These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CLOSE THREAD

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jessica23Atreides
Perkone
Caldari State
#41 - 2016-02-10 01:53:33 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
I doubt there will be any real loss anyways as sp trading opens up a whole market for farmers, which will be training sp purely for sale.


Nope. PLEX prices will soon make it a losing practice. They will have to pay RL$ to keep accounts subbed more than they will earn enough to PLEX. Probably a 2:3 ratio when the market settles. PLEX = AUR = Extractors (or are injectors on the NES)

PLEX will approach 3B by Christmas.

o/ Have fun farming!!
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#42 - 2016-02-10 05:30:09 UTC
I seriously doubt there'll be a net loss of SP. Skill training will still probably contribute to more gain of SP than any net loss from extraction and injection. Even if it doesn't, why does it matter?
Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#43 - 2016-02-10 12:40:01 UTC
pajedas wrote:
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
pajedas wrote:
Not calling everyone sheep, just you.


https://i.imgur.com/wYawI.gif

Glad to see that you brought your "A game".


this is to avoid further abuse in respeccing your "build" to the fotm ship (pvp), science skills (for production/invention), etc anytime, so that decision/consequence still matters.

Just Add Water
pajedas
Doomheim
#44 - 2016-02-10 16:40:22 UTC
Most of you are either really simple or just playing dumb.

Think, "Big Picture".

Since Day One CCP has pounded the value of 1:1 skill training, no exceptions!

Those skills were paid for through monthly subscriptions, plain and simple. (Most of you never even knew training before the Training Queue) You actually had to log in all the time to check/change your skills. I remember calling my wife from work and walking her through the process.

So, now they're saying those SP's aren't that valuable?

You can't have it both ways and you can't explain away the science behind it.

🐇
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#45 - 2016-02-10 17:32:27 UTC
I've removed some off-topic/trolling/personal posts and those quoting them.

Quote:
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.

5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster.

ISD Decoy

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#46 - 2016-02-10 18:00:32 UTC
Jessica23Atreides wrote:
Robert Caldera wrote:
I doubt there will be any real loss anyways as sp trading opens up a whole market for farmers, which will be training sp purely for sale.


Nope. PLEX prices will soon make it a losing practice. They will have to pay RL$ to keep accounts subbed more than they will earn enough to PLEX. Probably a 2:3 ratio when the market settles. PLEX = AUR = Extractors (or are injectors on the NES)

PLEX will approach 3B by Christmas.

o/ Have fun farming!!


bs
extractor price is directly bound to plex. Does PLEX price rise, so does the other.
Logan Revelore
Symbiotic Systems
#47 - 2016-02-10 20:07:25 UTC
Xyle Alduin wrote:
CCP you give us something new, but i want more! if we want to go as far as a 1:1 sp transfer, might as well do a 1:5. i want to take a million sp from my alt and give 5mil to my main! jesus man, your like my daughter. we give her a raise in her allowance by 50% and instead of being happy she starts trying to ask for another 50%.


As soon as she does that, you should not give her the raise, but instead deduct 50% for the next 3 months. See if she asks for more next time you give her something.
Poddington Bare
Black Mount Industrial
Breakpoint.
#48 - 2016-02-10 20:18:06 UTC
Jessica23Atreides wrote:
PLEX will approach 3B by Christmas.


Good.
Gauis Aldent
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#49 - 2016-02-10 21:00:59 UTC
pajedas wrote:
Most of you are either really simple or just playing dumb.
So, now they're saying those SP's aren't that valuable?


Except, nobody is saying that. SP in your head is 1:1 SP in your head.

What they are saying is, if you decide to inject more SP in your head through these new highly acclerated methods, that there is a diminishing return involved. You can't just inject and inject and inject and expect it to keep working like it did the first time. There is a reason normal skill training is slow.

In the end.... its just a new option with a new cost. You don't like the cost, feel free not to do it, I probably wont either.

Yes its a new option which CCP has chosen to offer us and monetize....but... its a new option to do something we have been able to do for a long time. Every character sale on the bazar is essentially an SP transfer, and one with no diminishment.

This really changes very little. My only peve is the same one I have with plex, why make it an in game item at all if you don't mean it to work like one? No remote injection! I want people undocking with full injectors and carting them around for the market asap!
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2016-02-10 21:32:16 UTC
pajedas wrote:
Most of you are either really simple or just playing dumb.

Think, "Big Picture".

Since Day One CCP has pounded the value of 1:1 skill training, no exceptions!

Those skills were paid for through monthly subscriptions, plain and simple. (Most of you never even knew training before the Training Queue) You actually had to log in all the time to check/change your skills. I remember calling my wife from work and walking her through the process.

So, now they're saying those SP's aren't that valuable?

You can't have it both ways and you can't explain away the science behind it.
Those SP earned from that method aren't changing. It's the ones liberated from that mechanism that introduce loss. That leaves aside the fact that prior to this mechanic there were potential losses which already violated the idea of "no exceptions."
pajedas
Doomheim
#51 - 2016-02-10 23:10:39 UTC
Gauis Aldent wrote:
What they are saying is, if you decide to inject more SP in your head through these new highly accelerated methods, that there is a diminishing return involved. You can't just inject and inject and inject and expect it to keep working like it did the first time. There is a reason normal skill training is slow.

Using the same technical basis for your argument, explain why "on the first injection" a 10m SP player will get 1:1 but a 60m SP player will get 3:5.

🐇
pajedas
Doomheim
#52 - 2016-02-10 23:16:36 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Those SP earned from that method aren't changing. It's the ones liberated from that mechanism that introduce loss. That leaves aside the fact that prior to this mechanic there were potential losses which already violated the idea of "no exceptions."

