you edge out that last 5% with implants, or do you just go with an empty clone and keep your losses low if you aren't confident that extra 5% will tip it far enough in your favour?
or "do i armour tank, or shield tank?" do i want ewar, or extra damage? meaningful choices.
but picking what skills you train slowly just isn't interesting or engaging, it's like being asked if you want to be punched in the gut, or the jaw. by mike tyson, in his prime.
thankfully most of us don't have to deal with off remap skills much, if at all, and that's nice. however that doesn't mean we shouldn't try and improve the system just because we've, essentially, surpassed it.
There are other ways to teach newbies all those things - but limiting the areas of the game they can experience by hampering their SP/hour from the start isn't the way to teach them those things. mercilessly blowing up their untanked t1 industrial carrying all their worldly possessions is when they jump in to uedama without a scout is. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1139
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 13:42:37 -
[1059] - Quote
How many remaps do you have left atm. |
Dave Stark
7374
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 13:45:25 -
[1060] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:How many remaps do you have left atm.
off the top of my head, i genuinely couldn't tell you. |
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29936
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 13:52:36 -
[1061] - Quote
1 or 2 for me, 3 on a couple.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Warric NazGhoul
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:05:26 -
[1062] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:let me pose the question then;
why is it ok for new players to train skills slower? why is that a good thing for the game?
Why is it ok for new players to have less skillpoints over all Why is it ok for new player to have "worse" ships then old player Why is it ok for new players to .....
Ill tell you why, its because this is a MMO, not space shooter. All in EVE create a want to be better/have more. Be it isk or ships or killboard stats. If you remove this you will kill the game.
Would be interesting to know how long the average player that picks up lets say Battlefield play that came compare to EVE. For me I played Battlefield for maybe a month or two, and that's a really good game.
I played EVE on and off for 8. |
Dave Stark
7374
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:10:22 -
[1063] - Quote
Warric NazGhoul wrote:Dave Stark wrote:let me pose the question then;
why is it ok for new players to train skills slower? why is that a good thing for the game? Why is it ok for new players to have less skillpoints over all Why is it ok for new player to have "worse" ships then old player Why is it ok for new players to ..... Ill tell you why, its because this is a MMO, not space shooter. All in EVE create a want to be better/have more. Be it isk or ships or killboard stats. If you remove this you will kill the game. Would be interesting to know how long the average player that picks up lets say Battlefield play that came compare to EVE. For me I played Battlefield for maybe a month or two, and that's a really good game. I played EVE on and off for 8.
i play both games - for different reasons.
the irony of battlefield is the guns you get at the start are some of the best. |
Warric NazGhoul
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:10:32 -
[1064] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:the problem is, the choice isn't meaningful. don't get me wrong - i'm all for choice, if it has meaning. the problem with SP is as i keep saying - you're just picking between two bad outcomes.
things i think are done right that are closely related to this topic - hardwirings.
Hardwirings are risked in combat, and also give you an edge in combat. do you edge out that last 5% with implants, or do you just go with an empty clone and keep your losses low if you aren't confident that extra 5% will tip it far enough in your favour?
or "do i armour tank, or shield tank?" do i want ewar, or extra damage? meaningful choices.
but picking what skills you train slowly just isn't interesting or engaging, it's like being asked if you want to be punched in the gut, or the jaw. by mike tyson, in his prime.
thankfully most of us don't have to deal with off remap skills much, if at all, and that's nice. however that doesn't mean we shouldn't try and improve the system just because we've, essentially, surpassed it.
There are other ways to teach newbies all those things - but limiting the areas of the game they can experience by hampering their SP/hour from the start isn't the way to teach them those things. mercilessly blowing up their untanked t1 industrial carrying all their worldly possessions is when they jump in to uedama without a scout is.
So you want to remove skillpoints then, skillpoints are never "interesting or engaging", skillpoints are the only laddering (and a pretty soft one) in EVE |
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
460
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:14:44 -
[1065] - Quote
It's good that the whole issue of the Achura 3 charisma attribute stupidity was brought up. That situation was harmful to the game. However, the fix of removing all racial differences from the game was itself harmful. Now it doesn't matter hardly at all and Eve has lost something.
Many would probably say good riddance to all that racial stuff. But it did add interesting game play. And the blandness of the current character generation is sad. The game should never be made so easy that all choice is removed and you never can make a bad one. Sadly though that appears to be where it is headed.
New players will always be at a disadvantage. I was, even with my first character, in 2006. But if you love this game it does not debilitate you. Other things such as removing the BPO lottery but leaving T2 BPOs in the game are more harmful to newbies. I had skilled and ground standings in order to get into the lottery and then they ended it. I then went into invention but found there was no way to compete with the wonderful ME on T2 BPOs for ships. But that is an aside, and I've seen many complain about T2 BPO complainers. So I moved on into other parts of the game and found much fun, even if I did not build tech II ships. Point is you try to avoid becoming some nullsec Scrublord's meatshield, and you find a niche.
Removing attribute implants and attributes as a whole is taking a sledge hammer to, if it is even a problem, a problem that really only requires some scissors, needle and thread. And that is really only catering to OCD min/maxing game players. And, there is no way to avoid the pain of needing some breadth of sp in the beginning. It will not go away with the removal of attributes.
Sigh. But then this whole sledge hammer paradigm is EVE too. 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.
CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
|
Gabriel Ironfist
Free Bacon. Primal Force
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:21:59 -
[1066] - Quote
First of all "What a Thread". I have been reading it for the past hour and some post I read completely while others I had to skip because it made no sense what so ever, but that is the reality of life and it is actually the reality in EvE. We can not make everyone happy. the world we live in is far from perfect, why do you expect the digital version to be so?
Not only in this forum but in the game you hear rants and complains about such and such is such a bad thing and needs to go, or someone wants a ship but cant have it etc etc. Well EvE is as real as it gets to real life and I do not think when you want a car that you dreamed of someone drops it to you garage and hands you the keys for it.
Before going in to the attributes and implants, I would like to ask all of you a question and want an honest answer.
- Would you go into the low security or non secured areas (the gethos, dark alley ways, forests etc.) of your home towns in your underware??? What would the outcome be in most cases? This game is as close to reality of our world as it can get. so common sense is essential...
Risk... I sometimes sit on a station in low sec looking at the stars thanks to the wonderful graphics people at CCP it is so nice to watch. I even fell a sleep couple times and woke up still alive... even at war times. I am always honoured to be killed by those who are willing to take the risk and shoot me.
Going into implants... I do not think any of the implants should be removed, but their slot assignments and the ammount you can use can be freed up. (a stacking penalty can apply here) For me the customization factor is what makes EvE so fun. I see people want everything. they want all the benefits of all the implants, all the skills set to "6" then what will happen? They will still get their ships handed to them in pieces and their pod blown up because they cant fit their ship and wont align knowing that they will loose their ship. so then it will be "Oh lets remove ship fitting" time because the illeterate D***b F**K can't fit his ship or read the warning sign going to low sec.
implants are the niche that the experts want in their heads for fights. if you are not willing to take the risk and the other guy is, what gives you the right to complain about his success and your failures. Our successes are built on our failures which is called experience. As a good friend of mine said to me once. "It is upto you how much you want to spend on learning"
If you can not take the Risk when you know you are immortal, what good are you?
Attributes: It is an other customization option so I like it. I would prefer to have the remap timer reduced to 3 months and maximum remaps you can have is set to 5 so it cannot accumulate over time. this will give players the option to speed their training at certain areas they wish.
Have jump clone creation available only in starter systems or all stations. remove the grinding need for jump clone creation. so new player can enjoy the benefits of it. and older players can go out in space and duel each other. so if you are in a situation they goes beyond your risk level you can just use a fresh clone to do what you want.
(if jump clone creation is allowed in all stations, then no implant/boosters/links/concord intervention option can be set for arranged duals which will make things equal)
Those who are good at this game will be good no matter what you do. and those suck at it will continue to suck what ever you do. I think the crazy learning curve of this game is what sets it apart from other MMO's in the market.
Before you leave a station you have to say" it is a good day to die" do not fear death. It can not keep you from waking up again in the EvE universe.. only you, keep youselves bound by fear of loosing...
Fly Safe my fellow capuleers! |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
7
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:22:58 -
[1067] - 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.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1141
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:26:36 -
[1068] - Quote
Tia Aves wrote: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.
