These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Latest CSM notes : Rumours of attribute points/implants being removed.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#221 - 2015-01-27 10:07:56 UTC
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Currently I have 530M worth of attribute implants and 600M worth of hardwires, with no attributes tied to the implants I would have 2-4b worth of pirate implants plugged in instead.


And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#222 - 2015-01-27 10:16:26 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
CCP Darwin wrote:


Or, is your concern that learning implants would be viewed by the average player as inherently more valuable than non-learning-implants, so their willingness to spend on their pod decreases?

I ask because it's not evident to me that making skill training speed independent of implants will somehow reduce the overall average value of a pod, or the average risk that a player is willing to take on its contents.


Considering that they are the only type of implants who can be effective even when you are logged off, I'd say that learning implants are significantly more valuable than others. Furthermore, if I don't have plugged them in, my skill tranining time is significantly reduced and I consider SP to be the most valuable resource in EVE.
That makes learning implants mandatory for my clones, which is not the case for non-learning implants.


Warp speed implants are mandatory for me due to my activities. I have never used any skill implants so no, you dont need them you just want them.
Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
#223 - 2015-01-27 10:18:27 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh?


I'm not on the team that brought this question up with the CSM, but I do have a question for you.

If your practice, normally, is to spend, say, 50 million ISK for a pod full of implants today, why would that not be your practice tomorrow, if learning implants were to be removed?

Wouldn't you just spend your money on hardwirings instead, and maybe get an even larger edge in combat?

Or, is your concern that learning implants would be viewed by the average player as inherently more valuable than non-learning-implants, so their willingness to spend on their pod decreases?

I ask because it's not evident to me that making skill training speed independent of implants will somehow reduce the overall average value of a pod, or the average risk that a player is willing to take on its contents.


1) Learning implants are mandatory for me. For some reason, maximizing Skill Points has been very important to me from day one. This has not changed even though I realized after like 2 years that having a million more or less practically has no relevant impact e.g. on one specific fight. So my pods will ALWAYS have learning implants. I mostly use +5/+4 to be ISK efficient, but due to clone limitations, I might happen to use a clone with 5 learning implants (one +5, 4x +4).
2) I used to jump into empty pods for doing dangerous stuff like nullsec roams etc, but over time I realized that with my given playstyle I do only lose 1-3 pods a year - thus the whole risk thing is highly overrated in my case. In lowsec or highsec you normally don't lose pods anyway, so it comes down to nullsec/WHs and bubbles. And I do NOT go on daily roamings and/or suicide attacks there all the time. And even if I do, I find I die much less than I would have estimated in advance.
Also, ISK is less an issue after several years of playing.
3) I am much more sloppy when it comes to skill hardwirings.
Skill hardwirings are so specific and there are so many that in virtually every situation I will be stuck in a clone with the wrong implants. Plus, they are hard to get in remote lowsec or nullsec.
Hardwirings for fittings are even more annoying: once you commit yourself to a fitting that needs an implant you will find yourself even more often either lacking the hardwiring OR being stuck in a clone with useless hardwirings.
So, although they might give an edge, I mostly don't use skill hardwirings OR restrict myself to cheap and very generic ones (+5% speed for example - that is useful on any ship)
Exceptions would be special situations like the AT or the like where you know what is coming and every bit counts.

Conclusion:
To me, implants are no significant part of any risk/reward considerations.
If learning implants were to be removed and everything else stayed the same, the average value of my pod would decrease significantly.
That would have no big impact on my behaviour, because I do not lose many pods and I do not avoid risks because of implants.
However, it would be more comfortable in regards to flexibility of skill training.
Dominique Vasilkovsky
#224 - 2015-01-27 10:50:18 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Currently I have 530M worth of attribute implants and 600M worth of hardwires, with no attributes tied to the implants I would have 2-4b worth of pirate implants plugged in instead.


And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops?

I never talked about helping newbies, I was just shooting down your stupid idea where you suggest it should take them 15 years to catch up to where we are after 10 years.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#225 - 2015-01-27 10:54:12 UTC
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Currently I have 530M worth of attribute implants and 600M worth of hardwires, with no attributes tied to the implants I would have 2-4b worth of pirate implants plugged in instead.


And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops?

I never talked about helping newbies, I was just shooting down your stupid idea where you suggest it should take them 15 years to catch up to where we are after 10 years.


Thats a myth anyway.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#226 - 2015-01-27 10:55:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Currently I have 530M worth of attribute implants and 600M worth of hardwires, with no attributes tied to the implants I would have 2-4b worth of pirate implants plugged in instead.


And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops?

I never talked about helping newbies, I was just shooting down your stupid idea where you suggest it should take them 15 years to catch up to where we are after 10 years.


