These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[CCP opinion requested] Remove learning implants from the game.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#61 - 2013-11-17 19:31:57 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:


Ashlar Vellum wrote:
Sarah Stallman wrote:
I have never owned a +5 implant, and switch to +3s when I get war decc'd or go into low-sec. I do not believe I am alone in this.

It's actually quite painful to do, I just have to remind myself I pay for a sub to play the game, not spin ships in station.

Why?
Not why you don't own +5s, but why switch to +3s?


Because loosing 500m in implants to a wardec would be stupid?


I am sorry, but even a full set of +4s do not cost 500m.

And then, why do you need more than 2 learning implants which you can change every 24 hours anyway, especially if you are in low/high sec?

If you are saying that they are still too pricey for your taste, then what are you flying? +4 cost is approximately 20mill that is a little bit more than price of a unfitted Crusader, bare Drake cost a little bit less than 2 +4s.

So again, why?
Fonton
Robot Head
#62 - 2013-11-17 19:43:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Fonton
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:


Ashlar Vellum wrote:
Sarah Stallman wrote:
I have never owned a +5 implant, and switch to +3s when I get war decc'd or go into low-sec. I do not believe I am alone in this.

It's actually quite painful to do, I just have to remind myself I pay for a sub to play the game, not spin ships in station.

Why?
Not why you don't own +5s, but why switch to +3s?


Because loosing 500m in implants to a wardec would be stupid?


I am sorry, but even a full set of +4s do not cost 500m.

And then, why do you need more than 2 learning implants which you can change every 24 hours anyway, especially if you are in low/high sec?

If you are saying that they are still too pricey for your taste, then what are you flying? +4 cost is approximately 20mill that is a little bit more than price of a unfitted Crusader, bare Drake cost a little bit less than 2 +4s.

So again, why?


If it so cheap why you discard?
Hesod Adee
Perkone
Caldari State
#63 - 2013-11-17 19:51:48 UTC
Roime wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Roime wrote:
Why do you want to remove choices from this game?

And no, learning implants are not the reason for being risk averse, it's inbuilt characteristic of one's personality. Learning implants aren't even a good excuse, as all the PVPers use them as well. Or even more expensive pirate implant sets.

This doesn't fly, sorry


Are you honestly arguing that items that reward passivity over activity are good? In the case of people who have a nearly inexhaustible wallet it may not really matter, but for the player who has just started and bought a set of +5 implants? Yeah that guy is going to be much more inclined to stay in high sec at all costs or even just stay docked and passively train for months.


No, I'm arguing that learning implants don't reward anything, they are a choice given to you. Plug in, get SP at a slightly accelerated rate. Why would a person who just started buy +5s? Right, because he is stupid. He doesn't get a single day of training advantage out of those in his first year.


Because the sooner he plugs in the +5s, the sooner that year elapses and he gets the benefit.

Which is the exact same reason people spent their first two months of Eve being bored with their ship choices while they trained learning skills. That didn't pay off for two years.

Which is the exact reason why learning skills were removed. The made new players chose between fun choices now, or boredom now and more fun choices in 2 years.

Learning implants are worse because they keep asking players to make that choice.
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#64 - 2013-11-17 20:12:11 UTC
Fonton wrote:
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:


Ashlar Vellum wrote:
Sarah Stallman wrote:
I have never owned a +5 implant, and switch to +3s when I get war decc'd or go into low-sec. I do not believe I am alone in this.

It's actually quite painful to do, I just have to remind myself I pay for a sub to play the game, not spin ships in station.

Why?
Not why you don't own +5s, but why switch to +3s?


Because loosing 500m in implants to a wardec would be stupid?


I am sorry, but even a full set of +4s do not cost 500m.

And then, why do you need more than 2 learning implants which you can change every 24 hours anyway, especially if you are in low/high sec?

If you are saying that they are still too pricey for your taste, then what are you flying? +4 cost is approximately 20mill that is a little bit more than price of a unfitted Crusader, bare Drake cost a little bit less than 2 +4s.

So again, why?


If it so cheap why you discard?

