These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Mining Barge SP Reimbursement

First post First post
Author
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#281 - 2013-02-11 21:36:30 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:

OK, see, that second point is a good one that shows the absurdity of the skills in the first place. I actually quit my first time around solely because of those skills and doing the math behind them. It was ridiculous. And yeah, no reimbursement for those who hadn't been training for over two years would have had disasterous results. I'd probably argue that alone was the reason for the reimbursement over anything else, not losing an advantage... which comes to why I disagree with your first point. When you train faster, you get more SP, which ends up being the whole reason you'd want to train faster, so you can get more skills. And those that trained over the two years? They got more skills than those who prefered not to put up with that absurdity. No matter how you swing it, that's an advantage and one that was gained through the skill.

You are still ignoring the point of continuing to get more SP. This was their value. You didn't train them just to get a quick chunk of SP (at least not until the change was announced). You trained them for continued accelerated progress through the skill tree. The actual count of their SP benefit was a moving number which would have continued to increase had they not been negated and removed. Again the advantage cannot be raw SP because the raw SP benefit was not static over time.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#282 - 2013-02-11 21:46:09 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:

OK, see, that second point is a good one that shows the absurdity of the skills in the first place. I actually quit my first time around solely because of those skills and doing the math behind them. It was ridiculous. And yeah, no reimbursement for those who hadn't been training for over two years would have had disasterous results. I'd probably argue that alone was the reason for the reimbursement over anything else, not losing an advantage... which comes to why I disagree with your first point. When you train faster, you get more SP, which ends up being the whole reason you'd want to train faster, so you can get more skills. And those that trained over the two years? They got more skills than those who prefered not to put up with that absurdity. No matter how you swing it, that's an advantage and one that was gained through the skill.

You are still ignoring the point of continuing to get more SP. This was their value. You didn't train them just to get a quick chunk of SP (at least not until the change was announced). You trained them for continued accelerated progress through the skill tree. The actual count of their SP benefit was a moving number which would have continued to increase had they not been negated and removed. Again the advantage cannot be raw SP because the raw SP benefit was not static over time.


Not ignoring anything, I just say it had more value than what you say it does. That wasn't training wasn't even an advantage at all until after the two year mark since you essentially got the same amount as them during that period. An advantage isn't an advantage until you gain over someone else because that's exactly what an advantage is, what you have over someone else. They still continued to have more over someone else who didn't train it and played for the same time if over two years, thus they still had an advantage over them.
Rebecha Pucontis
Doomheim
#283 - 2013-02-11 22:23:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Rebecha Pucontis
Your reasoning -

Arduemont wrote:
Right. Let's get this done shall we? The following are all very good reasons NOT to reimburse the skills. I will detail them all in individual sections for ease of reading and understanding, and it you want to counter them, then feel free to try in a logical fashion. These are not reasons you do not "require" a SP change, these are reasons that SP reimbursal would have a genuine negative effect on the game.



Flavour of the Month

Flavour of the Month is a way of saying that certain ships in the game are OP in some way and that people, for obvious reasons, tend to use the ships and equipment that are the best. So what happens is people congregate towards using the stuff that is likely to get nerffed. If you refund skill points you compound this problem, because people are then able to use said skill points to move towards the new flavour of the month, ie, the new things which will need to be nerffed. Because there will be more people moving to it than there would be without the skill refunds you end up compounding the problem so it gets worse faster, which leads to earlier nerfs, which leads to more SP reimbursal, which leads to earlier nerfs, etc etc until CCP can no longer keep up with the changes and you have an ultimately broken game. You will probably argue that people wont get enough SPs back to see any meaningful change like this, but that is not true, and I will cover that in a later section.

Too Many Skillpoints

Let's take this time to examine how many skill points people would be able to get back. If you want a reimbursement for your Orca, then it's only fair that everyone else get reimbursements where the same phenomenon has occurred. I am a 2009 player, and I will be using my skill sheet as an example;

I use Recon ships, and Heavy Assault Cruisers, so I expect a refund on the Assault Ship and Covert Ops skills because I don't need them and never use them. Also, I use heavy Interdictors but I don't use interceptors or destroyer sized Interdictors, so I expect to get the Interceptor and Interdictor skills refunded. I would also like all my mining barge levels reimbursed because I do not need them for my Orca. I fly command ships but not logistics, so I expect my logistics skills refunded. I also expect the Battleship 4s and 5s refunded because I don't fly Battleships, I go straight from BCs to Carriers. Also, I need as refund on Evasive maneuvering V because I don't need that for my Heavy Interdictor, but I had to train it. Now it's not a requirement. Also, I don't need Long Range Targeting for my Command ships, so I want that reimbursed. Oh! Don't forget to refund me Electronics Upgrades 5, I certainly don't need that for my Electronic Attack Ships. blah blah blah blah.