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?
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29937
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:28:17 -
[1069] - Quote
There are some huge scrublords out there.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
8
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:31:55 -
[1070] - 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. |
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29937
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:32:52 -
[1071] - Quote
Tia, just so you know, I'm not sure why you're being grilled for wanting a change that makes your gameplay better.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Walter Raliegh
The Shorty Regime
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:35:06 -
[1072] - Quote
I'm reading the thread and just to put something out there while were on the topic of changing attribute system. Perhaps if you do not remove the system in its entirety, maybe create something that actually "develops" the attributes. EVE is unique in that your attributes never grow. you can play for 10 years but your base attribute points never grow. I had the Idea that if you get podded you get an increase in some attribute points almost as some learning survival instinct that the clone passes to the medical clone from the lessons learned from it's death. It could also serve as a learning curve and make new players more likely to experience null/sec and WH spaces. You could calculate in diminishing returns each time you die and for a given time frame though so some one doesn't go out on a suicide spree to try and get a bunch of attribute points. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1591
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:39:58 -
[1073] - Quote
Walter Raliegh wrote:I'm reading the thread and just to put something out there while were on the topic of changing attribute system. Perhaps if you do not remove the system in its entirety, maybe create something that actually "develops" the attributes. EVE is unique in that your attributes never grow. you can play for 10 years but your base attribute points never grow. I had the Idea that if you get podded you get an increase in some attribute points almost as some learning survival instinct that the clone passes to the medical clone from the lessons learned from it's death. It could also serve as a learning curve and make new players more likely to experience null/sec and WH spaces. You could calculate in diminishing returns each time you die and for a given time frame though so some one doesn't go out on a suicide spree to try and get a bunch of attribute points.
This is just a stupid remake of the stupid learning skills of old. |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
8
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:40:03 -
[1074] - 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. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29938
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 14:57:48 -
[1075] - Quote
EVE players like to tout the concept of rookies getting within striking distance of vets, but I don't think it's as true as people think. After participating in this thread, my feelings about the utility curve of characters has changed, to worse than before. And yeah, there's still some residual disparity in SP accumulation even after the removal of learning skills.
You have these vets who are skilling at full clip, with a lot of prereqs already under their belt, while new characters still have to train Cybernetics to IV or V and then come up with the ISK for attribute implants.
I already know the next order of business for changes is skill prereqs that are V, when they could be I or III. T2 ship prereqs, in particular. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they're some of the worst offenders of placing a time wall in front of characters.
Anyway. If the goal is to allow new characters to hit the ground running at the same speed as vet characters, variable attributes have to go. Implants, though, I think should stay, as a modification of base attributes.
I know it seems like I'm simply repeating myself, but I'm just arriving at the same conclusion after considering new arguments made in the thread.
Remaps are just awkward. I won't ever miss them if they go away. Variation by attribute is preserved (and there's still a reason to list them on skills) if we keep attribute implants.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Memphis Baas
167
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 15:00:54 -
[1076] - Quote
Tia Aves wrote:So its not like its just me fighting for whatever is going to benefit me most.
Only one person in this thread is trying to make that sound like it's a bad thing.
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1591
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 15:12:50 -
[1077] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:EVE players like to tout the concept of rookies getting within striking distance of vets, but I don't think it's as true as people think. After participating in this thread, my feelings about the utility curve of characters has changed, to worse than before. And yeah, there's still some residual disparity in SP accumulation even after the removal of learning skills.
You have these vets who are skilling at full clip, with a lot of prereqs already under their belt, while new characters still have to train Cybernetics to IV or V and then come up with the ISK for attribute implants.
I already know the next order of business for changes is skill prereqs that are V, when they could be I or III. T2 ship prereqs, in particular. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they're some of the worst offenders of placing a time wall in front of characters.
Anyway. If the goal is to allow new characters to hit the ground running at the same speed as vet characters, variable attributes have to go. Implants, though, I think should stay, as a modification of base attributes.
I know it seems like I'm simply repeating myself, but I'm just arriving at the same conclusion after considering new arguments made in the thread.
Remaps are just awkward. I won't ever miss them if they go away. Variation by attribute is preserved (and there's still a reason to list them on skills) if we keep attribute implants.
The "wall" in front of T2 ships is not as much of an issue because you can do pretty much all roles in T1 now unlike before where logi work was pretty much T2 cruisers or don't bother. The funny point about these change is the worst offender for this is still the most painful because to use T2 logistics you pretty much need to skill it to IV and have the very vast majority of the related support skill at V for it to even work. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1141
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 15:15:10 -
[1078] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Tia Aves wrote:So its not like its just me fighting for whatever is going to benefit me most. Only one person in this thread is trying to make that sound like it's a bad thing.
No it's fine to do so, as long as it's not marketed as "better for the game and newbies". Just be honest about it. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29938
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 15:15:23 -
[1079] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:The "wall" in front of T2 ships is not as much of an issue because you can do pretty much all roles in T1 now unlike before where logi work was pretty much T2 cruisers or don't bother. The funny point about these change is the worst offender for this is still the most painful because to use T2 logistics you pretty much need to skill it to IV and have the very vast majority of the related support skill at V for it to even work. I like that part, though. So I don't see why not allow players to have T2 ships with **** skills.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Airane
The Watcher's Consortium
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 17:30:09 -
[1080] - Quote
Suede wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Grace Chang wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Or better explained. That's been the biggest flaw, not that it's complex, that it's complex AND you're on your own to figure it out. If a new player picks skills they don't want later, that's a different issue: at least their skill training has enabled some experimentation and gameplay that might satisfy their curiosity about things they ultimately don't wish to do in EVE. But, the attribute system is just complexity for its own sake. It is not. It is something that forces a choice. Choice makes people (characters) differ. Notice any RPG worth its salt has attributes? For any of those games your reasoning applies as well. Ultimately it is not about complexity - it is about choice. The idea is, that as a player, you have to consider trade-offs that define your choice: essentially you choose between a short term benefit vs. a long term benefit. You have to THINK what is important to you and what might not be a priority. Player choice is not a value in itself. Imagine (for a moment) that the skill system required players to train one of two skills early on. One skill cuts their hit points in half, for all time, on all ships. Another cuts their damage in half, for all time, on all ships. This would be a choice. It's even a choice between two things that directly affect how the core combat game plays out. But, it's a choice that feels bad because it's a choice between two options with no upside, and it's not fun. It would just be bad game design. When you attempt to play optimally with attribute remaps, you either pick skills in line with your remap (yawn, of course you do) or you find yourself forced to deviate from your remap and it feels bad. It's just like my hypothetical skills, where best case you'd be optimized for tanking and flying a freighter (where they would provide no benefit), and worst case you'd be bashing a POS for two hours while optimized for tanking (where it would actively make the gameplay less fun). Attributes is a bad system, just mean it locks you in the one side of traning plan where you have to wait to get new remap to change to set other skills
nothing to do with Risks it is more down to the fact of what the CCP DEV posted
|
|
Mharius Skjem
Opacity Circles
305
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 20:24:26 -
[1081] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Mharius Skjem wrote:If I wanted to play WOW I would just play WOW or SWTOR, but you know what? WOW/SWTOR is for pussies, there's no risk, and no penalty for death and dying. If you go into battle you risk nothing. 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.
That's my point, this is a slippery slope, if we allow any more of this, what you've described is exactly what we'll end up with.
A recovering btter vet, with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...
Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...
|
Mharius Skjem
Opacity Circles
308
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 20:36:20 -
[1082] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:let me pose the question then;
why is it ok for new players to train skills slower? why is that a good thing for the game?
This is the common misconception.
New players train their skills at the same rate as everyone else.
Buying implants speeds this up.
In other words in-game activities such as learning about, finding and getting an implant leads to a tangible benefit.
This is called gameplay and some people like myself find it to be immersive.
Id also like to add that getting podded can cause you to lose this ingame bonus, this is also called gameplay.
At no time though are you learning more slowly than anyone else in the game, you are just gaining an advantage and then risking it in something called gameplay.
Without loss, or the fear of loss, all gameplay is worthless.
A recovering btter vet, with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...
Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 21:26:14 -
[1083] - 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. Also, I "suffer" it still every day. I have many alts and projects with new characters. Not 2 weeks ago I opened a new account and and fully training up 3 characters on that one (ie 3 plex a month). As I stated earlier, it would benefit me personally if they'd remove remaps and learning implants. 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). What about those of us who only have one character to use? |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 21:37:12 -
[1084] - Quote
Mharius Skjem wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Mharius Skjem wrote:If I wanted to play WOW I would just play WOW or SWTOR, but you know what? WOW/SWTOR is for pussies, there's no risk, and no penalty for death and dying. If you go into battle you risk nothing. 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. That's my point, this is a slippery slope, if we allow any more of this, what you've described is exactly what we'll end up with. Maybe we should slide it the other way. Have it so once anything is built in the game it expires after 24 hours and disappears. That way we can move further away from being like WoW, right? |
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
265
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 21:41:40 -
[1085] - Quote
I don't get it.. I mean I'm not a band new char, but nor have I been around for 10 years. I remember when I started. I saw remaps early on, within my first few days, but having a little common sense, didn't touch em cause I had no idea what they were. A month or so in, I sat down and looked it all up. I asked in Corp (NPC Corp I might add) and read sections on the forums/wiki/etc.
I don't feel like I started out disadvantaged. I mean "technically" yes I start out not maxed to the skill I'm training that second, but apart from VERY specific skill plans, starting out with a general even spread map is idea for at least the first few months. I feel like I started out with an advantage yet to be taped. What I mean by that is I start up with a general map, and 3 remaps to use, When I want. And when I know how. It's no different that a new player starting out with some skills, or some knowledge. I didn't know how useful Thermodynamics was until I started Incursioning. So for years I was at a disadvantage, one that likely cost me far more than a few months of sub-optimal training ever did.
Eve is a game that rewards you for the time you put in. Not like other games in SP for kills or anything, but rewards you in your knowledge. Knowing what skills to train, tactics to use, and how to use remaps are all part of that.
Anyone crying over a little less SP/hr than potential max.. HTFU. Nothing is stopping you from maxing it out (apart from as I said before, the silly limit to remaps an NO way to get more). Wasted your remap? Well that's your fault. Just like if you cashed in a PLEX to buy a shiny ship and died in it. It's not the games fault. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
47616
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 21:52:35 -
[1086] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: The biggest concern about implants that affect training speed as such is that they don't make in-space gameplay more fun, and in fact provide an incentive to sit in station or log off instead. A better design would be one that encourages playing the game now instead of waiting for later to do so.
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
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Dave Stark
7381
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 21:59:24 -
[1087] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: The biggest concern about implants that affect training speed as such is that they don't make in-space gameplay more fun, and in fact provide an incentive to sit in station or log off instead. A better design would be one that encourages playing the game now instead of waiting for later to do so.
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
he's pretty much right. i'd rather log off than risk my +4s.
my SP/hour means more to me than pvping. |
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1075
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 22:11:39 -
[1088] - Quote
Tia Aves wrote: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.
As bizarre as that sounds, I kinda like it. It does what a ton of people want (get people out of stations), stops them from amassing 300+ ships, etc. unfortunately something like this only affects highsec, lowsec and npc nullsec. You could do this in sov null and give the owner the ability to set a storage fee.
Anything in a pos is exempt.
I do see marketers complaining and hoarders (there are a lot of them). Also throwing people into the current pos mechanic is a recipie for disaster. Not a bad concept but a few years too early.
Yaay!!!!
|
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
117
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 23:01:18 -
[1089] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: The biggest concern about implants that affect training speed as such is that they don't make in-space gameplay more fun, and in fact provide an incentive to sit in station or log off instead. A better design would be one that encourages playing the game now instead of waiting for later to do so.
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 he's pretty much right. i'd rather log off than risk my +4s. my SP/hour means more to me than pvping.
That's your choice.
Doesn't mean we need to change the system because you are risk averse.
|
Mharius Skjem
Opacity Circles
308
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 23:03:29 -
[1090] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Mharius Skjem wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Mharius Skjem wrote:If I wanted to play WOW I would just play WOW or SWTOR, but you know what? WOW/SWTOR is for pussies, there's no risk, and no penalty for death and dying. If you go into battle you risk nothing. 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. That's my point, this is a slippery slope, if we allow any more of this, what you've described is exactly what we'll end up with. Maybe we should slide it the other way. Have it so once anything is built in the game it expires after 24 hours and disappears. That way we can move further away from being like WoW, right?
Well that is just silly and not really a contribution to the discussion at hand. If that's all you can come up with then sadly, it seems that you have lost the argument.
A recovering btter vet, with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...
Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...
|
|
Mharius Skjem
Opacity Circles
308
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 23:12:34 -
[1091] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: The biggest concern about implants that affect training speed as such is that they don't make in-space gameplay more fun, and in fact provide an incentive to sit in station or log off instead. A better design would be one that encourages playing the game now instead of waiting for later to do so.
If this is indicative of CCP's thinking then you might as well get rid of skills and SP totally. Just have it so that all capsuleers can fly all ships and operate all equipment and guns that way you can quickly get to your real long term goal of PAY TO WIN!
Just have it so that people can buy plex, buy what they like and then fly it without any of that pesky training at all. Better yet, have it so that if they lose it all after undock, that it all just respawns in station.
You might get 13,000,000 people online then, but I for one won't be one of them.
Don't forget the only game that CCP has ever made that has successfully paid the bills is Eve Online. There's a variety of reasons for this, but it seems to me you are getting rid of all of those reasons one step at a time.
A recovering btter vet, with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...
Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...
|
Silent Cyborg
The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology
11
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 23:41:28 -
[1092] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:I'll again offer my caveat that I'm not on the team considering possible changes to the attribute system, just engaging in the conversation and speaking for another point of view. Leannor wrote:I agree, where is the issue here? You know the score, you know what at risk, you know what the options are. You make a choice, and you either get SP epeen, or ability Epeen. People have different priorities. For every vet out there bragging about how many SP they have, there's a hundred more dedicated lesser SP person than could woop their ass in whatever they do. Be it mission, mining or fighting. There are a couple of specific issues with how this system currently works that make it less than ideal, both related to the new player experience: 1) Most new players learn about the full impact of the attribute system very late, and because the effect of the system is cumulative (the degree to which person A with a less-optimal remap falls behind person B with an optimal remap increases over time) it's frustrating for new players to discover, months into the game, that they've possibly left a lot of skill points on the table. (This differs crucially from the case where a new player discovers that they've been training what, for whatever reason, they consider the wrong thing, because at least they've probably 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. Those two issues add up to a system that more severely punishes new players (whether they know the system or not) who experiment or dabble in skills, and I think one could make a very good argument that such experimentation is essential for new players to try a range of activities in the game and find their place. Note that I haven't said a word about the impact of fitting implants on PvP. :)
Sounds to me like CCP has already made up its mind and this 'presentation' to the CSM is just another smoke screen of we are doing this and we dont care what pilots think.
in reference to the points the dev made about 'Most new players learn about the full impact of the attribute system very late' then there is a simple idea: Write a guide in your wiki you do everything else! even as simple as making a character 'https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Character_creation'
Please re-frame from 'improving' stuff that people do not complain about and please improve areas people have been begging about for years *cough* POS's *cough* *cough* |
Memphis Baas
170
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 00:12:55 -
[1093] - Quote
Mharius Skjem wrote:You might get 13,000,000 people online then, but I for one won't be one of them.
Good argument there; CCP will definitely avoid even the POSSIBILITY of $187.5 million in monthly revenue in order to keep a quality player like you in the game.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1920
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 00:55:47 -
[1094] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:
That's your choice.
Doesn't mean we need to change the system because you are risk averse.
It means there is a bad system which rewards you for not undocking. If you don't like CCP's proposal, find a better solution.
This solution needs to not be an XP grind system. It needs to not encourage players to mono track, and punish exploring new skill sets. It needs to not disadvantage new players. It needs to not have only bad choices associated with it.