'Cause, change for the sake of change is meaningless, and I do not believe that this will make people more PVP proactive if they are not already.
Also, it removes choices and this is always not good in my opinion.
Fonton
Robot Head
#65 - 2013-11-17 20:34:35 UTC
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
it removes choices

Now. You have 100mil ISK. You buy 2 imps +4. 100 - 40 = 60mil of choices.
Will be. You have 100mil ISK. You not buy 2 imps +4. 100mil of choices.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#66 - 2013-11-17 20:57:57 UTC
Hesod Adee wrote:
Roime wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Roime wrote:
Why do you want to remove choices from this game?

And no, learning implants are not the reason for being risk averse, it's inbuilt characteristic of one's personality. Learning implants aren't even a good excuse, as all the PVPers use them as well. Or even more expensive pirate implant sets.

This doesn't fly, sorry


Are you honestly arguing that items that reward passivity over activity are good? In the case of people who have a nearly inexhaustible wallet it may not really matter, but for the player who has just started and bought a set of +5 implants? Yeah that guy is going to be much more inclined to stay in high sec at all costs or even just stay docked and passively train for months.


No, I'm arguing that learning implants don't reward anything, they are a choice given to you. Plug in, get SP at a slightly accelerated rate. Why would a person who just started buy +5s? Right, because he is stupid. He doesn't get a single day of training advantage out of those in his first year.


Because the sooner he plugs in the +5s, the sooner that year elapses and he gets the benefit.

Which is the exact same reason people spent their first two months of Eve being bored with their ship choices while they trained learning skills. That didn't pay off for two years.

Which is the exact reason why learning skills were removed. The made new players chose between fun choices now, or boredom now and more fun choices in 2 years.

Learning implants are worse because they keep asking players to make that choice.


Ermmm no. Because he has to train Cyber V, he has the same skills at the end of the year as his pal who only plugged in +4s.

Bored with ship choices? Frigs, dessies and cruisers, the least boring ships in game.

.
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#67 - 2013-11-17 21:03:02 UTC
Was expecting a rant thread. Pleasantly surprised.

TBH this just goes in line with the removal of the learning skills and I can't honestly believe they weren't removed at the same time as the skills were. I'm all in favour of removal of anything that boosts anything passively in game. (apart from most passive modules on ships as it is an active choice to fit that module etc)

The choice in your skill training should be your neural remap that you get. (I'd be in favour of a 3-6 month timer rather than 12 month but thats a different argument) these are an 'active' choice as to what type of training you will be doing the next 12 months. Give everyone a straight attribute boost (the number is irrelivent TBH as everyone will get the benefits) and remove the attribute implants and remove the attribute component of the pirate implants etc simple.

I just checked my next years skill plan. I am a pvp'er and only fly with basic combat implants so I only have base attribute setup optimally via my skill planner. If I were using all +5's I would have an extra 66 days of training. What implants are in your toons head does affect the vast majority of players choices as to what they are going to do in eve. I hear it on a regular basis from my in game connections 'nah I'm not going for that null roam as I have a full set of +5's so I'll pass. Hit me up in 2 weeks time once I've trained this skill to V' etc.

Remove it. simple. no nonsense.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#68 - 2013-11-17 21:09:39 UTC
Roime wrote:
Hesod Adee wrote:
Roime wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Roime wrote:
Why do you want to remove choices from this game?

And no, learning implants are not the reason for being risk averse, it's inbuilt characteristic of one's personality. Learning implants aren't even a good excuse, as all the PVPers use them as well. Or even more expensive pirate implant sets.

This doesn't fly, sorry


Are you honestly arguing that items that reward passivity over activity are good? In the case of people who have a nearly inexhaustible wallet it may not really matter, but for the player who has just started and bought a set of +5 implants? Yeah that guy is going to be much more inclined to stay in high sec at all costs or even just stay docked and passively train for months.


No, I'm arguing that learning implants don't reward anything, they are a choice given to you. Plug in, get SP at a slightly accelerated rate. Why would a person who just started buy +5s? Right, because he is stupid. He doesn't get a single day of training advantage out of those in his first year.


Because the sooner he plugs in the +5s, the sooner that year elapses and he gets the benefit.

Which is the exact same reason people spent their first two months of Eve being bored with their ship choices while they trained learning skills. That didn't pay off for two years.

Which is the exact reason why learning skills were removed. The made new players chose between fun choices now, or boredom now and more fun choices in 2 years.