Now, you'll point out that many of those are silly request. But, frankly so is getting your skills back from the Orca. Where exactly do you draw the line? With all the above skills refunded I could probably pop myself straight into ALL of the new flavour of the months. Hell everyone could move so that all Eve players ONLY used the broken OP ships with this kind of change.

Less Meaningful Consequences

Eve is a game where what you do actually matters and effects your (and other people's) game play. What you train and what your character can do is a big part of that. If your just letting people undo their little mistakes you take away from what is a fundamental part of this game. Consequences. People play Eve for it's realism, and for it's harsh environment. This is not Helly Kitty Online, everything is NOT going to work out alright in the end. And that is what a lot of people love about this game. Frankly, if you want to remove that aspect from the game, perhaps you should be playing something that doesn't have that already. Star Trek online is comparitively free of consequences. Maybe you should try that.

CCP Employee Time and Pay

Working out who is genuine and who is not, would be impossible. As such CCP would have to be reimburse everyone for all their requests. Now, by everyone... I mean literally everyone. Who isn't going to want to take advantage of what is essentially a chance to get bazillions of skill points back on all the things they don't use very much anymore? That's a rhetorical question by the way. Now, CCP don't have enough GMs to do this AND answer all our petitions etc. Which means they would need to hire more, or fire some devs, or relocate them. Either way, that means that there are less devs working on our awesome expansions because someone wanted some skillpoints back.



I could probably go on forever like this. Every one of the above points is enough reason to not reimburse skill points on it's own. Frankly, unless you can solve all of the above (I assure you, you can't), then this is a pointless discussion. With any of the above still standing you can not be reimbursed. For the sake of the game and for the sake of it's players. You don't NEED your SP back. You just don't. You were happy to spend those SP in the first place, so learn to live with your decisions. Please, if you want to make a counter to the above arguments go ahead. I do not want anyone replying with what is essentially their personal view restated without any content or counter, because we have already heard what you have to say and your "opinion" is now completely useless unless backed up by a logical argument. A arguementless/logicless opinion is only relevant the first time it is stated by each person, and then at no point there-after.

TL:DR If your taking part in a discussion and you can't be bothered to read the posts then you shouldn't be here. Go away.
Rebecha Pucontis
Doomheim
#284 - 2013-02-11 22:23:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Rebecha Pucontis
CCP's reasoning - I cant see any of the points in here you mentioned above.

CCP Ytterbium wrote:
For playing the game ourselves, we do know how much of pain it is to have unwanted skills left in your character sheet because of a change you even remotely have nothing to do about. It seems logical that, since we required Mining Barges 5 trained as a pure time sink to reach the Orca, we should give the skill points back.

Except it's not, unfortunately. As mentioned in the blog, the only skills that we can in good conscience reimburse are the Destroyers and Battlecruisers ones.

That is because the overhaul will make the two skills mentioned above useless. Even if we were going to give the Destroyers/Battlecruisers skill points back in the allocation pool on a 1:1 ratio, we would leave players unable to fly hulls they could use before the changes (we are creating four racial variants instead of a single generic skill).

All the other skills, including Mining Barge 5 for the Orca, are not in the same category however. We are not taking your ability to fly the vessels away but changing how they are reached - players will still be able to fly them after the change. We are even modifying how skill training works to make sure you can still train the skill itself after the plan goes live.

Yes, it is annoying we leave you with a bunch of skills you have no interest into in your character sheet, and for that, you have our sincere apologies. But if we were to refund them here, other players, like capital pilots, or even people we affected during our numerous changes in the past, could rightfully claim for the same treatment. Because even if the previous concept was deemed acceptable, EVE Online is not one of these games where skill allocation can be technically wasted: with time, any player can theoretically reach and train all the skills we have to offer. There is no such thing as a Class A preventing you from seeing Class B content unless you create a new character specifically for it.