So far, not a single person has come up with a system that achieves that except CCP. This strongly suggests to me that the entire system is exactly as flawed as learning skills were, and needs ripping out just the same. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 01:20:30 -
[1095] - Quote
Mharius Skjem wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Mharius Skjem wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Mharius Skjem wrote:If I wanted to play WOW I would just play WOW or SWTOR, but you know what? WOW/SWTOR is for pussies, there's no risk, and no penalty for death and dying. If you go into battle you risk nothing. 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. That's my point, this is a slippery slope, if we allow any more of this, what you've described is exactly what we'll end up with. Maybe we should slide it the other way. Have it so once anything is built in the game it expires after 24 hours and disappears. That way we can move further away from being like WoW, right? Well that is just silly and not really a contribution to the discussion at hand. If that's all you can come up with then sadly, it seems that you have lost the argument. Just following the slippery slope fallacy that is being spouted that changing the current system to something with interesting choices that are enjoyable to engage in magically transports the game into WoW.
It's like some of you want the game to be as frustrating as possible - just because. That and there is that obvious sentiment to punish new players as long as the established ones don't endure the same arbitrary mechanics in a painful way. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1365
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 01:24:29 -
[1096] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Syn Shi wrote:
That's your choice.
Doesn't mean we need to change the system because you are risk averse.
It means there is a bad system which rewards you for not undocking. If you don't like CCP's proposal, find a better solution. This solution needs to not be an XP grind system. It needs to not encourage players to mono track, and punish exploring new skill sets. It needs to not disadvantage new players. It needs to not have only bad choices associated with it. So far, not a single person has come up with a system that achieves that except CCP. This strongly suggests to me that the entire system is exactly as flawed as learning skills were, and needs ripping out just the same. No, the system rewards you for having implants, whether docked or undocked. The choice to not undock is linked to fear of losing a pod, but that manifests differently for different people. This is not some absolute with the way everyone reacts and also gives reason and purpose to having various levels of implants.
Also there is an issue with making a suggestion. First, no concrete plan has been proposed. Second, there is a lack of a fundamental idea of the full goal. Is it just the implants? What about attributes which have been mentioned? How far does it go and what is the end goal?
Right not it seems like the goal hinted at is bad. For instance, if it doesn't "punish" new players that means that old players cannot draw relative advantages from it. There can be no gain from experience, greater resources or understanding. To not lock players in (which it doesn't save again by individual choice) it means that it needs all skills to be equal to train in any circumstance removing any elements of long term planning or gaming for advantage.
In other words the goals you state remove any room for dynamics for players to work with beyond "what's next on my list." And with no game to play in the system it becomes more stale than currently, being just a flat time barrier. This doesn't create a good mechanic either. But if YOU have a solution that works around that I'd be glad to know what it was. |
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
118
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 01:25:18 -
[1097] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Syn Shi wrote:
That's your choice.
Doesn't mean we need to change the system because you are risk averse.
It means there is a bad system which rewards you for not undocking. If you don't like CCP's proposal, find a better solution. This solution needs to not be an XP grind system. It needs to not encourage players to mono track, and punish exploring new skill sets. It needs to not disadvantage new players. It needs to not have only bad choices associated with it. So far, not a single person has come up with a system that achieves that except CCP. This strongly suggests to me that the entire system is exactly as flawed as learning skills were, and needs ripping out just the same.
It doesn't mean it a bad system.
It means you choose to be risk averse and avoid pvp. |
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team Good Sax
1165
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 01:28:20 -
[1098] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Syn Shi wrote:
That's your choice.
Doesn't mean we need to change the system because you are risk averse.
It means there is a bad system which rewards you for not undocking. If you don't like CCP's proposal, find a better solution. This solution needs to not be an XP grind system. It needs to not encourage players to mono track, and punish exploring new skill sets. It needs to not disadvantage new players. It needs to not have only bad choices associated with it. So far, not a single person has come up with a system that achieves that except CCP. This strongly suggests to me that the entire system is exactly as flawed as learning skills were, and needs ripping out just the same.
By this logic, expensive ships and mods are bad for the game because the risk-adverse are afraid to undock and PVP in them. We should make all things cost 100 isk like on SiSi. Then ppl will use all the nifty ships in the game and PVP more.
\m/ O.o \m/
"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29942
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 01:38:49 -
[1099] - Quote
why CCPees wouldn't be able to stomach these debates, I have no idea.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
183
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 01:48:39 -
[1100] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: The biggest concern about implants that affect training speed as such is that they don't make in-space gameplay more fun, and in fact provide an incentive to sit in station or log off instead. A better design would be one that encourages playing the game now instead of waiting for later to do so.
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
The real biggest concern is that the dev that is posting in here has nothing to do with the team that would be implementing this change. So can't actually answer any of our questions as its all his opinion or at best second hand information that might be old by the time he tells us |
|
Soltys
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 02:04:04 -
[1101] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote: While I wouldn't want to paint my game design colleagues into a corner, I don't believe that implants are going anywhere. Only learning implants are in question.
They don't need to go anywhere. Their price and method of obtaining them should be adjusted (industry, BPOs - or more simplistic but equivalent - lesser isk/lp cost). +1 to +4 should be equivalent of ships' T1 rigs for head. +5 (and maybe stronger ones) should be around T2 rigs for head.
CCP Darwin wrote:There have been suggestions in this thread and elsewhere that learning implants with flat learning speed bonuses might work in an attribute-free world.
Attribute-free world is dumbing the game down. You should be fixing and improving it, not dumbing it down.
Main issue with attributes is rigid one year cycles. This is what is broken - not the attributes themselves. Make it flexible, fine grained and in player's hands (highsec booster industry, 1 month nominal spacing, subject to neurotoxin skills as well).
Quote:I think replacing learning speed implants with alternatives that encourage rather than discourage undocking is more likely, but I don't think anyone has yet come to any conclusions about what form that might take.
Solutions above, more detailed outline here. Use it or use some other ideas - but for goodness' sake - don't dumb the game down again. It's received enough of that in past months.
Quote:(Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.")
That's not gonna happen in reality. Every undocking is risk vs reward. Whether you use new blingy T3 destoryer, a bit cheaper T2 AF or a dirt cheap rifter with cheapest meta mods on market.
|
Memphis Baas
170
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 03:13:40 -
[1102] - Quote
As a counter argument, I see people showing off their bling ship in the newbie systems a lot. They undock and sit there, while all the newbies gawk and make praise comments. Same as in WOW where you get the newest flying griphon or whatever and spend several hours hovering in front of the city gates.
Haven't seen a single person undocking in an average ship and sitting there trying to show off their implants. Possibly cause you can't show off implants. Wish we could show off our outfits, but CCP isn't implementing a pub any time soon. Anyway, where was I? Oh yeah, counter argument. |
NeodiuM
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 06:08:32 -
[1103] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:
But CCP isn't implementing a pub any time soon. .
It hurts my soul that in this distant future there is no place I can go to get wasted with randoms. + 1 for pub, and to keep this post on topic, maybe in said pub you can fight and rip out each others implants : \ |
Dave Stark
7383
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 07:59:19 -
[1104] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:Dave Stark wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:CCP Darwin wrote: The biggest concern about implants that affect training speed as such is that they don't make in-space gameplay more fun, and in fact provide an incentive to sit in station or log off instead. A better design would be one that encourages playing the game now instead of waiting for later to do so.
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 he's pretty much right. i'd rather log off than risk my +4s. my SP/hour means more to me than pvping. That's your choice. Doesn't mean we need to change the system because you are risk averse.
no, it just means you need to change the system if you want more people pvping. i'm not risk averse, i just don't need to pvp, i do need to train skills. why would i risk something i need, doing something i don't? |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
120
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 09:14:11 -
[1105] - Quote
NeodiuM wrote:Memphis Baas wrote:
But CCP isn't implementing a pub any time soon. .
It hurts my soul that in this distant future there is no place I can go to get wasted with randoms. + 1 for pub, and to keep this post on topic, maybe in said pub you can fight and rip out each others implants : \
always thought you should be able to salavge implants anyway ... loot and salvage actually. Lets start making implants from biomass and electronics.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1498
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 10:58:36 -
[1106] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Oh, now that's just hyperbole. I really don't think anyone is talking about the kind of consequences that cut your hitpoints in half for the rest of your character's life. I was using an extreme example to demonstrate why something being a choice to customize your character didn't inherently make that a good design. Although, replace "hitpoints" for "skill points" and you've almost described the attribute system. :) Quote:Attributes are meh. Yep.
