EVE General Discussion

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.

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.

It doesn't need to be simple, just intuitive.

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.

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 as such, 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. The complexity just makes it something people put off dealing with for a while.

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 now but may need later 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.

Once again, I'd like to reiterate that I'm simply sharing my personal point of view, not speaking for the team working on skill & clone changes. I offer these thoughts in the hope that reasoned responses to them by those who don't agree might be useful to the team.

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"

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?

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 :)

False dichotomy alert.

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 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.