I think you're on the right path.

I actually find attributes interesting - I just don't think they're consistent. I think there's a lot to gain by splitting them into "combat" and "non-combat" first and then prioritizing attributes based on that. Combat would notionally be Per/Wil early and Wil/Per as you advanced; Non-Combat would be Int/Mem early and Mem/Int late. For "crossover" and "core" skills, we'd push them to the "max" training rate (conceivably +5s with maximum attributes rate - maybe these become a separate attribute if that's what the code needs).

Oh, and remove Charisma from skills. Every skill that had Charisma should belong in "crossover", Combat, or Non-Combat. It's a simple system then, and it lets people still make the decision of implants versus no implants (a decision I believe has value). You want combat - get your two implants. Want non-combat - get your two implants. Want to work on your core skills, leadership skills, etc. - the crux of multiplayer and new player - get them quickly at max rate so you can provide content.

For the charisma slot - I think you could put a default rate increase implant into clones by default, and then change the charisma implants to also include this exact same rate increase. Essentially a "null" implant, and something you unplug and replace for sets of implants (perhaps an opportunities opportunity - a known state of having an implant in). Refund the market cost as current for these to anyone who has then plugged in. This also gives CCP a lever if they decide overall SP is being gained too quickly or too slowly.

Ultimately, I think a lot of the frustration is inconsistent attribute allocations for combat pilots. If I want to combat probe, have a t2 tank, anchor bubbles, fly faster as a combat pilot those all require charimsa, intelligence, or memory. There is no way I can be efficient without training across all 5 attributes.

That would require them to know what they want, to be knowledgeable about any activity in the game. Henceforth, this would require a lot of text to read and information to digest. I doubt that newbies, who apparently can't even be asked to train a couple of hours worth of skills to "start the game", will be able to use this.

You should not base your idea on your experience of "starting a toon". You know what you want to do. Newbies (in most cases) do not. They are overwhelmed by the already existing plethora of opportunities, possibilities and information hammering them. Your 4 categories (and here it already starts to get messy) aren't really covering all the things or are too broad. Where are the Explorers? They are not strictly combat, not strictly Harvesting. Traders? They sell industry and harvesting goods, but need none of their skills. They are too special to put them under the JOATs and don't really fit into the other categories without lots of explanations.

You do not need advance weapon upgrades to fit ships properly. You need AWU lvl 3-5 for some high skilled tight fits, that a rookie won't be able to fly anyway. Well not well, unless you need just another null blob that needs more f1 monkeys.

One of the things i enjoyed doing was turning these "master fits" into cheaper and often almost as good fits for my skills. Places like bombers bar and Spectre have a ranges of fits for bombers for the lower skilled pilot, and yet your only looking at a 10% DPS nurf or so compared to the L33T fits.

That is the problem... The dogma that unless your ships does at least 500DPS/100kEHP sort of thing you shouldn't fly. That is just stupid. How often is 10kEHP really going to matter in a fleet? And even solo, the point is you... YOU. You deal with the imperfections of the character. Low SP pilots can and do do well, when they just get out there and get it done.

bonus skill points won't change other players DOGMA.

Actually, the entire community of Eve coerces the use of +5 implants by demanding SP levels to be met in order to join a corp/alliance. Many corps/alliances and activities demand capability to be able to fly and fit certain ships, in certain ways, etc. etc..

While they do not come out and directly say "you need +5s", the demand for SP requirements to be met, and the general understanding that SP determines worth and/or capability within Eve, fosters an importance towards the gain of SP, which in turn subliminally suggests the importance of +5 implants.

At a certain point in time this no longer becomes the case... Take me for example, I have almost 60 mil SP and most of what I have trained is everything I want. As it sits now, the skills I'm currently training are to simply give me more options and/or optimize certain capabilities. However, due to my early development, I still have a mentality of optimizing my training times, therefore, I leave +5 implants in as much as possible.
That said, I will every once in a while, jump into a clone without implants. However, once the jump CD is gone, I immediately got back into my +5 clone, which often times leaves me stranded in a clone when someone suggests we go do something risky...