A loss through not having an up to date clone or T3 loss?

Those are slightly more dramatic and don't involve a medical procedure inside of a sterile lab.

The T3 loss tied to SP loss was one of the worst ideas ever.

Your argument is invalid.

🐇
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#53 - 2016-02-10 23:19:33 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
pajedas wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Those SP earned from that method aren't changing. It's the ones liberated from that mechanism that introduce loss. That leaves aside the fact that prior to this mechanic there were potential losses which already violated the idea of "no exceptions."

A loss through not having an up to date clone or T3 loss?

Those are slightly more dramatic and don't involve a medical procedure inside of a sterile lab.

The T3 loss tied to SP loss was one of the worst ideas ever.

Your argument is invalid.


No amount of fairy-tale roleplay rationalizations are going to get you lossless transfers.

You're not supposed to be able to losslessly remap your own SP. Decisions in Eve are supposed to have enduring consequence. In this case, wanting to remap your SP comes at the cost of a portion of that SP.

Get the **** over it.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#54 - 2016-02-10 23:21:09 UTC
pajedas wrote:
Using the same technical basis for your argument, explain why "on the first injection" a 10m SP player will get 1:1 but a 60m SP player will get 3:5.


Because the way veteran players would abuse this to max out skills for specific fittings in specific scenarios is insane.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2016-02-10 23:26:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
pajedas wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Those SP earned from that method aren't changing. It's the ones liberated from that mechanism that introduce loss. That leaves aside the fact that prior to this mechanic there were potential losses which already violated the idea of "no exceptions."

A loss through not having an up to date clone or T3 loss?

Those are slightly more dramatic and don't involve a medical procedure inside of a sterile lab.

The T3 loss tied to SP loss was one of the worst ideas ever.

Your argument is invalid.
Agreed that the T3 loss mechanic was poorly conceived, though that doesn't and can't invalidate that it exists and has, along with clone grade related losses in the past, reduced SP which you claimed was a violation of a longstanding central theme about the value of skill training. The argument is as valid as the prior existence of those mechanics. You can't just pretend facts do not count at your convenience.

pajedas wrote:
Using the same technical basis for your argument, explain why "on the first injection" a 10m SP player will get 1:1 but a 60m SP player will get 3:5.
@ 10mill SP the return is 4:5 rather than 1:1. The reason the 60mill player has a lower return is due to the ability to extract and reallocate to the same character and prevent 55mill in perfect reallocation from becoming a reality. Instead their past decisions limit them to a maximum of 44 mill reallocatable, which is still very good considering the potential possibilities with that SP, as opposed to the 10 mill character's 4 mill.
pajedas
Doomheim
#56 - 2016-02-10 23:31:26 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
you claimed was a violation of a longstanding central theme about the value of skill training.

When did I make that claim?

Wait, let me tell you.

Never.

🐇
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#57 - 2016-02-10 23:38:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
pajedas wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
you claimed was a violation of a longstanding central theme about the value of skill training.

When did I make that claim?

Wait, let me tell you.

Never.
So you aren't arguing that something other than skill training is violating the principle of skill training by providing a mechanism of loss?

Or was the statement "Since Day One CCP has pounded the value of 1:1 skill training, no exceptions!" not intended to be relevant to skill injection since it's not training? If so what was the point in stating it?
pajedas
Doomheim
#58 - 2016-02-10 23:47:08 UTC  |  Edited by: pajedas
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
So you aren't arguing that something other than skill training is violating the principle of skill training by providing a mechanism of loss?

Or was the statement "Since Day One CCP has pounded the value of 1:1 skill training, no exceptions!" not intended to be relevant to skill injection since it's not training? If so what was the point in stating it?

You're trying so hard to make this something that's it's not. What's your inspiration?

If you can't differentiate between loss by death, which was found to be flawed (due to technology) and changed.
Now if you get podded you don't lose those skills that you paid to train.

How is that the same as profit driven systematic elimination of trained SP's?

While we're at it, why not introduce the probability of losing SP's (memory) through drug use? We all know that drugs kill brain cells.

🐇
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#59 - 2016-02-10 23:53:45 UTC
pajedas wrote:


If you can't differentiate the difference between loss by death, which was found to be flawed (due to technology) and changed.



Med clones were removed because they effectively added an escalating cost-of-living to PvP. This being a PvP game, a mechanic that actively discouraged it by doing nothing but adding an expense that had to be met to PvP was deemed to be poor for gameplay.

This, along with the lack of meaningful decisions to be made regarding med clones (the correct answer was ALWAYS to upgrade your clone after a podding) is why they were removed.

Neither of these issues exist with skill injectors.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2016-02-11 00:01:31 UTC
pajedas wrote:
You're trying so hard to make this something that's it's not. What's your inspiration?
None needed. It's been more directly explained why the diminishing returns exist, but the idea of simple 1:1 accumulation (which is still debatable since someone with +5s outpaces me) without interference of any kind or "exceptions" doesn't exist.

pajedas wrote:
If you can't differentiate the difference between loss by death, which was found to be flawed (due to technology) and changed. Now if you get podded you don't lose those skills that you paid to train.
Never said they were the same, simply addressed the specific claim as presented.

pajedas wrote:
How is that the same as profit driven systematic elimination of trained SP's?
How much of a profit driver is a mechanic which only effects the demand side when it's the supply side driving most of the revenue? It should also be considered that the more this affects you the higher your earning potential in game is possibly eliminating the need for you to contribute additional revenue.

pajedas wrote:
While we're at it, why not introduce the probability of losing SP's (memory) through drug use? We all know that drugs kill brain cells.
Separate topic, but if you want to penalize booster use make a proposal. I have no real opinion on such a mechanic either way.