Implants are not. They are a meaningful choice, and encourage decision making based on risk vs reward. (just because some people choose wrong and handcuff themselves is not reason to scrap that whole system) While I wouldn't want to paint my game design colleagues into a corner, I don't believe that implants are going anywhere. Only learning implants are in question. There have been suggestions in this thread and elsewhere that learning implants with flat learning speed bonuses might work in an attribute-free world. I think replacing learning speed implants with alternatives that encourage rather than discourage undocking is more likely, but I don't think anyone has yet come to any conclusions about what form that might take. If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.")
As a suggestion make attributes a flat increase in learning speed and remove the old mechanic completely. use the licencing system you have developed with skins for training implants, make them time limited, and linked to account in the same way.
They still need to be bought, and sought as drops then and we have the best of both worlds. The negative is it affects killboards online, but I am sure people are not so selfish that they would rather keep a poor system to pad their killboard
But as an alternative removing learning implants and the learning component of hardwires, whilst keeping hardwires is probably an equally good alternative. . Licencing would work well here too.
Create new time limited versions of the pirate implants to go with the existing ones (which retain their permanence ond preserve their value) to provide more choice and variety and available in more and new interesting ways, possibly player built. Keep permanent pirate implants available from their current sources.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
The Newface
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 16:09:24 -
[1107] - Quote
I really donGÇÖt get the problem.
You donGÇÖt HAVE to use learning implants. Only the most extreme MIN/MAX player would even think so. I have played for 8 years, multiple accounts and I have never plugged in lvl 5. I routinely run with lvl 3, thatGÇÖs about 45M ISK and compare to ships you lose your pod very rarely.
Taking learning implants away is dumbing down the game, im sorry but it seems almost the definition of dumbing it down. You donGÇÖt HAVE to use them, itGÇÖs a choice for the player, to GÇ£helpGÇ¥ players we want to remove the choice?
I just donGÇÖt get it, you can use the same argument for allot of aspects in EVE. GÇóHardwires GÇô you donGÇÖt HAVE to use them but you are better off if you do and you lose more ISK if you get podded. GÇóFaction ships GÇô you donGÇÖt HAVE to use them but youGÇÖre better off if you do and you lose more if you lose it. GÇóAnd so on.
Skill implants are a choice, you weigh it against the cost and the risk, thatGÇÖs whatGÇÖs EVE is about.
|
The Newface
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 16:17:59 -
[1108] - Quote
Oh btw, I think itGÇÖs important to remember that eve is not a GÇ£PVPGÇ¥ game, EVE is a (maybe the only) sandbox game. That means that your choices effect you and others around you.
We donGÇÖt need PvP for the sake of PvP, we need reasons beyond that. The reason need then to be countered by risk.
Anyway, for the once who say that you need to use lvl 5 implants please explain why? Do you also NEED all skills to lvl 5 or are you for some reason able to CHOSE what skills you need to undock?
|
Dave Stark
7384
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 16:19:53 -
[1109] - Quote
The Newface wrote:I really donGÇÖt get the problem.
You donGÇÖt HAVE to use learning implants. Only the most extreme MIN/MAX player would even think so. I have played for 8 years, multiple accounts and I have never plugged in lvl 5. I routinely run with lvl 3, thatGÇÖs about 45M ISK and compare to ships you lose your pod very rarely.
Taking learning implants away is dumbing down the game, im sorry but it seems almost the definition of dumbing it down. You donGÇÖt HAVE to use them, itGÇÖs a choice for the player, to GÇ£helpGÇ¥ players we want to remove the choice?
I just donGÇÖt get it, you can use the same argument for allot of aspects in EVE. GÇóHardwires GÇô you donGÇÖt HAVE to use them but you are better off if you do and you lose more ISK if you get podded. GÇóFaction ships GÇô you donGÇÖt HAVE to use them but youGÇÖre better off if you do and you lose more if you lose it. GÇóAnd so on.
Skill implants are a choice, you weigh it against the cost and the risk, thatGÇÖs whatGÇÖs EVE is about.
you don't HAVE to pvp either.
the issue with your examples vs learning implants are that hardwirings, faction ships, etc all give you a direct advantage in the situation where you put them at risk. (which is risk vs reward done right, perfect examples of it - especially hardwirings)
learning implants are only at risk in pvp (until red crosses start podding) and in that situation higher sp/hour gives you 0 benefit what so ever. it's that disconnect that means players just think "i don't need to pvp, so why bother risking my implants" rather than "sure i'll come on your drunken roam and generate some content". |
The Newface
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 16:46:37 -
[1110] - Quote
So do learning implants, I gain a little more skill points while I PvP. Sure my +3 implants wonGÇÖt help me kill any ships at that specific time but so wont my gunnery hardwire when I fly my Raven. So I have the choice, risk the hardwire anyway or use the methods available to me, jump clone to a clone without that hardwire. Same as I have with the skill implants.
The change wonGÇÖt change anything, next complain will be that the GÇ£good shipsGÇ¥ are to expansive, people have multiple account or something else. The only way to get people into more PvP is to give them reasons for it. If you just want to fight there are allot of other games out there.
PS. i dont own a raven, just a example |
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29947
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 17:03:24 -
[1111] - Quote
If you are explaining why the learning system sucks, the person is in denial. And will probably stay that way.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Dave Stark
7385
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 17:04:21 -
[1112] - Quote
but you don't need to be in pvp to gain a benefit from them that's the point [especially when you simply don't need to be in pvp at all] - as for hardwirings and things you do need to be in combat to gain any benefit (the same place they're at risk).
you can give people all the reasons under the sun to pvp, but if none of them mean more than their sp/hour - they would still rather dock up and log out than undock and shoot people. however with SP being disconnected from pretty much everything you interact with (it just accumulates, all the time) then there's pretty much never going to be a situation where pvping will mean more than their sp/hour unless they simply want to pvp. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29947
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 17:07:51 -
[1113] - Quote
most of the naysayers seem to admit it doesn't affect them, and then say some bit about an imaginary theme park.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
122
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 18:08:11 -
[1114] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:The Newface wrote:I really donGÇÖt get the problem.
You donGÇÖt HAVE to use learning implants. Only the most extreme MIN/MAX player would even think so. I have played for 8 years, multiple accounts and I have never plugged in lvl 5. I routinely run with lvl 3, thatGÇÖs about 45M ISK and compare to ships you lose your pod very rarely.
Taking learning implants away is dumbing down the game, im sorry but it seems almost the definition of dumbing it down. You donGÇÖt HAVE to use them, itGÇÖs a choice for the player, to GÇ£helpGÇ¥ players we want to remove the choice?
I just donGÇÖt get it, you can use the same argument for allot of aspects in EVE. GÇóHardwires GÇô you donGÇÖt HAVE to use them but you are better off if you do and you lose more ISK if you get podded. GÇóFaction ships GÇô you donGÇÖt HAVE to use them but youGÇÖre better off if you do and you lose more if you lose it. GÇóAnd so on.
Skill implants are a choice, you weigh it against the cost and the risk, thatGÇÖs whatGÇÖs EVE is about.
you don't HAVE to pvp either. the issue with your examples vs learning implants are that hardwirings, faction ships, etc all give you a direct advantage in the situation where you put them at risk. (which is risk vs reward done right, perfect examples of it - especially hardwirings) learning implants are only at risk in pvp (until red crosses start podding) and in that situation higher sp/hour gives you 0 benefit what so ever. it's that disconnect that means players just think "i don't need to pvp, so why bother risking my implants" rather than "sure i'll come on your drunken roam and generate some content".
Burner missions...lots of isk lost...I am sure that includes some of the most expensive implants in game...its PVE.
Again, if you want the benefit it is up to each player to make the choice for themselves.
Nothing wrong with how implants work, you are just exercising your choice to hide.
Accept it and move on. |
The Newface
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 18:24:32 -
[1115] - Quote
I guess IGÇÖm going to give up arguing this with a final reflection.
It seems most people who are for this suggestion is actually looking to make it easier/faster to get into big ships. I get the district feeling that these people would be happy if there were no skills at all.
There are many many games like that already, there is only one EVE though and I hope CCP understands how damaging this direction would be for the subscription rates.
The simpler a game is the less longevity it have, EVE is one of the oldest MMOGÇÖs and one of the reasons, a big one I believe is that you always have something to strive for and something to learn. Take that away and EVE will lose its appeal and yes I know, doom and gloom but I believe die.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29949
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 19:15:44 -
[1116] - Quote
The Newface wrote:I guess IGÇÖm going to give up arguing this with a final reflection.