I don't care about my hardwiring implants because Eve and the player base haven't caused the development of "need" into those, so I would likely take those risks with those implants still in my head, just because I don't really care about them.
Hell, if I lost them, I'd probably start flying around with 3% implants, just cause I don't need them.

But as I've said, the game and the player base have fostered a mentality that SP attainment, and thus attribute implants, are the most important aspect of Eve.

Remove these implants and attributes as a whole, give all players a base SP/hr that cannot be modified, and suddenly one of the largest causes and/or excuses of risk averse behavior is gone.

At 4 years, such a +5 character has maybe gained 4-5 months over a character that only uses +3 implants all the time. (1 month per 408 days of this plan, no remap from the standard)

With another plan that is a bit more closer to what people might train, such a person also gains barely a month over a character with +3s.

Now, there is a difference, obviously; however, it is by far not as large as people depict it. It takes ~12 years (maybe 10 if I factor in remaps) of sitting in a +5 to gain a full year over a +3 character.
If a person sits this long in a +5, just to get the skills a couple of days per month, a month per year, a couple of months per half a decade faster, by all means let them ruin their game. If these people complain about how boring the game is, by all means show them their failure. If a person in +3s is complaining about how slow skill training is, suggest them to use +5s but also visualize to them what they risk if they continue their current path of action (maybe that person was already active in low sec and is merrily shooting stuff) and/or what they are going to lose in terms of action/activity/content if they confine themselves to High sec for just a couple of days difference.

I am now 4 years old, and I have reached a point where I do nothing more but hone what I already know in terms of skills and can do nothing else but to branch out into other races (I used to be quite Amarr focused), but now I have trained almost everything that Amarr has to offer. This is 6 more years of training until he has such a lead over me. And by then, it does not matter at all anymore if I can fly 3 carriers and he 4.

The potential comes with more risk. If you undock in that pod and die in High sec to a ganker, which is more likely these days than ever before, you lost hundreds of millions. By keeping these implants safe in a station, however, you also lose out on a lot of action and make your game experience less enjoyable (depending on your needs and ambitions). There are more risks to the game than just losing stuff. Which means, by forcing yourself to a fast training, you consciously bar yourself from the game itself and confine yourself into an unsatisfying existence.

Negative.

Risk is not the wooden leg.

It all sits behind the key board. You can have a Nerf bat contest, and they still wont.

it all has to do with 'losing' and someone keeping track of it.

they show up to play a game trying not to lose.

hmm not sure yet, but the best would be if corporations could invite the rookies in-space, perhaps some new beacon rookies can intuitively warp to

Your Tournament thing made me think of the space race episode from Stargate SG-1.

For a NPE on navigation, you could get a bunch of new player, or players with npcs. give them beacons to hit in any order spread across a few systems in the noob constellation. Then let them race each other to get the beacons the fastest. Reward them with a T1 meta prop mod, or nav skill book.

Don't let them use auto pilot, and make a "opportunity" that intros them to the map and zoom in zoom out first so they can do some basic route planning if they want.

My assumption is that people seem to complain about not having fun because they are stuck in their +5s. That is the essence more or less of the 20 previous pages and that this is a problem for some people. A person who goes to low or null sec right on day one or day three shouldn't care about these either. Firstly, because they are too expensive for them to use; secondly because it is a waste of 20 days of skill training and simply does not pay off until years later, if at all; thirdly because they waste their skill training time that ought to be invested in actually useful skills instead.

I do not care about whether they have fun in High sec with their +5s because I do not care about +5s. I have never cared about them and will never. I train my skills with a nice speed already. I do not particularly worry about my +3s either, even though I take lots of precautions to not lose my pods often. I was under the assumption that I had made that clear on the last 20+ pages, but apparently that wasn't the case. So again: I do not care about whether people train faster or slower than me. I train at an adequate speed. I am happy with the situation right as it is. This is how everyone should see the game.

That seems like a bad idea.
It forces the player to benefit the alliance, and serves no benefit to the individual, especially in the case a newbros, which need a way to make isk.

There's a good chance the corp would force the newbro into an ewar meta/fit as opposed to something that would benefit them as an individual.