Learning implants are worse because they keep asking players to make that choice.


Ermmm no. Because he has to train Cyber V, he has the same skills at the end of the year as his pal who only plugged in +4s.

Bored with ship choices? Frigs, dessies and cruisers, the least boring ships in game.



Well looking at my skill planner it takes a complete new toon 14d 5h to train cyber V with optimal neural mapping.

A set of +5 can reduce a years worth of training by 60+ days with optimal neural mapping. So by that logi you are not correct by a matter of 43 days 19hours. and that doesn't include the potential to reduce the train time for cybe V by progessively plugging in a new set of learning implants every time they gain a level in cyber (only two implants need for the attribs affecting cyber skill)

Thats what I'd do if I was trianing up an alt to sell on the market etc and have know a few players who fund their pvp in such ways.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#69 - 2013-11-17 21:10:40 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
"I hate having to lose something because I don't want to risk."

"CCP, please remove this element of risk so that I no longer have to make a meaningful choice."

Does that about sum it up?

If you think it's a good idea to remove learning implants because they're expensive, don't you think it would also be a good idea if CCP simply removed all implants from the game and gave everyone the equivalent of having 4% hardwirings to every skill? It would eliminate the need to risk expensive implants when you fly in PvP.


Someone completely missed the point. Other expensive implants only reward you if you actively use them. Expensive training implants reward you for sitting in a station and doing nothing other than station activities (trading and manufacturing for instance). No one in this thread is arguing against all expensive implants. We are pointing out that expensive training implants encourage passivity and are therefore problematic. Not sure why that's hard to understand.
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#70 - 2013-11-17 21:19:45 UTC
Fonton wrote:
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
'Cause, change for the sake of change is meaningless, and I do not believe that this will make people more PVP proactive if they are not already.
Also, it removes choices and this is always not good in my opinion.

Now. You have 100mil ISK. You buy 2 imps +4. 100 - 40 = 60mil of choices.
Will be. You have 100mil ISK. You not buy 2 imps +4. 100mil of choices.

So, are you saying the only thing that stops people from PVP are those 40mills, really?

btw. what about removing clone cost entirely?
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#71 - 2013-11-17 21:23:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Zvaarian the Red wrote:

Someone completely missed the point. Other expensive implants only reward you if you actively use them. Expensive training implants reward you for sitting in a station and doing nothing other than station activities (trading and manufacturing for instance). No one in this thread is arguing against all expensive implants. We are pointing out that expensive training implants encourage passivity and are therefore problematic. Not sure why that's hard to understand.

I'm actually seeing very few people say they're bad because they encourage passivity. Mostly I'm seeing people complain that they're expensive and they don't want to lose their high SP/hr, nor do they want to compromise between cost and SP/hr by flying +3s for PvP.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#72 - 2013-11-17 21:25:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
"I hate having to lose something because I don't want to risk."

"CCP, please remove this element of risk so that I no longer have to make a meaningful choice."

Does that about sum it up?

If you think it's a good idea to remove learning implants because they're expensive, don't you think it would also be a good idea if CCP simply removed all implants from the game and gave everyone the equivalent of having 4% hardwirings to every skill? It would eliminate the need to risk expensive implants when you fly in PvP.


Someone completely missed the point. Other expensive implants only reward you if you actively use them. Expensive training implants reward you for sitting in a station and doing nothing other than station activities (trading and manufacturing for instance). No one in this thread is arguing against all expensive implants. We are pointing out that expensive training implants encourage passivity and are therefore problematic. Not sure why that's hard to understand.


And station activities like trading are no activities? You can do it too if you are incapable of maintaining the implants in your head. Or you can go to space where you can risk your ship, but not your head.

And your tone has this slight notion towards "I don't like station sitters. I have to move around to get things done, everyone should have to move around to get things done." Correct me if I'm wrong, but in case envy for the capable/a different way to play the game is the only motivation behind, this is a very bad suggestion.

Quote:
I'm actually seeing very few people say they're bad because they encourage passivity. Mostly I'm seeing people complain that they're expensive and they don't want to lose their high SP/hr, nor do they want to compromise between cost and SP/hr by flying +3s for PvP.