But they can't catch up SP wise (not that this matters), not in the current situation nor in the suggested one. All it'll do is allow you to not "have to" choose learning implants and instead use lol implants which will give you a massive benefit DURING their progress. In short; drop the pretence that you're doing this "for the good of newbies, so they can advance faster". You just want to soothe your OCD to a point where you will allow yourself to drop learning implants in favour of combat ones, because it would give you more advantages.
Dominique Vasilkovsky
#227 - 2015-01-27 11:01:58 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Currently I have 530M worth of attribute implants and 600M worth of hardwires, with no attributes tied to the implants I would have 2-4b worth of pirate implants plugged in instead.


And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops?

I never talked about helping newbies, I was just shooting down your stupid idea where you suggest it should take them 15 years to catch up to where we are after 10 years.


But they can't catch up SP wise (not that this matters), not in the current situation nor in the suggested one. All it'll do is allow you to not "have to" choose learning implants and instead use lol implants which will give you a massive benefit DURING their progress. In short; drop the pretence that you're doing this "for the good of newbies, so they can advance faster". You just want to soothe your OCD to a point where you will allow yourself to drop learning implants in favour of combat ones, because it would give you more advantages.

I'm just saying they should progress at the same pace we have done up until now, not slower (which your 1800SP/h suggest).
Dominique Vasilkovsky
#228 - 2015-01-27 11:04:27 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Currently I have 530M worth of attribute implants and 600M worth of hardwires, with no attributes tied to the implants I would have 2-4b worth of pirate implants plugged in instead.


And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops?

I never talked about helping newbies, I was just shooting down your stupid idea where you suggest it should take them 15 years to catch up to where we are after 10 years.


Thats a myth anyway.

My average SP/h since birth is 2440, Gregor Parud suggested all SP accumilation should be locked at 1800. How are people going to reach the same number of SP in the same timeframe that way?
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#229 - 2015-01-27 11:09:50 UTC
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
My average SP/h since birth is 2440, Gregor Parud suggested all SP accumilation should be locked at 1800. How are people going to reach the same number of SP in the same timeframe that way?


You realise that that post was sarcastic, to see who'd bite on it? To see who'd go "yes well equality is fine and all and I'll use it as my official reason to support the changes but I'm not really into it for the equality. I just want really fast, zero consequence skill training".
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#230 - 2015-01-27 11:12:04 UTC
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Currently I have 530M worth of attribute implants and 600M worth of hardwires, with no attributes tied to the implants I would have 2-4b worth of pirate implants plugged in instead.


And it would give you a hilarious advantage over younger players who can't spend that money on them. So removing implants isn't helping newbies at all, now is it. Oops?

I never talked about helping newbies, I was just shooting down your stupid idea where you suggest it should take them 15 years to catch up to where we are after 10 years.


Thats a myth anyway.

My average SP/h since birth is 2440, Gregor Parud suggested all SP accumilation should be locked at 1800. How are people going to reach the same number of SP in the same timeframe that way?


You can only put so much SP into a single ship. You are effective in pvp at 30 minutes old.
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#231 - 2015-01-27 11:20:53 UTC
That's not really a good rationale for locking everyone at 1800 sp/hr.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#232 - 2015-01-27 11:30:50 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Primary This Rifter wrote:
That's not really a good rationale for locking everyone at 1800 sp/hr.


Im against binning SP implants. The whole argument for removing them is a hollow one.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#233 - 2015-01-27 12:07:25 UTC
pay attention to my opinion as it's the important one, i didn't read any of the others because they're not as extremely important as mine

ok you all listening now good

i see a certain level of learning implants as practically mandatory. we can't gain time spent training on a character through any method than waiting out that time. it's therefore an incredibly valuable resource, and when presented with a multiplier for that time in the form of learning implants you'd be silly for not wearing the reasonably-priced ones as often as you're able

if we see that the vast majority of characters are wearing skill implants, it's probable that they're pretty much considered a 'must have'. ofc i can't see this, someone with access to the data'd have to look. i don't like must-haves in a game, they're just a few extra clicks i have to do, something i need to earn before i can get going to the fun bit. it's got the gameplay value of a checkbox you have to click before undocking

in eve ofc we know the value we're risking can plausibly affect our willingness to engage but i don't really care or know about that in this case, especially as i never really left lowsec

i'd have a look at what level implants the largest proportion of characters have equipped. if, for example, a huge number of characters have +3 implants, i think that'd indicate that the price:benefit ratio made these a must-fit, and that the price:benefit of +4s was at a nicer spot in comparison

since i don't like must-fits, i'd take action to remove the 'must' bit. i'd then make +4s into +1s, leave them where they are in terms of rarity, sit back and see what happens

removing learning implants deffo ain't dumbing down the game and if it decreases mission rewards to an unhealthy level we can think of something cool to add to the loyalty point stores to replace the implants so that doesn't really matter

i won't read any replies because they're unimportant if they're not by me love benny
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#234 - 2015-01-27 12:13:00 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
i won't read any replies because they're unimportant if they're not by me love benny

i just realised this'd mean i wouldn't be able to read the tremendous amount of praise gd will doubtless lay upon me for being so great

