These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Case for Removing Learning Implants

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Orzo Torasson
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#161 - 2012-08-31 02:39:44 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Andski wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:

That's horseshit from start to finish.

I agree completely the article was horseshit from start to finish.

The Null bears really should stop calling hi-sec dwellers risk adverse when they are more risk adverse than the Null sec dwellers.


the "nullbears" risk expensive ships far more often than anybody else

And Large Null sec alliances have a ship replacement program.
So does this not make the members of those Alliances more risk adverse than those in alliances without this type of program?

After all it is only a risk to the player if he had to actually afford the "expensive ships" he was getting destroyed.
Were as I don't see Alliances having an implant replacement program.


Actually, with the exception of Pandemic Legion, nullsec alliances will only reimburse certain ships fit a certain way on certain ops.

It's not like I can go and welp a deadspace fit Vargur and the alliance will be like "LOL GG nah but seriously here's 5 bil ISK for a new one."
stoicfaux
#162 - 2012-08-31 02:47:44 UTC
Mocam wrote:

Many can afford what others consider a fortune in ships/fittings to fly and even lose them with no more than a shrug - we can buy more. What no one can buy is even 1 SP they didn't train and PvP players catch it in the short hairs the earlier they get into PvP vs those who "play it safe". I've always found these training benefits for PvP avoidance to be onerous. (if anything, PvP players should train skills *FASTER* than PvE players as a benefit - not slower.)


But, but... nullsec is where the big isk is, so nullsec players can buy characters with more skill points, thus gaining skill points at a rate higher than any set of +5s?

On a serious note,

If you're into empire building over mindless PvP, then you can nullbear with +5s if your corp/alliance can control the space.

If you're into mindless PvP, then what do you expect? Why should the rest of Eve listen to someone complain about skill point loss due to their suicidal tendency of actively trying to get their head blown off? It's like complaining about brain damage because you like to play "who can punch the other guy in the head the hardest" every day of your life.

If you're afraid of losing skill training time, roll/buy a combat alt, always pick fights you can win, stop PvP'ing, or quit thinking that a few extra skill points is more important than being well practiced at PvP.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Nikodiemus
Ganja Clade
Shadow Cartel
#163 - 2012-08-31 03:02:39 UTC
Why are you trying to curtail an issue where one does not yet exist.
Ensign X
#164 - 2012-08-31 03:08:41 UTC
That article and this thread still haven't provided a single compelling argument to explain why there should be less risk involved in travelling, PVPing or living in Nullsec.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#165 - 2012-08-31 03:37:47 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
If you're afraid of losing skill training time, roll/buy a combat alt, always pick fights you can win, stop PvP'ing, or quit thinking that a few extra skill points is more important than being well practiced at PvP.


tell me why any given playstyle should be discouraged

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#166 - 2012-08-31 03:39:32 UTC
Ensign X wrote:
That article and this thread still haven't provided a single compelling argument to explain why there should be less risk involved in travelling, PVPing or living in Nullsec.


how would this remove any risk

i don't understand pubbie logic but this doesn't eliminate risk by any means

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Ensign X
#167 - 2012-08-31 03:47:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Ensign X
Andski wrote:
Ensign X wrote:
That article and this thread still haven't provided a single compelling argument to explain why there should be less risk involved in travelling, PVPing or living in Nullsec.


how would this remove any risk

i don't understand pubbie logic but this doesn't eliminate risk by any means


Flying in nullsec with expensive implants is a risk.

Removing expensive implants from the game eliminates that risk.

Logic isn't hard.

edit: I would suggest you check your ad hominem at the door, but considering you're posting in a location where you can't use the threat of bans to support your arguments, you can continue with the insults as you wish.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#168 - 2012-08-31 03:48:25 UTC
Ensign X wrote:
Andski wrote:
Ensign X wrote:
That article and this thread still haven't provided a single compelling argument to explain why there should be less risk involved in travelling, PVPing or living in Nullsec.


how would this remove any risk

i don't understand pubbie logic but this doesn't eliminate risk by any means


Flying in nullsec with expensive implants is a risk.

Removing expensive implants from the game eliminates that risk.

Logic isn't hard.


because learning implants are the only implants in the game and this would remove all risk from the game and losses would be absolutely irrelevant

l0l

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Ensign X
#169 - 2012-08-31 03:51:44 UTC
Andski wrote:
Ensign X wrote:
Andski wrote:
Ensign X wrote:
That article and this thread still haven't provided a single compelling argument to explain why there should be less risk involved in travelling, PVPing or living in Nullsec.


how would this remove any risk

i don't understand pubbie logic but this doesn't eliminate risk by any means


Flying in nullsec with expensive implants is a risk.

Removing expensive implants from the game eliminates that risk.