It seems most people who are for this suggestion is actually looking to make it easier/faster to get into big ships. I get the district feeling that these people would be happy if there were no skills at all.
There are many many games like that already, there is only one EVE though and I hope CCP understands how damaging this direction would be for the subscription rates.
The simpler a game is the less longevity it have, EVE is one of the oldest MMOGÇÖs and one of the reasons, a big one I believe is that you always have something to strive for and something to learn. Take that away and EVE will lose its appeal and yes I know, doom and gloom but I believe die.
check yourself. some of the people in this discussion have everything trained, and are not lobbying in self interest.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Guttripper
State War Academy Caldari State
591
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 19:45:21 -
[1117] - Quote
After skimming through this thread...
..."new" players (and not another alt of a current player) are actually (attempt to) playing this ancient game??? |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 20:33:56 -
[1118] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Oh, now that's just hyperbole. I really don't think anyone is talking about the kind of consequences that cut your hitpoints in half for the rest of your character's life. I was using an extreme example to demonstrate why something being a choice to customize your character didn't inherently make that a good design. Although, replace "hitpoints" for "skill points" and you've almost described the attribute system. :) Quote:Attributes are meh. Yep.
Implants are not. They are a meaningful choice, and encourage decision making based on risk vs reward. (just because some people choose wrong and handcuff themselves is not reason to scrap that whole system) While I wouldn't want to paint my game design colleagues into a corner, I don't believe that implants are going anywhere. Only learning implants are in question. There have been suggestions in this thread and elsewhere that learning implants with flat learning speed bonuses might work in an attribute-free world. I think replacing learning speed implants with alternatives that encourage rather than discourage undocking is more likely, but I don't think anyone has yet come to any conclusions about what form that might take. If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.") As a suggestion make attributes a flat increase in learning speed and remove the old mechanic completely. use the licencing system you have developed with skins for training implants, make them time limited, and linked to account in the same way. They still need to be bought, and sought as drops then and we have the best of both worlds. The negative is it affects killboards online, but I am sure people are not so selfish that they would rather keep a poor system to pad their killboard But as an alternative removing learning implants and the learning component of hardwires, whilst keeping hardwires is probably an equally good alternative. . Licencing would work well here too. Create new time limited versions of the pirate implants to go with the existing ones (which retain their permanence ond preserve their value) to provide more choice and variety and available in more and new interesting ways, possibly player built. Keep permanent pirate implants available from their current sources.
This is a horrible idea. So you want to make it so that now the ONLY way to keep your training time up is to constantly keep buying temporary learning abilities? does anyone else think this is horrible?
|
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 20:42:11 -
[1119] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:Right... lets all fly around PVPing with no risk whatsoever other than the ship.... no thank you And why not? Isn't that risk enough? If you could scan for implants like you can scan for cargo, would anybody STOP to scan before attacking? You're judging each encounter by the ships you see in the overview, and you're shooting or bugging out based solely on that information. The value of the killmail is merely a (sometimes pleasant) surprise, a few hours after the fact. EVE PVP is driven by the ships (and by strategic goals), not by the implants. Regarding the question about incentivizing people to undock, if that's what you want CCP, then incentivize that directly. I did suggest giving SHIPS a skill training bonus as long as they're undocked in space, and got shot down because OMG everyone is going to afk cloak. That's still more exposure to PVP than remaining in station. But in any case, don't give the bonus to any ships that can cloak and people won't afk in them. Just give a big skill training bonus to T1 frigates (for the newbies), smaller bonuses to T1 cruisers (not so newbies), and then varying degrees of training bonus to other ships (T2, capital) as you see fit. Or give some other incentive, I don't know; I just think the issue is a bit like getting people to go to lowsec: subtle solutions won't work.
No the choice you make is weather or not you want to risk various levels of implants. for example I dabble in PVP extensively on another character in null. Some people never fly with more than +2 but I personally always fly with at least +4's in. does it cost more when i die? sure but that's my choice. Also this whole giving ships bonus.. you're kidding right? So the only way people can get bonuses is by being undocked... I can see 1000's of t1 frigs sitting cloaked in space all day.
One of the great things about eve is that I never have to worry about training while i'm away on vacation or away for a long weekend. Any mechanic that FORCES me to log into the game for training is an awful idea. It's the exact reason I hate WOW LOTR and every other mmo out there. |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 20:49:19 -
[1120] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Oh, now that's just hyperbole. I really don't think anyone is talking about the kind of consequences that cut your hitpoints in half for the rest of your character's life. I was using an extreme example to demonstrate why something being a choice to customize your character didn't inherently make that a good design. Although, replace "hitpoints" for "skill points" and you've almost described the attribute system. :) Quote:Attributes are meh. Yep.
Implants are not. They are a meaningful choice, and encourage decision making based on risk vs reward. (just because some people choose wrong and handcuff themselves is not reason to scrap that whole system) While I wouldn't want to paint my game design colleagues into a corner, I don't believe that implants are going anywhere. Only learning implants are in question. There have been suggestions in this thread and elsewhere that learning implants with flat learning speed bonuses might work in an attribute-free world. I think replacing learning speed implants with alternatives that encourage rather than discourage undocking is more likely, but I don't think anyone has yet come to any conclusions about what form that might take. If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.")
This would be a very difficult situation to deal with due to difficulty determining where you set the universal learning speed at. It seems like a serious punch in the gut of anyone who trained cybernetics to V and is using +5's if their learning speed is nerfed at all. At the same time it would be equally insulting if everyone got boosted up to their learning speed level. Personally I don't see a good way to remove the learning implants although I already made a post earlier in this thread how they could be improved with no remaps and doubling the effect of the implants. One way which was already discussed was if jumpcloning was reduced to a much shorter time period for in station clone swaps. say 2 hours or so. That would encourage much more people to participate in PVP as they would no longer be "stuck" in their expensive skulls. |
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1078
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:04:19 -
[1121] - Quote
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:It seems like a serious punch in the gut of anyone who trained cybernetics to V and is using +5's if their learning speed is nerfed at all. At the same time it would be equally insulting if everyone got boosted up to their learning speed level.
I don't agree at all that these two choices would be equally annoying to players.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:14:27 -
[1122] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:It seems like a serious punch in the gut of anyone who trained cybernetics to V and is using +5's if their learning speed is nerfed at all. At the same time it would be equally insulting if everyone got boosted up to their learning speed level. I don't agree at all that these two choices would be equally annoying to players.
So I'm assuming that one of the possible options which is being considered is boosting everyone up to "perfect mapping" and making that the flat rate is being considered. If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
217
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:14:46 -
[1123] - Quote
It's all about getting players to log in, it's all about getting players to stay around. So let's see how we can affect the game that could change that. We need to keep players active, interested and sticking around. IsnGÇÖt it best first to admit that there is a fairly high number of players in EVE that have zero interest in PVP. No matter what the hell you do with game mechanics, these people will never change their mind. They would rather quit EVE than take part in PVP so they stay in an NPC corp and love the game just as much as we do. So CCPGǪGǪ. Active, Interested and sticking around. Ah the very same problem every single CEO in EVE faces. How the hell do I keep these assholes logged in, interested and sticking around? I tried the, hey, hereGÇÖs free skill books, hereGÇÖs free ships, now letGÇÖs get the feck off station and go **** the locals off. PVP guys go yay \0/ industrial and PVE guys go really? Do we have too? I say yes! Come on, youGÇÖll have a laugh with the lads. So the lads show up, yup all of them, they listen and do a good job, have a great laugh, they even get a kill or 2. Some of them get into PVP some donGÇÖt. So it kind of worked a little. Do they all gain an interest in PVP? No, Not any more than they need too because they are being pushed into it. I even covered pod loss costs. It didnGÇÖt matter even a little. Bottom line, some will love it, some will hate it. Those that hate it will fight if pushed but will revert back to PVE/Indy the second you stop pushing them. You can dress a duck up as an Eagle but that fecker is gonna quack and head for the nearest water the second you take your eyes of him. ItGÇÖs unrealistic to think everyone who joins EVE will love PVP and it will keep them in game forever. Some will wander into EVE, have a laugh for a year or so and leave. Some will wander in and have a horrible time and leave in a very short time. No different than every single game out there. This idea to remove attributes and implants may work short term. I have very little faith in it working long term. Perhaps CCP taking a very active roll online in game. Lots of epic live events for newbs and bitter vets alike. Perhaps this whole Caroline star event is leading towards more of that. |
Reelin Antollare
Secret CONCORD
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:28:01 -
[1124] - Quote
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants.
Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1366
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:30:22 -
[1125] - Quote
Reelin Antollare wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan. Why is planning for a long term return inherently bad? |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:43:18 -
[1126] - Quote
Reelin Antollare wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan.
When training any type of capital alt it makes a lot of sense to use +5's considering you're going to be training for at least a year to sit in the thing. 2 years if you want to REALLY be able to fly it (near max tank/ fitting/ drone/ gun/ nav skills etc.) |
Dave Stark
7389
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 22:03:10 -
[1127] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Reelin Antollare wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan. Why is planning for a long term return inherently bad?
because you're not getting a long term return, you're just picking what you want to train slowly.
we've been over this point.
the system just lets you pick a punishment - that's a bad system. something is going to have to train slowly, you just get to pick what it is. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1367
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 22:10:59 -
[1128] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Reelin Antollare wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan. Why is planning for a long term return inherently bad? because you're not getting a long term return, you're just picking what you want to train slowly. we've been over this point. the system just lets you pick a punishment - that's a bad system. something is going to have to train slowly, you just get to pick what it is. But you are getting a return in that you train less slowly. It doesn't bypass training, nor speed it to a great degree; that I can agree with. But if there is no return, why are you doing it? Furthermore why are you altering your gameplay to maintain this lack of return? Why did you alter training for it in the first place? |
Circumstantial Evidence
168
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 22:36:21 -
[1129] - Quote
CCP doesn't reimburse SP very often, usually responding that players received value for time spent, up to the point of the change. Game mechanics may change going forward, but past investments in time or isk weren't "wasted." |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
84
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 22:36:46 -
[1130] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Reelin Antollare wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan. Why is planning for a long term return inherently bad? because you're not getting a long term return, you're just picking what you want to train slowly. we've been over this point. the system just lets you pick a punishment - that's a bad system. something is going to have to train slowly, you just get to pick what it is. But you are getting a return in that you train less slowly. It doesn't bypass training, nor speed it to a great degree; that I can agree with. But if there is no return, why are you doing it? Furthermore why are you altering your gameplay to maintain this lack of return? Why did you alter training for it in the first place? Edit: Also, I haven't looked over your posts but your reasoning is a bit confusing in that it applies to the basic idea of a real time training system even without the details EvE's skill system adds. That being the case I have to ask what about implants makes your objection more pertinent to this than a system without them?
I am equally confused what he is trying to say. From the sounds of it he is reasoning the only reason to train cybernetics V is for the high-grade ship implants. |
|
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
84
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 22:39:46 -
[1131] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:CCP doesn't reimburse SP very often, usually responding that players received value for time spent, up to the point of the change. Game mechanics may change going forward, but past investments in time or isk weren't "wasted."
True. And if you trained Cybernetics V for the high-grade implants then no your time would not be wasted. However if you only trained it for the +5's then yes it would be. It would be simple for CCP to just refund the SP needed to train cybernetics from IV to V. Then if you wanted the skillpoints for the high-grades you just reapply them. If you only got it for the +5's you can just re delegate them to something else. It's actually a simple solution. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
407
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 23:14:00 -
[1132] - Quote
you train cybernetics v because the shame of being such a poor you don't have the +5% version of any hardwiring worth plugging in is horrible
well, back to polishing the officer mods on my titan |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
84
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 23:23:11 -
[1133] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:you train cybernetics v because the shame of being such a poor you don't have the +5% version of any hardwiring worth plugging in is horrible
well, back to polishing the officer mods on my titan
Thank you for contributing nothing to the discussion. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
408
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 23:35:38 -
[1134] - Quote
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:EvilweaselFinance wrote:you train cybernetics v because the shame of being such a poor you don't have the +5% version of any hardwiring worth plugging in is horrible
well, back to polishing the officer mods on my titan Thank you for contributing nothing to the discussion. oh please carry on the eight millionth "ccp made a change to the game that affected what skills I would have trained, give me a refund" which will get denied for the same reason as every other one: the skill wasn't removed |
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3844
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 23:52:15 -
[1135] - Quote
I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.
The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Circumstantial Evidence
168
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 23:57:46 -
[1136] - Quote
For any change, the developers have to draw a line somewhere. If you have received +5 learning implant benefits longer than the training time, you got a benefit for time spent.
If you received less or no use of +5 learning implants prior to their removal, and weren't aware of this rumored change, then you would have some right to feel left out. But in looking at this thread, word is getting out. It started end of January, and is pushing over 250 unique posters with an awesome 25 from CCP Darwin, proving that they are considering this player feedback. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29950
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 00:05:35 -
[1137] - Quote
I'm not stuck on the absolute rate of SP, only relative. If the max rate is the only rate, that's fine. It would be liberating.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1367
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 00:26:20 -
[1138] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I'm not stuck on the absolute rate of SP, only relative. If the max rate is the only rate, that's fine. It would be liberating. I can't really disagree with that idea, but as a system it seems lacking. It removes any interaction with the system itself aside from building a sequential list, even if that interaction is a source of consternation for some. |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1080
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 00:37:47 -
[1139] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:This idea to remove attributes and implants may work short term. I have very little faith in it working long term. I'm not a game designer (sorry I keep repeating this) but I can say with certainty that we're not making changes to manipulate players into staying with the game longer. We make changes to improve the game while retaining its unique character.
(Slippery-slope arguments notwithstanding, EVE's unique character is what has attracted many of us to CCP, and, for those of us who have moved to Iceland from elsewhere, it's what keeps us in this beautiful but formidable country. We're not going to gamble that unique character away to improve our metrics.)
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Tetsel
Heretic Army Overload Everything
154
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 01:03:40 -
[1140] - Quote
I'm a dumb pilot and I totally don't get the attribute/skill relationship back in the day, I lost a lot of SP/h because of that, forget to remap before changing my skill plan etc etcGǪ I didn't invest in implant cause I thought it was better to stack useless iskies instead of skilling fasterGǪ I made mistake cause I didn't pay enough attention to "Skills how it works" and I paid the priceGǪ That's what EVE is all about, remove those attribute/implant is just reducing player choice of what they can do, and simplify the game for those lazy whiners who don't want to learn how to master it.
Stoopid idea to get in more "lazy" players that used to think EVE was too difficult. It's all about $$$ and nothing with "better player experience"
My 2 isk
Loyal servent to Mother Amamake.
@EVE_Tetsel
Another Bittervet Please Ignore
|
|
Kenneth Endashi
Atomic Pharmaceuticals
46
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 01:30:52 -
[1141] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:This idea to remove attributes and implants may work short term. I have very little faith in it working long term. I'm not a game designer (sorry I keep repeating this) but I can say with certainty that we're not making changes to manipulate players into staying with the game longer. We make changes to improve the game while retaining its unique character. (Slippery-slope arguments notwithstanding, EVE's unique character is what has attracted many of us to CCP, and, for those of us who have moved to Iceland from elsewhere, it's what keeps us in this beautiful but formidable country. We're not going to gamble that unique character away to improve our metrics.)
There are a lot of people who would love to be in the same position you folks are in. It's nice to know that after 11 years, CCP still hasn't flipped the pay-to-win switch and turned the game into an ATM. It's rewarding for everyone when you hold to that concept, from the roleplaying capsuleer to the role developers play in pursuit of a shared ideal. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29951
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 01:34:10 -
[1142] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Rain6637 wrote:I'm not stuck on the absolute rate of SP, only relative. If the max rate is the only rate, that's fine. It would be liberating. I can't really disagree with that idea, but as a system it seems lacking. It removes any interaction with the system itself aside from building a sequential list, even if that interaction is a source of consternation for some. I said that knowing CCP is not going to remove learning implants. They're available for everyone, so the mechanic is accessible, and rather quickly. On top of that, Cybernetics has other uses beyond learning implants.
No way they're uprooting learning implants. The industry, the gameplay, depth of the mechanic. It's the unnatural bits that need to be ironed out.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
181
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 03:43:12 -
[1143] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote:The problem with learning implants is that they don't contribute to in game activities. Having them active means you are less likely to be doing something else which other people can interact with. So when I'm in my +5 learning I'm not in my snakes, or industry, or whatever else.