Invested skill points are still an asset - particularly Mining Barges 5, as it is very valuable for resource gathering characters. Which brings the question, why should we leave players with Mining Barge 5 trained if they are using the Orca as a hauler, or even a logistics platform for pirate related activities? That is because, initially, it was designed to be a logistic ship with a mining focus. You may not use any of its bonuses due to the sandbox nature of the game, but it didn't change the role it was initially tailored for.


So again, you do have our sympathy here - we wouldn't have spent half an hour writing this reply if we didn't care - but we cannot reimburse anything else than Destroyers and Battlecruisers in this case.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#285 - 2013-02-11 22:52:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Just thought I'd add, that learning skills trained to 5/5 started to payback after an average of 3 Years, 235 Days, 11 Hours, 3 Minutes, and 38 Seconds with a full set of +3 implants.

Carry on. Big smile

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Daimon Kaiera
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#286 - 2013-02-11 22:54:23 UTC
Rebecha Pucontis wrote:


Personally my feeling is that it would be good of CCP to refund this skill, and also any other skill which has been effected in this manner. The orca is a particular example as mining barge is completely useless to a lot of people who trained up for an Orca.



That awkward moment when you read "effected" for what it really means and then realise they meant "affected." Your sentence effected my misinterpretation.

.... . .-.. .--. / .. / .... .- ...- . / ..-. .- .-.. .-.. . -. / .- -. -.. / .. / -.-. .- -. -. --- - / --. . - / ..- .--. / ... - --- .--. - .... .. ... / ... .. --. -. .- - ..- .-. . / .. -.. . .- / .. ... / -. --- - / ... - --- .-.. . -. / ... - --- .--.

Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#287 - 2013-02-11 23:33:11 UTC
My forum warrioring is done here.

I have done all that I can for logic and reason and now I am moving on. CCP have reaffirmed their position, and I am glad to see that they are not swayed by people who do not understand the game enough to see the consequences of what they ask for. Good night gentlemen.

/me super hero pose.

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf

Wacktopia
Fleet-Up.com
Keep It Simple Software Group
#288 - 2013-02-11 23:41:19 UTC
I don't like any kind of skill re imbersment. I just think that you train stuff at a time for a reason and that's just it. Leave it done with.

Kitchen sink? Seriousy, get your ship together -  Fleet-Up.com

Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#289 - 2013-02-11 23:46:19 UTC
Wacktopia wrote:
I don't like any kind of skill re imbersment. I just think that you train stuff at a time for a reason and that's just it. Leave it done with.


I have the same opinion on this matter.

The Tears Must Flow

Whitehound
#290 - 2013-02-12 00:03:25 UTC
Arduemont wrote:
My forum warrioring is done here.

I have done all that I can for logic and reason and now I am moving on. CCP have reaffirmed their position, and I am glad to see that they are not swayed by people who do not understand the game enough to see the consequences of what they ask for. Good night gentlemen.

/me super hero pose.

Ha, I believe in a completely different truth.

I believe CCP is afraid of using it!

Skillpoint reassignments are new and CCP have little experience with them and therefore are they being overly careful about it. They rather stick to the old ways of making excuses as they did before the implementation of their skill point reassignment system, when instead they should be using it more often in order to make the game in exactly the way they want it to be and without disappointing players, which is what they do when they make excuses.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#291 - 2013-02-12 02:26:44 UTC
I have an orca alt. That orca has been WELL worth the ~30 days of training you're complaining about.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.

CCP Falcon
#292 - 2013-02-12 09:13:16 UTC
I've cleared several personal attacks from this thread.

Be sure to read the forum rules and be aware that personal attacks are bad.

CCP Falcon || EVE Universe Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon

Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3

Kinis Deren
Mosquito Squadron
D0GS OF WAR
#293 - 2013-02-12 09:39:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Kinis Deren
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
I have an orca alt. That orca has been WELL worth the ~30 days of training you're complaining about.


My alt is in the same boat (or should that be mining barge) and found the Orca to be a very efficient mini freighter. Yes, my alt has other mining associated skills, but hardly ever rock munches tbh. The Orca use was only ever considered a stepping stone until my alt could fly a Freighter & item volume moved could justify it.

