These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Returning Players/Skill Points
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jegrey Dozer
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2014-05-31 02:38:38 UTC
Erufen Rito wrote:

Which is a bit under 10%.

Currently, an unmapped toon without implants vs a perfect mapped with +5 implants is something like 58% behind in training time.
And this is using the current system we have.


What about when it's the 28 primary attribute? = P

28+21*0.5 = 38.5

38.5/43.5 gives you 11.5%

Averaging out 9.2% and 11.5% you get 10.35%, which is above 10% like I assumed earlier ^_^

I will stick to 10% and say that doing what I first mentioned gives you a 10% lead on the closest competitor. The next only being much further behind.

It's a large increase. In the 81 days you gained you could get anything from 4-10 skills to level V because you mapped correctly. That is a significant jump!
Erufen Rito
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#82 - 2014-05-31 04:57:11 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…which is in response to, what? There's a reason why I call it a strawman: because your fallacious argument is in response to nothing I've said. It's not that I'm unable to answer. It's that your ramblings are not something I have to respond to because they're just some incoherent expression of lunacy you've pulled out of your backside — answering it serves no purpose.

Quote:
Fair to anyone, by the measure of everyone being able to make use of it.
Yeah, but see… they can't. Nor is that a good measure of fairness. Some will be able to use it to their advantage; others will only be able to waste it and gain nothing; yet others will not be able to use it at all. How is it fair that old players can take advantage of this idea and new ones can't (I don't mean “take advantage of” as in “use” but as in “gain an advantage from”)? How is it fair that old players don't have to care about skills but new ones do? How is it fair that new players have to forego playing the game in favour of progression and older players don't? How is it fair that your carefully constructed character is worth as much as an incoherent pile of useless junk?

Quote:
What exploitation?
You know that EVE is a game of special-purpose alts, right? You understand that the game mechanics are there to ensure that it takes a while to build something, even for these alts and that bypassing these mechanics is something so strictly forbidden that you get banned for it?

Quote:
I did answer what it was that I am training for, in 4 different ways.
…none of which actually answer the question since you never read or forgot its context: why do you train skills?

Quote:
It breaks nothing, because time spent correlates to SP gained, which in turn correlates to progression.
Ok. So you don't actually understand the EVE skill system. That explains a lot. No. SP gained does not correlate to progression. Again: why do you train skills?

And if you're going to state without reason that it breaks nothing, at least respond to the ways in which it very obviously breaks the game. If you're going to state that I'm working under a given assumption, try checking that I'm actually doing that or you'll just waste your time making another idiotic strawman argument. Especially, try to check your assumptions before quoting the part that proves you wrong. And it is very relevant when a topic first came up if you're trying to claim (as always without support) that I've said something first…

Oh, and you have a couple of unanswered questions that you need to take care of, by the way:
How did I twist your words?
How do you work around the exploitation this allows for older players?
What it it you are training for? As in: why do you train skills?

So it is well established you would possibly do great on a debate table. Good, so lets move on from that.
You have not once established what is your problem with this suggestion. All you've said is that it somehow breaks things, but you haven't explained that either. You think you have, because you've used words such as "balance" and "mechanics", but you have yet to produce a single reason as to how anything "breaks". Then you have the nerve to claim my understanding is wrong, or not present.
Answering it serves no purpose? Incoherency out of my ass? Pardon me, who are you to decide that? I am asking you a question, have the decency to answer it. Half of the garbage you spew is wrong and based on assumptions, but I go through the trouble of trying to tell you why you are wrong and answering. I'd expect at least this much from you. Are you capable of complying? You consider my argument lunacy, something something resort to fallacy something.

Can you elaborate on what is impeding everyone from making use of this feature? I wont answer your ramblings on this point, because you failed to address the fairness and impossibility for everyone to use the feature equally.

Eve is not a game designed to be played with alts. That we have turned into so is a different matter. But again, you are forgetting that this idea is intended as a ONE TIME change. Are you familiar with the concept of ONE TIME? I still don't see how it would be exploited, following the ONE TIME use restriction. Can you? If so, explain.

I'm afraid it is you who doesn't understand the skill system. If you mean to tell me that SP=/=time spent, and thus time spent=/=progression, you have nothing further to say on the matter.