Logic isn't hard.


because learning implants are the only implants in the game and this would remove all risk from the game and losses would be absolutely irrelevant

l0l


Cool strawman.

I guess I should have been more specific for you.

Flying in nullsec with expensive learning implants is an added risk.

Removing learning implants eliminates that added risk.

Try again, Andy.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#170 - 2012-08-31 03:55:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Ensign X wrote:
Cool strawman.

I guess I should have been more specific for you.

Flying in nullsec with expensive learning implants is an added risk.

Removing learning implants eliminates that added risk.

Try again, Andy.


again, you're wrong, and you're accusing me of a strawman when you're the one saying that I want all risk removed from the game

why are you so intent on punishing players who take a different playstyle than you? not everyone likes saving the damsel for the nth time, tbh

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#171 - 2012-08-31 04:07:44 UTC
Andski wrote:
Ensign X wrote:
Andski wrote:
Ensign X wrote:
That article and this thread still haven't provided a single compelling argument to explain why there should be less risk involved in travelling, PVPing or living in Nullsec.


how would this remove any risk

i don't understand pubbie logic but this doesn't eliminate risk by any means


Flying in nullsec with expensive implants is a risk.

Removing expensive implants from the game eliminates that risk.

Logic isn't hard.


because learning implants are the only implants in the game and this would remove all risk from the game and losses would be absolutely irrelevant

l0l


i agree but common goons! how much trillions of isk you guys have? did not the years of tech you got made it so losses dont really count?

personally dont get rid of learning implants but please do something about clone costs 40 million just to be podded is bull... either reduce the costs or just make it so i can build new clones with industry slots...

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Ensign X
#172 - 2012-08-31 04:08:26 UTC
Andski wrote:
again, you're wrong, and you're accusing me of a strawman when you're the one saying that I want all risk removed from the game


Show me where I said anything even remotely resembling this. You can't, because I didn't. My argument is that removing learning implants removes the risk of losing learning implants. It does, unequivocally. There's no debating that point. What is in debate is whether or not that risk should be removed from the game, and I'm doubting that you've provided a compelling argument for why they should.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#173 - 2012-08-31 04:11:06 UTC
Ensign X wrote:
Andski wrote:
again, you're wrong, and you're accusing me of a strawman when you're the one saying that I want all risk removed from the game


Show me where I said anything even remotely resembling this. You can't, because I didn't. My argument is that removing learning implants removes the risk of losing learning implants. It does, unequivocally. There's no debating that point. What is in debate is whether or not that risk should be removed from the game, and I'm doubting that you've provided a compelling argument for why they should.



true there is still loosing ships and other hardware implants... those should count too...

but no dont get rid of learning implants thats just plain stupid.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#174 - 2012-08-31 04:13:35 UTC
Orzo Torasson wrote:


It's not like I can go and welp a deadspace fit Vargur and the alliance will be like "LOL GG nah but seriously here's 5 bil ISK for a new one."


no but you can welp a welpcane or a drake or a logi all you want and get your isk back... thats the point you wanna make personal isk and use an expensive setup koodos to you... but for CTA **** you get your isk back...

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#175 - 2012-08-31 04:23:27 UTC
Ensign X wrote:
Andski wrote:
again, you're wrong, and you're accusing me of a strawman when you're the one saying that I want all risk removed from the game


Show me where I said anything even remotely resembling this. You can't, because I didn't. My argument is that removing learning implants removes the risk of losing learning implants. It does, unequivocally. There's no debating that point. What is in debate is whether or not that risk should be removed from the game, and I'm doubting that you've provided a compelling argument for why they should.


The "risk" of losing them is zero when you're never flying with them. The reward is equal whether you fly with them or stay docked up. How is this true to the risk/reward aspect of the game?

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
stoicfaux
#176 - 2012-08-31 04:25:51 UTC
Andski wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
If you're afraid of losing skill training time, roll/buy a combat alt, always pick fights you can win, stop PvP'ing, or quit thinking that a few extra skill points is more important than being well practiced at PvP.


tell me why any given playstyle should be discouraged

Tell me about more about Hulkageddon, Mr. Goonswarm person.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#177 - 2012-08-31 06:03:52 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Mocam wrote:

Many can afford what others consider a fortune in ships/fittings to fly and even lose them with no more than a shrug - we can buy more. What no one can buy is even 1 SP they didn't train and PvP players catch it in the short hairs the earlier they get into PvP vs those who "play it safe". I've always found these training benefits for PvP avoidance to be onerous. (if anything, PvP players should train skills *FASTER* than PvE players as a benefit - not slower.)


But, but... nullsec is where the big isk is, so nullsec players can buy characters with more skill points, thus gaining skill points at a rate higher than any set of +5s?