I'm in support of CCP on this issue and I thought CCP Ytterbium's post, in this very same thread (#209), was very thorough and logical in deciding that a sp reimbursement wasn't justified in this case.
Charles the Miner
Amarr Empire
#294 - 2013-02-12 10:02:52 UTC
Who cares about Mining Barge V! I want Exhumers re-imbursed after they killed my Hulk! Cry
Jungleland Roy
#295 - 2013-02-12 11:45:23 UTC
No SP refund, No Re-map.

2 Years ago I trained a char to fly an orca. I didn't want to mine - I just wanted to have a hauling ship and at the same time I thought what the hell, I can use it to boost mining ops as well. So for 2 years I've had the use of the ship.

Now, if someone had told me 2 years ago that I could wait until Summer 2013 and get the orca without some useless mining skills - would I have waited? - NO! I wanted the ship back then, I skilled accordingly and have had the use of the ship for 2 years.

My only concern would be that due to the new skill changes I had to learn some other skills to get me back to where I am today - and CCP has imo satisfactorily dealt with that problem.

There are only 2 situations where people can feel unfairly treated with this method.

1) The guys who haven't read the forums/devblogs and are now skilling unnecessary skills to get into a ship a few days before the expansion hits. They will be pissed off - but we all know our answer to that one. Eve requires knowledge and keeping up to date on blogs and announcements - so unlucky for you matey.

And 2) The guys who want to fly a ship now but also know that the skill requirements are changing. They either skill unnecessary skills now OR wait for the changes. They have to decide to either do it now or wait for the change depending on how much they want to fly a ship now.

I see no reason for SP refund or re-map.

Roy

_if you could fly it before, you can fly it now. _ Read the Blog.

Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#296 - 2013-02-12 13:00:12 UTC
I have an alt with mining barge V that I don't use. I can't fly Orcas but I could really use those skillpoints can I get reimbursed too?
Whitehound
#297 - 2013-02-12 14:32:02 UTC
Yeep wrote:
I have an alt with mining barge V that I don't use. I can't fly Orcas but I could really use those skillpoints can I get reimbursed too?

If it was up to me then, yes, you should get the same option. Cool

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Ottersmacker
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#298 - 2013-02-12 14:48:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Ottersmacker
Maybe the real question is whether time-sink skills should be made more useful.

I suppose Barge V is at least a useful skill to some extent, even though not to dedicated Orca alts, but the bonus it provides when in a barge is rather meaningful.

People once had to train Survey V to inject the salvaging skillbook. With the pre-req lowered to III, it now provides a wonderful 5% cargo scanner cycle duration reduction for 4 days of training. It once gave access to salvaging, sure, but now the threshold is lower. I don't want SP back for Survey V, I want the skill to be more meaningful. (+ the same for new upcoming time sinks such as Advanced SS command V).

i just locked an open door.. strange, yet symbolically compelling.

Courtney Fish
Doomheim
#299 - 2013-02-12 14:51:32 UTC
Oops
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#300 - 2013-02-12 15:30:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Kidd
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Rebecha Pucontis wrote:
Snip


This is a valid concern. While there is no way we can promise we will never ever do skill changes again, overhaul like theses are supposed to last for quite a while - which is why we modified a lot of vessels to make sure we wouldn't have to do it again soon. Even if we do change some skills in the near future, it should not impact gameplay nearly as much.

To answer the question however, you need to ask yourselves "when was the last time CCP changed ship skills on such a wide scale?" That was... uh.. well... never since launch?* Oops

*That I can remember. Please don't hold my family responsible over 7 generations if you find a smart quote listing 200 ship skill changes in 2004, thank youCry


I'm more concerned about the cumulative effect of all of these changes. You're fundamentally changing requisite skills which is devaluing the skills we have trained to reach the point we are currently. Over multiple changes, ships, skills, and multiple toons, you're talking about months or years of training time that is now unnecessary and yet we've spent it.

Frankly, CCP should setup a simple algorithm that calculates SP based on the changes, discounted by X% and automatically refunds that SP or allots a training time bonus o something if only as a token to reimburse the time we've spent training those skills that are being impacted over this massive change. It's not the SP as much as it is the TIME! I couldn't give a rats arse about the SP, it's the TIME, TIME, TIME!

Quote:
Tippia wrote:
Four more pages while I slept, and still no reason has been presented why people should be “reimbursed” for something they haven't lost… Lol


Time Tippia. We're losing value of time!

Don't ban me, bro!