Ah, so it's not a matter of me not answering the question, its closer to your inquiry not producing the answer you want. You've asked "what do you train for" and i've answered. Now you ask "why do you train skills?" A different question deserves a different answer, and so: to progress in the game.

Your "unansered questions" have been answered. You are simply not getting the answers you want, and you are not going to get them.

You have yet to answer my questions, so until you do....

This is as nice as I get. Best quote ever https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4137165#post4137165
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#83 - 2014-05-31 05:20:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Erufen Rito wrote:
You have not once established what is your problem with this suggestion.
Shocked
Ehm. Reading. It's good for you.

Quote:
Answering it serves no purpose? Incoherency out of my ass? Pardon me, who are you to decide that?
I am the person whose arguments you are misrepresenting in your failed attempts at responding to them. I can therefore decide with ease when what you said has nothing to do with what I'm saying and you're only using strawman arguments to make it seem like you have a counterpoint to offer even though it's an irrelevant tangent of your own invention.

Quote:
Can you elaborate on what is impeding everyone from making use of this feature?
I already did. You didn't read it. Even though you quoted it, you were unable to respond to it and offer any kind of counter-argument. If you can't be arsed to even read and respond to my posts, I will not be arsed to keep repeating myself because you have so far demonstrated that it yields no results. You just keep dodging the issue and/or replace it with some kind of irrelevant strawman.

Just because you have shown yourself to be functionally illiterate does not mean that I'm rambling or that I've failed to address something. It just means you have not read what I'm writing and instead decided to fallaciously fill in the gaps with strawman arguments.

Quote:
Eve is not a game designed to be played with alts. That we have turned into so is
…the reality of the situation and therefore is what you'll have to account for when you alter core functionality. The idea of SP remaps is exploitation heaven by default; your limitation makes it exploitation heaven for the select group that can purpose-build alts. This is not a good thing since it just makes everything even more uneven than it would be otherwise. How this would happen has been explained. You didn't read it. Instead, you're now off on a completely different strawman about time and progression that I have never ever mentioned — only you have, ironically enough in relation to not understanding the skill system.

So the question remains: how do you work around the exploitation this idea allows for older players?

Quote:
Ah, so it's not a matter of me not answering the question, its closer to your inquiry not producing the answer you want. You've asked "what do you train for"
…in a context you didn't read. You instead invented something else so you could avoid answering the question. The context made it fairly clear that I have no interest in what's in your skill queue or why. I'm asking you for what purpose the purpose is for training skills? A hint: it is not progression.

Oh, and how did I twist your words? What is the logical loop (and it has to be something I said, not some braindead nonsense you invented)?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#84 - 2014-05-31 06:40:03 UTC
"I don't know what a strawman is so I'm just going to assume it's just some catchall term for 'you're wrong.' "

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Snakebyte Jack
AcT Legion
#85 - 2014-05-31 06:53:30 UTC
I would definatley leave the game to take advantage of this.
Don Purple
Snuggle Society
Snuggle Society.
#86 - 2014-05-31 07:40:58 UTC
No.

I am just here to snuggle and do spy stuff.
Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#87 - 2014-05-31 11:46:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Samillian
No form of accelerated SP acquisition be it skill re-maps, PLEX for accelerated learning or any other of the numerous and often suggested balance trashing ideas like them is ever going to be acceptable to many players. Many in fact even have a problem with the existing attribute enhancing implants and the differential they create.

While the current SP system may not be perfection it is at least reasonably fair and even handed while (as far as I know) not being exploitable or gameable, a rare thing in EvE and worth preserving.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law
Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#88 - 2014-05-31 12:15:24 UTC
this is a very bad idea...

with this, almost everybody will have a boosting alt SP-remapped from toons bought from the bazaar

Just Add Water
Serene Repose
#89 - 2014-05-31 14:41:21 UTC
Dumb idea. Really. Not very smart.
Plan your training. Now, that's smart.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Yarda Black
The Black Redemption
#90 - 2014-05-31 15:57:27 UTC
Did we finish this discussion? I mean, are vets getting their 5 free titan pilots yet?
Erufen Rito
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#91 - 2014-05-31 18:56:39 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
"I don't know what a strawman is so I'm just going to assume it's just some catchall term for 'you're wrong.' "

