|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Khrillian
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
   |
Posted - 2009.02.11 19:05:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
Originally by: Hieronimus Rex
Could you post some maths/calculations to give us some idea of how bad it really is for new players? I'm just surprised that moving from 9/9/9/9/3 to 9/9/8/8/5 makes such a huge difference.
9/9/8/8/5 trains better all around than my characters 
I think the bit that bothers him is the drop in starting sp, and implied uselessness of new characters.
I dunno all of the bold caps nerdrage stuff was about how now it's better to train learning first & keep your character untouched for 3 months instead of 1. I just don't see this happening under the assumption that you'll only play for a year.
Plus, training learning skills is risky. If you quit EVE before the break-even point you never recover the loss, and even if you quit EVE a bit after the break-even point, you might have been better off enjoying the game early.
|
Khrillian
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 19:43:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Khrillian
Plus, training learning skills is risky. If you quit EVE before the break-even point you never recover the loss, and even if you quit EVE a bit after the break-even point, you might have been better off enjoying the game early.
Training them at twice the speed makes them far less risky, though, since the break-even point is pushed quite a lot closerą
What? Less investment in learning means a sooner break even point. "Break even" is when time you spend on learning skills + regular skills = the time you would have spent on regular skills had you not trained learning. In the trivial case, where time spent on learning is 0, the break even point is now. As you train more and more learning the break even point extends further into the future.
Suppose it takes you 1 year to break even on 1 month of learning and it takes 3 years to break even on 2 months of learning. If you quit after six months, you take a huge hit if you trained learning for 1-2 months.
|
Khrillian
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:28:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Khrillian
What? Less investment in learning means a sooner break even point. "Break even" is when time you spend on learning skills + regular skills = the time you would have spent on regular skills had you not trained learning. In the trivial case, where time spent on learning is 0, the break even point is now. As you train more and more learning the break even point extends further into the future.
Yes? Like I said ł it makes them less risky since the break-even point is pushed closer.
lol disregard that for some reason i read "twice the speed" as "twice the number of learning skills" or something like that 
|
|
|
| |
|