Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I would like to say first that I am against the removal of attributes. Based on the concept of adding and improving meaningful choices, which led to ship/module tiericide/rebalance, attribute manipulation DOES add meaningful choices. The mechanics of that manipulation are poorly documented in game is grounds for more explanation but not removal of the system.

Regardless, it is clear that the options for modification or removal are being considered and I would like to add an idea.

Since I feel choices for accelerated skill training in specific foci are a valuable choice, I would like to see options for this beyond those presented by implants.

Standings toward npc factions could be used to give players choices on what type of skills a player could choose to accelerate. For example, positive standings toward gurtistas would allow the player to accelerate trainig for drone skills, shield skills, Caldari spaceship command, and/or Gallente spaceship command, or Anel standings for training navigation, shield, MinmatarSC, and/GallenteSC. Whereas empire npc standings give a more restricted set of options, such as Caldari Navy allows for shield, missile and/or Caldari SC skills could be accelerated.

Essentially this would establish the option to use a sliding scale based on positivity of standings to allow players to choose how they want to progress.

Some arbitrary limits need to be put in place, such as only being able to choose one faction to benefit from, while still having positive standings toward multiple factions.

Pros:
+Could remove the confusion over how attribute points effect skill training.
+Could remove frustration over remap timers
+Adds granularity by seperating acceleration of training of skills currently linked by primary and secondary attributes. I.e. All gunery and spaceship command skills are currentky perception primary and willpower secondary while this system would break down gunnery by type and apaceship command by race.
+Null and lowsec factions would give a wider variety and/ or stronger effect on the acceleration of training increasing the reward for operating in "more dangerous" parts of space, also giving pilotsa reason to leave highsec, and could bea conflict driver.
+Would give meaning to standings beyon highsec jump clones and getting to jita or not
+give value to social skills

Cons:
-relies on mission running
-sorry wormhole dwellers
-requires new UI to select focus
-standings system is old and may not integrate well with current code, CCP goals/direction
-doesn't address skill implants

Ok, rip it to shreds!

100% agree with you about keeping current system, but I'm witnessing a tide of people complaining about the system.

By linking skill training to npc factoons it would be essy to see in ISIS what competencies the faction focuses in and therefore what training bonus they provide.

As for the big alliances sitting in the best space, this means their space would be more heavily roamed by players and since this would be npc space and lowsec the size doesn't matter as much( see trouble ofevery alliance to live in fountain since Test, or stain since almost forever). Also, if you want to kick someone out, train the counter and live there while you build yoir forces.

Onlly problem is the implants, which are expensive. Replace with a POS fuel type system at a home system, which consumes PI and ice type materials to raise stats, wouldn't matter how many times your pod explodes, demand for PI/Ice goes up, more transactions causing small isk sink, throw in LP items like star base charters as another sink (would be cheap cost, secondary sink), more risk for players since hi-sec couldn't support the demand further requiring more null/low/WH travel....naw, stupid idea removing the one time cost of an implant and replacing with an hourly cost that isn't as high so long as the market is stupidly flooded....being that BS ships are 3 times their cost from a few years ago, and you rarely see them flown outside missions, it wouldn't be that stupid of an idea once the surplus caught up to the demand

Fair point, a reliance on pilots willingness to run missions, especially missions as they are, is a significant drawback.

Even though a pilot can increase their standings without doing the missions via fleet reward sharing would not be enough. Possible a tags for sec type solution could be considered, but thats another argument.

Thanks for the responses and please keep it up! My intent is to get the discussion of attributes started. A series of posts on F&I requesting a vertical t3 minmatar dedtroyer may have influenced that ships design. I want to collect several well rounded ideas on what to do with attributes BEFORE CCP decided what they want and only consider minor tweaks to their idea while ignoring better community generated ideas.

Yup, you caught me, I null sec dweller for over 3 years and director of a CFC corp, in fact only run missions on my highsec alt.

Also, never claimed my idea was good, loolking for good ideas or good criticism, post either.

Lastly, I'm the 8th post on that thread, good research.

Agreed. tying SP to grinding is so... contemporary MMO and bears the faint odor of that other game that gets referred to more than it should be.

I would much prefer they add back Learning Skills than remove attributes.

You do realize that not everything that made it into the game was good for the game, right?

if alot of people complaining about something meant they were right, then governments wouldnt tax people, kids wouldnt be required to go to school, and the middle east would be in even worse shape than it is now

TL;DR just because people ***** doesnt mean they are right, just entitled

i like the idea of standings playing a bigger role than they do now, but we have to be careful if they are to affect SP.
Remember, SP progression represents "paid time" (money) and since we all pay the same, it would have to be fair.

So, your specific implementation finds me opposed, since it excludes some people that pay their sub like everyone else.

Unless the whole standings system was also revamped, and everyone got a fair chance to reap its benefits no matter what their preferred activity is.

I would support such a scenario, it would add more meaning to factions and standings, make players more interested in them and
thus more immersed. As a minor example, a player might find themselves wondering, "why do i need better "X npc corp" standing to train a T2 ship skill faster?", which could probably drive them to check out that npc corp's description and find out that they manufacture those specific ships. Now, combine a lot of such small examples for each skill and you will have a player who is a lot more informed about the in-game lore and surroundings.

If they want to ofcourse. It would have to respect the people who just dont wanna know.