"I'm posting here because I think I'm clever and I have nothing to contribute"

Tippia wrote:
I am the person whose arguments you are misrepresenting in your failed attempts at responding to them. I can therefore decide with ease when what you said has nothing to do with what I'm saying and you're only using strawman arguments to make it seem like you have a counterpoint to offer even though it's an irrelevant tangent of your own invention.
I already did. You didn't read it. Even though you quoted it, you were unable to respond to it and offer any kind of counter-argument. If you can't be arsed to even read and respond to my posts, I will not be arsed to keep repeating myself because you have so far demonstrated that it yields no results. You just keep dodging the issue and/or replace it with some kind of irrelevant strawman.

Oh, so now I'm missinterpreting your bickering?Kind of hard to do that, when it holds no meaning behind it. It's even harder to reply to something that makes no sense.

You continue to make excuses and dodge questions, and further derailing the conversation. As it turns out, now you can't be arsed to reason with. You are now resorting to insult me and publicly humiliating me. Good arguments there. Really. You have not once answered a single question relevant to the topic at hand, you simply dodge it and hide behind your logic loop, and your arbitrary labeling of "strawmen" to anything I bring to the table. I don't mind really, it simply proves you have nothing to show. You effectively constructed a baseless argument, and when asked to elaborate, you turn to your baseless argument and call it good.
If you want to have a decent debate, I'd advice you stop dismissing everything anyone says, and consider the points at had. You have none, except your logical loop which you can't even explain.

Quote:
Just because you have shown yourself to be functionally illiterate does not mean that I'm rambling or that I've failed to address something. It just means you have not read what I'm writing and instead decided to fallaciously fill in the gaps with strawman arguments.
ad hominem.

Quote:
…the reality of the situation and therefore is what you'll have to account for when you alter core functionality. The idea of SP remaps is exploitation heaven by default; your limitation makes it exploitation heaven for the select group that can purpose-build alts. This is not a good thing since it just makes everything even more uneven than it would be otherwise. How this would happen has been explained. You didn't read it. Instead, you're now off on a completely different strawman about time and progression that I have never ever mentioned — only you have, ironically enough in relation to not understanding the skill system.
Care to show where in the turial you are adviced to construct an alt? You have yet to identify said "exploitation" this would allow. Assume I'm as illiterate as you consider me, and draw it out.

Quote:
…in a context you didn't read. You instead invented something else so you could avoid answering the question. The context made it fairly clear that I have no interest in what's in your skill queue or why. I'm asking you for what purpose the purpose is for training skills? A hint: it is not progression.

Oh, and how did I twist your words? What is the logical loop (and it has to be something I said, not some braindead nonsense you invented)?

You can't say what my motives are. If I say they are "progression" you are only then allowed to say "ok" and move on to a different point.

You keep arguing and further deraling this topic, while clearly missing the OP. Focus on it, anything else is irrelevant.
You have twisted my words, as i've said, by quoting out of context. This is the 3rd time I say this.
And you have the face to tell me I'm not reading?

I've also explained what your logical loop is, this would be the 5th time I've mentioned it: You argue "it's broken and unbalanced because it's unbalanced and broken". IE. "I define red as red".

But hey, carry on assuming and bickering! You are good at it.

This is as nice as I get. Best quote ever https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4137165#post4137165
KnowUsByTheDead
Sunlight...Through The Blight.
#92 - 2014-05-31 19:02:47 UTC
This thread again?

Relevant.

Big smileRollPirate

Once you realize what a joke everything is, being the comedian is the only thing that makes sense.
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#93 - 2014-05-31 19:16:14 UTC
Tippia's right about half the time and he's right about this.

I'd be less averse to allowing people to untrain skills (instead of training them, not concurrently) at perhaps 50% of the rate it would take to train them.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#94 - 2014-05-31 19:18:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Erufen Rito wrote:
Oh, so now I'm missinterpreting your bickering? Kind of hard to do that, when it holds no meaning behind it. It's even harder to reply to something that makes no sense.
Yes you are. Just look at how you misrepresented my posts in that one sentence.