On a serious note,

If you're into empire building over mindless PvP, then you can nullbear with +5s if your corp/alliance can control the space.

If you're into mindless PvP, then what do you expect? Why should the rest of Eve listen to someone complain about skill point loss due to their suicidal tendency of actively trying to get their head blown off? It's like complaining about brain damage because you like to play "who can punch the other guy in the head the hardest" every day of your life.

If you're afraid of losing skill training time, roll/buy a combat alt, always pick fights you can win, stop PvP'ing, or quit thinking that a few extra skill points is more important than being well practiced at PvP.



I like that.. Seriously. "mindless PvP" - vs mindful? hehe

PvP is what keeps the economy flowing. Less PvP and the market bloats with low-cost products that generate virtually no profits to those into PvE -- low demand for items with a high supply due to lack of consumption.

As such, I tend to be "mindful" of issues that impact PvP - the more players willing and able to get into PvP, the better off the entire economy is and that helps the overall game.

"roll/buy a combat alt" - there we go again. "get past all penalties and limits in EVE by buying more accounts. It helps EVE and ..."

Yes, tossing RL money at multiple accounts (be that your own or via PLEX someone else paid RL money for) can buy you past most limits in this game and how most "dangerous space" players will insist you solve any problems in this game. "point scout", "cyno alt" "hauler alt", "indy alt", corp holder", etc. Just get enough accounts and your set.

THAT would be an interesting advertisement with EVE - "expect to get multiple accounts if you stay with this game." Not a good advert IMO but a lot more accurate based upon this communities attitudes these days.

"well practiced at PvP" - takes all of 2 weeks.

Whether you do that within the first couple of weeks or YEARS later -- climb into a cheap ship and go for it. There is no difference in how quickly or slowly you will figure out the hands-on side.

The big differences are the longer you wait, the more you have "caught up" to other players by being able to fit & fly ships far better than someone who just jumps in - and how big your bank is to afford to do so. How? Use higher end implants and avoid PvP to bank up and train faster.

Just avoid PvP...

PvP = consumption of goods in the game. More consumption = market turnover and demand for goods, which equates to a better PvE experience -and- far more active PvP for those who really enjoy it.

Oh, and yes - "a few more SP" -- I have a bit over 61 million SP across just under 3 years. With a perfect map & plan, staying as a station trader in highsec - you could have a bit over 70 million in the time I've been playing. I know players with less than 53 million who started around when I did and have been active in PvP since early on. That I find to be a problem.

Why the hell should someone who isn't involved in PvP be able to gain the skills to fit & fly better ships than someone who uses ships all the time?

Keeping up I can see but this situation really doesn't make sense for a game that supposedly is so focused on PvP to drive it.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#178 - 2012-08-31 07:52:40 UTC
Ensign X wrote:
Andski wrote:
again, you're wrong, and you're accusing me of a strawman when you're the one saying that I want all risk removed from the game


Show me where I said anything even remotely resembling this. You can't, because I didn't. My argument is that removing learning implants removes the risk of losing learning implants. It does, unequivocally. There's no debating that point. What is in debate is whether or not that risk should be removed from the game, and I'm doubting that you've provided a compelling argument for why they should.

So you're going to completely ignore the fact that lots of people go "I don't think I'll go out PVPing today, I can't jumpclone out of this +5'd clone", or just avoid PVP in any way, shape or form because "they have implants", which leads to less PVP and a less exciting gameworld?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#179 - 2012-08-31 07:53:23 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Nope it was not that article

Which one, then?

I will try to find it for you as I cannot remember the title at the moment. I read a lot of articles.

Hey, so, we're still waiting.

We're still waiting. Which article were you talking about which didn't have the proper list of numbers of losses somewhere in the article?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#180 - 2012-08-31 07:58:56 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
Roime wrote:
NPCs should pod.


I support this 100%.

But how many neg 10s will be drowning the forums in tears of anguish as their sole source of KMs (high sec miners) is shut off to them?

Mr Epeen Cool


That would naturally be accompanied by:

1) more hisec-lowsec gates and stations with medical and repair facilities
2) moving 4/10s L4s and Incursions to lowsec
3) revamping mission system for more random locations to prevent mission hub & system camping
4) revamping NPC AI to favour proper fits instead of shitfits
5) increasing resources in lowsec:
- all DED 1-3/10 sites should appear in ls as well (why no content for new players in lowsec?)
- more ladar sites
6) removing cynos and supers from lowsec
7) new pirate NPC starter corps and related new PVE content
8) fixing existing starter corps so that evernoobs can't contaminate the real new players with false ideas
9) improve NPE even further to allow nubs to take care of themselves outside CONCORD protectiob

For example. Not saying lowsec is broken, for me it's the second best sec after w-space, but I feel that this is the general direction EVE changes would take.




.