And just because people are too lazy or unwilling to switch clones, these implant effects have to go away? Roll

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
hellcane
Never Back Down
#73 - 2013-11-17 21:31:47 UTC
OP, and others, put too much emphasis on SP/hr. On top of that, they seem to be idolizing the "space rich veterans" and are angry that they have done so.
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2013-11-17 21:33:44 UTC
+1

People say "risk/reward" but there really is no interesting reward here. It's a useless game mechanic.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#75 - 2013-11-17 21:44:26 UTC
Nyancat Audeles wrote:
+1

People say "risk/reward" but there really is no interesting reward here. It's a useless game mechanic.


The "useless game mechanic" of training faster is your reward. Shouldn't this be enough reward for players to catch up to older players in certain areas? The risk has already been amply discussed.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#76 - 2013-11-17 22:14:08 UTC
Ashlar Vellum wrote:

So, are you saying the only thing that stops people from PVP are those 40mills, really?

btw. what about removing clone cost entirely?

Given CCP have discussed the possibility of removing clone cost, your argument kinda shoots itself in the foot. It's an obvious thing to remove learning implants that make risk averse behaviour of doing nothing more rewarding than risky behaviour.
All the other implants require you to take risks to get their advantage. There are enough 1-5 slot implants already that you wouldn't be left with empty slots and would actually see significantly more LG sets being used I'm sure. And lost at the same time.
If Learning implants were removed I'd be PVPing with LG slaves most of the time for example, so my isk sink would go up, not down most likely (Though I've managed to get my pod out of null before even hitting camped bubbles, so haven't lost it for a bit anyway)
Randy Wray
Warcrows
THE OLD SCHOOL
#77 - 2013-11-17 22:24:35 UTC
Only reason I would see not to do this would be if CCP wanted to add the long sought after ability to salvage implants from corpses. But even then learning implants are kinda meh. The issue here though is that learning implants are a big part of the economy. Many missioners turn their LP into learning implants and have huge stocks of them that they liquidate once prices go up every once, what would you do to recompensate these people? Turning all none plugged in learning implants into isk would be one solution but that would prolly crave alot of work from CCP's side, and CCP don't like that kinda stuff no mo'.

Solo Pvper in all areas of space including wormhole space. Check out my youtube channel @ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd6M3xV43Af-3E1ds0tTyew/feed for mostly small scale pvp in lowsec/nullsec

twitch.tv/randywray
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#78 - 2013-11-17 22:30:17 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:

And just because people are too lazy or unwilling to switch clones, these implant effects have to go away? Roll


No. you are completely missing the point. we don't want the effects to go away. The OP stated that all base attrib be increased by 3-5 so the implant effects are perminently in game for everyone. Not just the people who leave there toons sitting doing nothing.

Passivity is slowly choking eve. The less effects/bonus for passive gameplay the better it is for the game.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#79 - 2013-11-17 23:05:28 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Ashlar Vellum wrote:

So, are you saying the only thing that stops people from PVP are those 40mills, really?

btw. what about removing clone cost entirely?

Given CCP have discussed the possibility of removing clone cost, your argument kinda shoots itself in the foot. It's an obvious thing to remove learning implants that make risk averse behaviour of doing nothing more rewarding than risky behaviour.
All the other implants require you to take risks to get their advantage. There are enough 1-5 slot implants already that you wouldn't be left with empty slots and would actually see significantly more LG sets being used I'm sure. And lost at the same time.

My argument? Are you talking about how 40mill preventing people from pvp all of a sudden, are talking about that argument?

Nevyn Auscent wrote:

...I'd be PVPing with LG slaves most of the time...

And what preventing you from doing it now?
Devlin Shardo
Phoenix Connection
#80 - 2013-11-17 23:36:00 UTC
Pobunjenik wrote:
At first, I came here to flame at you. But then I read you wall of text, and it totally makes sense.
Especially since I'm a wormholer (CCP dun wanna give us jumpclones hurdur).

This guy said it.
After reading i was like " wait, he makes sense, why? " Started thinking and it so damn true. Why should i train for a month just to get the optimal training ?
and then i need to spend A LOT of isk to get the optimal training. But i can't PvP, Mine, Rat or undock and look at the station, due to the fact that they cost a lot and gives me no benefit outside training.