Quote:
You have not once answered a single question relevant to the topic at hand
Yes I have. You just haven't read them. You just keep dodging the answers, dismissing them out of hand, replacing them with strawmen, refusing to elaborate… you know, all those things that you are accusing me of doing.

Oh, and no, I don't arbitrarily label things you bring to the table as strawmen. I very specifically label the counter-arguments you try to bring to the table in spite of not countering anything I've actually said as strawmen, because that's what those kinds of arguments are. They're silly red herrings you invent because can argue against them, but you are utterly unable to argue against what I actually say, and you're hoping that no-one will notice that you're putting words in my mouth only so you'll have a non-zero chance of actually being able to say anything in opposition.

You also need to read up on what an ad hominem is. It's not just being mean to someone — it requires you to do what you were doing before (which makes your failed attempt at using it here even more hypocritical).

Quote:
Care to show where in the turial you are adviced to construct an alt? You have yet to identify said "exploitation" this would allow.
Yes I have. You just haven't read it. And what's in the tutorial does not change how the game is played and how you have to design for it. You can try to dodge that as much as you like, but the simple fact remains: the reality of the situation is that EVE is a game of alts and they're something you'll have to account for when you alter core functionality. Ignoring this doesn't make it go away, and refusing to take it into account makes your idea hideously naïve.

Quote:
You can't say what my motives are.
Good thing that I didn't then. I asked you a question and you desperately tried to dodge it. As long as you keep up that feeble tactic, the questions will just come back to haunt you: what is the purpose of training skills? (A hint: it's not progression). How did I twist your words?

Quote:
I've also explained what your logical loop is, this would be the 5th time I've mentioned it: You argue "it's broken and unbalanced because it's unbalanced and broken". IE. "I define red as red".
No, that's just a strawman you've made up because you haven't read what I've written. It's not something I've said, as demonstrated by the fact that I've explained why it's unbalanced and broken (something you've missed because of your abject refusal to read). In other words, it's another dodge, which will be treated the same as all your other dodges: what is the logical loop (and it has to be something I said, not some braindead nonsense you invented)? Be specific; provide examples; make sure they're from me, rather than something you have to lie about
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#95 - 2014-05-31 19:23:08 UTC
Erufen Rito wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
"I don't know what a strawman is so I'm just going to assume it's just some catchall term for 'you're wrong.' "

"I'm posting here because I think I'm clever and I have nothing to contribute"

"C'mon man, why won't you contribute to my manure pile?"

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#96 - 2014-05-31 19:55:15 UTC
KaarBaak wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Sibyyl wrote:
Skill Point remap would be interesting..

No, it would not.

Skills are an interesting and meaningful decision to make. Removing that decision would be the exact opposite of interesting and meaningful. It would also be directly harmful to the game.


OP: What you're asking for is already in the game. It's called “skill training”. EVE is not a class/level-based game where you're stuck in one path and can't do anything outside of the 20 abilities you've accumulated on your way to max level. Instead, if you want to try something new, just try it.


I'd pony up a PLEX or two for an SP remap. And would activate at least one old account and do the same. Could be a financial shot-in-the-arm for CCP.

It's not personal, it's just business.

KB


I'd pony up a PLEX to remove 1M SP from you.

Not personal, just business.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Dave Stark
#97 - 2014-05-31 20:10:10 UTC
while a skillpoint remap would be an abomination of the worst kind, i'd love to see learning implants die in a huge fire.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#98 - 2014-05-31 20:26:21 UTC
I'd love to see clone sp limits die in a fire.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Dave Stark
#99 - 2014-05-31 20:31:15 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
I'd love to see clone sp limits die in a fire.


i think the SP limits are ok, losing a bunch of SP because you didn't push a button is a somewhat amusing mechanic.

however, paying more than your ship for each pod is one of those isk sinks that really does put people off the whole ~content creation~ thing. ****, i'm one of them.
i'd love to go and lark about in t1 frigs dying in hilarious ways... but when my pod is worth more than a handful of ships (before we include implants), it's not worth it.
Marsha Mallow
#100 - 2014-05-31 20:40:05 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
i'd love to go and lark about in t1 frigs dying in hilarious ways... but when my pod is worth more than a handful of ships (before we include implants), it's not worth it.

Same. Clone costs are still way too high at the top end Cry

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day