Encouraging people into learning clones rather than 'interacting' clones is bad game design. Thats not the implants that entirely down to you. True but why promote a feature that makes people chose inactivity for a large percentage of the playerbase? If the option for attribute implants didn't exist people wouldn't get themselfs locked in "in the wrong clone" in the first place.
That is the way consequence works. In RL and in game. Implants are a choice, and should never be considered for removal. With that being said, a newb does need implants at all...most skills they need while learning how to actually play in their first 30-90 days take as much as 4 days to reach lv4 each without them. Having implants does not make you less interactable.....the player mentatlity of "I want to play and be left alone to do so" is the problem with that question. It is a problem because EvE is a game based on someone ruining your day just because they can or because some how you have become a problem without knowing your a problem or do not fit in with their group..yet.
Also the higher cost of some implants......like +5's you do not really need them unless your a veteran and skilling some long time skill. For example i have a research toon that is planned to learn her science skills from 4 to 5 each....359 days total...with +5's installed. So do not go on about (those of you that do) removing implants for the sake of the newb.......you are not helping them but instead trying to gimp veterans that do use them and can afford them because they are vets.
Now as to attributes themselves. Instead of removing them, besides increasing SP slightly the higher they are for what ever category why not make them more useful instead. Perception for example as in most table top RPG games helps tremendously with combat related skills, being able to track movement better, notice things easier than others, being able to hit a moving target much easier than the next guy.
Perception should have a noticable combat related mechanic for higher attribute score.....then say the next guy.
The person with really high Charisma should have bonus to how their Fleet command skills and links work as well.
just my 2 cents. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29952
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 03:59:36 -
[1144] - Quote
You don't have to explain consequence, we know what it is. The problem with this particular consequence is the prevailing logic that makes most players stay inside, and EVE is less active as a result.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
181
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 04:05:17 -
[1145] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:You don't have to explain consequence, we know what it is. The problem with this particular consequence is the prevailing logic that makes most players stay inside, and EVE is less active as a result.
Which is by result the same logic such players use in RL to avoid conflict.....whether its abuse by law enforcement, their friend being beaten to death at a bar, or the next door neighbor getting robbed.........they still will never undock. |
Wolf Kruol
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
71
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 04:16:56 -
[1146] - Quote
CCP do not nerf implant attribute related bonuses.. I'll be pi$$ed off if you touch that. It takes me forever to train lvl 5 skills.. If people don't like them then they don't need to use them. I like my cyborg enhanced brain, because implant % benefits gives that bit of edge. For the attributes +'s Helps knock off a day or two or more. No touchy got it CCP!
[b]GÇ£If you're very very stupid? How can you possibly realize you're very very stupid?
You have to be relatively intelligent to realize how stupid you really are!GÇ¥[/b]
|
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1409
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 04:20:39 -
[1147] - Quote
To be honest I almost never bother with the learning implants except maybe plugin a beta if I got it for free as they are barely worth selling.
The reason ? Not cost - you can make enough ISK for a set of +4s in an hour or two. The reason is playing the EVE SP minigame is kind of pointless and a really detrimental habit to get into.
I do however happily plug in skill hard-wirings. Regardless of PvP or PvE skill hard-wiring implants pay for themselves almost immediately. |
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
266
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 04:42:20 -
[1148] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Why is planning for a long term return inherently bad? because you're not getting a long term return, you're just picking what you want to train slowly. we've been over this point. the system just lets you pick a punishment - that's a bad system. something is going to have to train slowly, you just get to pick what it is. Your logic is flawed. You have Choices as it is. You can Remap, and get a boost to training specific skills, at the cost of a considerable reduction in other skills. OR You can keep a neutral map, be it the default one, or remaping once to free up the Charisma points. This gives you a reasonable speed training any skill, but no super fast on one specific type.
This is Fully reasonable, and Logical. If you want the speed for specific skills, you have to have a drawback, which is diminished time on the other ones.
This alt here lives by the remap.. mostly.. I'm always Int/Mem or Percep/Will. But the rest of my alts live under the neutral map (less Charisma). Does it make a difference? Yes, is it HUGE and game ending that I'm not getting perfect speed? Nope. It means that I can freely change skills without a second thought. If I'm on this toon, I have to seriously consider if that skill it worth being off remap to train. Other ones, no hesitation.
It works just fine, I have the free will to make my choice. I'm never FORCED to remap, it's just an option available to me. Same way I'm never FORCED to put in hardwires.. sure it may boost damage, or speed, or whatever, but that's a risk/reward choice. Same way remaps are.
As I've said before, and I'll say again. Better feedback to new players about remaps and how they work, combined with some way in game to gain more remaps so we are not slaves to yearly cycles. Then it's no longer a trap, and just as implants are now, nothing more than a choice with pro's, con's, and a Price. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29952
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 04:51:37 -
[1149] - Quote
Max Deveron wrote:Rain6637 wrote:You don't have to explain consequence, we know what it is. The problem with this particular consequence is the prevailing logic that makes most players stay inside, and EVE is less active as a result. Which is by result the same logic such players use in RL to avoid conflict.....whether its abuse by law enforcement, their friend being beaten to death at a bar, or the next door neighbor getting robbed.........they still will never undock. If I got locked into my pajamas for 18 hours whenever I wanted to wear them to sleep, I probably wouldn't go out as much or to as many places. If I got locked into professional clothes for 18 hours whenever I wanted to go outside, I would probably be uncomfortable when I slept in them.
So what's the solution here: let me swap in and out of my clothes when I'm at home (docked). That way my sleep activities don't influence my awake activities.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1368
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 05:05:31 -
[1150] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:To be honest I almost never bother with the learning implants except maybe plugin a beta if I got it for free as they are barely worth selling.
The reason ? Not cost - you can make enough ISK for a set of +4s in an hour or two. The reason is playing the EVE SP minigame is kind of pointless and a really detrimental habit to get into.
I do however happily plug in skill hard-wirings. Regardless of PvP or PvE skill hard-wiring implants pay for themselves almost immediately. An interesting position, I always found implants to be a pretty uninteresting minigame since they were pretty set and forget. Less like a game and more like Free SP for the taking. |
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1171
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 07:28:53 -
[1151] - Quote
99% of the posts are "I must maximise because of :reasons: but I don't like the downsides of this so instead of making an informed decision and accepting possible consequences to my choices I'll go whine about how CCP should just remove consequences and choice altogether, and I'll use amazing explanations for it to make that sound logical in a game like EVE".
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29953
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 08:20:50 -
[1152] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:99% of the posts are "I must maximise because of :reasons: but I don't like the downsides of this so instead of making an informed decision and accepting possible consequences to my choices I'll go whine about how CCP should just remove consequences and choice altogether, and I'll use amazing explanations for it to make that sound logical in a game like EVE".
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.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1172
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 08:46:50 -
[1153] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:99% of the posts are "I must maximise because of :reasons: but I don't like the downsides of this so instead of making an informed decision and accepting possible consequences to my choices I'll go whine about how CCP should just remove consequences and choice altogether, and I'll use amazing explanations for it to make that sound logical in a game like EVE".
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.
No, the reality is that people who want to whine for change do so on the forums, the ones who are ok with it mostly don't come to the forums. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
122
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 08:58:16 -
[1154] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Rain6637 wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:99% of the posts are "I must maximise because of :reasons: but I don't like the downsides of this so instead of making an informed decision and accepting possible consequences to my choices I'll go whine about how CCP should just remove consequences and choice altogether, and I'll use amazing explanations for it to make that sound logical in a game like EVE".
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. No, the reality is that people who want to whine for change do so on the forums, the ones who are ok with it mostly don't come to the forums.
Yup, people are more inclined to shout out about something they dislike, rather than what they like.
To take any decisive action purely based on a forum poll, would be extremely unwise and unjust towards the silent vast majority who are quite happy.
"Lykouleon wrote:
STOP
TOUCHING
ICONIC
SHIP
PARTS"
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3847
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 09:27:33 -
[1155] - Quote
Dradis Aulmais wrote:In before the lock It took a while. But as the discussion is going around in circles for about the last ten to fifteen pages and no real new insights are being added to this discussion, I can safely say that this thread has run its course.
Thread locked.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
|
|
|
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] |