therefore all reading have my permission to mail their appreciations for my posting directly to me provided their appreciations are in the form of fabulous and expensive gifts
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#235 - 2015-01-27 12:14:08 UTC
Why is it people are forever confusing what they want with what they need? You dont need these implants.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#236 - 2015-01-27 12:17:29 UTC
didn't need to upgrade your clone when you died neither did you

but you did
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#237 - 2015-01-27 12:24:06 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
didn't need to upgrade your clone when you died neither did you

but you did


Losing SP can mean losing access to ships or modules. Technically you could stop training and do fine. Nice try at being witty btw, it's not really working.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#238 - 2015-01-27 12:32:19 UTC
the point was actually about the difference between a practical need and an actual need and protesting baltec's simple and absolute classification of learning implants as a non-need

that's the thing about top-level posting there's layers of meaning it's like poetry except i'm not a wanker
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#239 - 2015-01-27 12:32:28 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
If I am likely to lose the pod, I wear no hardwires and might have some learning implants in, by happenstance as there is a limit to how many jump clones one can have.

If there are no learning implants and only higher stats, I will wear no hardwires and just bank the ISK.


Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning?


Hardwires are massively situational, and unless you are flying the same ship day-in, day-out, you will need half a dozen clones to have the right hardwire combinations.

In one of my currently deployed-at hangers, I have a Harpy, a Hawk, an Apocalypse, a Tengu, a Huginn, a Celestis, an Archon, and an Ishtar. I need a 3% PG hardwire to fly the Apoc, but not any of the other ships. Amoungst them there are five shield ships, and three armour, two that use railguns, two light missiles, one lasers, one projectiles, and two predominently drones. Four ships sig-tank and rely on maneouverability, the rest couldn't care less, while the carrier could probably benefit from some warp speed. What hardwire configuration would you wear for that mess (especially since its a deployment, at most I can have two clones to use due to the inability to store two JCs in one station)? Whereas learning implants still carry a benefit regardless of the ship (in fact I wear Genvolutions since that solves the Apocs problem, but its still a slight waste in the other hulls)
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#240 - 2015-01-27 12:56:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Aralyn Cormallen
Benny Ohu wrote:

i'd have a look at what level implants the largest proportion of characters have equipped. if, for example, a huge number of characters have +3 implants, i think that'd indicate that the price:benefit ratio made these a must-fit, and that the price:benefit of +4s was at a nicer spot in comparison

since i don't like must-fits, i'd take action to remove the 'must' bit. i'd then make +4s into +1s, leave them where they are in terms of rarity, sit back and see what happens


That's the point, what is the reality of the situation?

I will bet a large number of the placard-waving "implants must go" crowd inserted +5s in their first week, and have never let go (a lass above literally said that was the case for her), but how many people truly do this? How many people have ever injected a +5? Bear in mind the Cybernetics requirement might mean some characters physically can't (in fact, thats an interesting and easily figured stat for CCP, what % of characters has Cybernetics 5?) And how long do the players who have a +5 clone actually spend in it? Ask the same for +4's, even +3's (given the free Genvolutions that got handed out, this will likely be a high %, but even then, how many owners spend what % of time wearing them). In fact, how many characters have never worn an implant outside the occasional +1s and +2s that came from a mission reward? (or not even that much, again an easy stat to discover, what percentage of characters do not even have Cybernetics injected at all?)

I can only speak for myself. When I started (mid 2009, so nearly 6 years now) I had done my research and dropped a PLEX first week to buy a set of +5's. I wore those pretty-much continuously until I left highsec (even while a part of RvB, foolish me) which was mid-2010. Granted, I had a 3-month hiatus in that year, so I had probably 9 months of continuous +5 usage. From then, til I lost my +5's in a "foolish incident" in the middle of the eviction of IT from Fountain (so, 6 months later maybe) I probably only spend a third to a quarter of my time in a +5 clone, the rest in +3's. By that time I had been weaned off the breast, and I never replaced them, and have probably spent equal time in +3's, and implantless. Hell, I haven't trained a skill on this character for the past four months (a same account alt needed a few skills, and I was on the verge of a clone upgrade, so was happy to stall til the recent clone change). So when you look at it, of my 5 and a half years, I've spent maybe a year in +5's, 2 years in +3's, 2 implantless, and half a year either unsubscribed or not training for other reasons. And I'll freely admit I wouldn't be surprised if a third to a quarter of that time was spent learning skills off-remap (that's life when a doctrine change kicks in).

How typical am I? I will admit I don't know, but I would bet anything I'm a lot more closer to the norm than Mrs "wore +5s since day one and never trained a skill off-remap".

EDIT: Right, I went full-nerd and did some basic maths. 8765.81 hours/year, and removing unsubbed and unskilling time, I have been skilling for approx 5 years exact. Looking at my current sp (92mil and some change), it comes out that I've averaged 2106 sp/h over my characters life.