EVE General Discussion

One could of course add a cool down to it, I would not object, even if it was set at 24 hours just like the regular jump clones (but on a separate timer from the normal jump clones). Might as well set the life-timer on the activated disposable clone to 24 hours too then. That means one could only engage in "risk free" (you can still lose your ship and you have to pay for the disposable clone) PvP once a day...


As an added though: being against disposable clones is like being against insurance on the ships. They both would work to keep your isk investment secure, only that you can still use the ship, but you will not get any bonus from your implants.

Yes they should remove insurance after a character reaches a SP/Timeframe. Even still it's not really the same since insurance only lessens the loss it doesn't almost completely remove it.

I have a feeling everyone who wants to keep learning implants also cried and gnashed their teeth when learning skills were removed.

How about CCP just cuts the ****, lets everyone learn skills at the absolutely best possible rate, and re-appropriate stats exclusively for pvp/pve use, instead of creating a huge money/time sink for newbies. This game is already hard for new players to get into due to the fact that nearly everything fun requires at least a few months worth of SP. There's no reason to keep learning implants around unless you're one of the turds who puts the things out on the market.

It would be better for literally everyone, shaving days off of long training times and lessening the time required to get to the part of the game where you might actually have fun.

Uh no they're pretty much the same. The SP rate should be constant across all characters and set at at least as high as what is achievable with learning implants at this time. Deal with it. Accept you're wrong and grow from it.

With that ideology why have T2 or T3 ships. It should be consistent across the board and inline with all characters, risk and value should be equal in all respects. There should be no diversity and no way for people to use isk in order to gain an advantage.

Face it your too cheap and risk adverse to use implants, so you whine and moan when others do it and want it changed so you can have it without the risk.

That makes no sense and you're just really driving home the point that you don't know what you're talking about and you're against removing learning implants for really tenuous reasons.

You seem to think that paying for an advantage is bad. Buying implants to speed up training is no different then paying more for higher tiered mods or ships that give a better advantage. What is there not to understand.

As a newbie I agree that one of the big issues holding me back from pvp combat is the expensive implants in my head. When I first started I got lucky and someone gave me a shot of isk which I went and spent on implants to train stuff faster, so now that I have them and I can see how much time they take off training long skills I feel very nervous about losing them, especially since it would near wipe me out to replace them. Thing is if they're removed it will take me that much longer to get my skills up, which means that much longer till I feel like I can confidently pvp without getting pwned right off the bat by someone else.

I've seen a lot of people say that lose is one of the attracting factors of EVE, I'm not convinced. When a newbie like myself has to spend hours grinding away to make his isk just to afford a ship and fit that the rest of the community can brush away like a flea, pvp doesn't seem all that attractive. The obvious solution of course would be to find a corporation/alliance that can fund all this, thing is despite access to a chatroom, recruitment menu, and forum I'm kind of finding it hard to find the corporation that's right for me (or doesn't just flat out assume I'm a spy). So in the mean time here I am logging on long enough to update my skill que and maybe run a boring lvl1 mission, then logging off to do something fun.

except ship spinning

It's true.