These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Memphis Baas
#261 - 2015-01-27 14:40:18 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Look at all the things CCP has added to the game in the last 2 years that damn near no one uses.


I think, at this point, they're not going for "if we add this EVERYONE will use it", but rather "maybe we get a 10% increase in subscriptions to get out of this downward trend." It's like scamming, they only need a few to bite, not all of us.

Gregor Parud vs. Mara Rinn: one of you is arguing from the point of view of playing the game solely for the game itself, the other from the point of view of training up a character over years. While playing the game and its PVP will attract new players, and even keep them interested, building up your character is a staple of MMOs and probably attracts more players than the specific PVP (with spaceships) that EVE has to offer. In any case, there's probably no room for an agreement.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#262 - 2015-01-27 14:41:15 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
The rest of your stuff is a whole lot of "what if" that has no bearing on the (f)actual current situation, nor would it change anything. those extra implants affect extra... regardless of removing of learning implants or not.


Now you tell me, if I'm flying a Rifter and I already have all the skills required to fly that Rifter trained to 5, why am I using +5s instead of useful implants?


Because you're training for a Hell.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#263 - 2015-01-27 14:48:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
Memphis Baas wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Look at all the things CCP has added to the game in the last 2 years that damn near no one uses.


I think, at this point, they're not going for "if we add this EVERYONE will use it", but rather "maybe we get a 10% increase in subscriptions to get out of this downward trend." It's like scamming, they only need a few to bite, not all of us.

Gregor Parud vs. Mara Rinn: one of you is arguing from the point of view of playing the game solely for the game itself, the other from the point of view of training up a character over years. While playing the game and its PVP will attract new players, and even keep them interested, building up your character is a staple of MMOs and probably attracts more players than the specific PVP (with spaceships) that EVE has to offer. In any case, there's probably no room for an agreement.


So which is it.

"woe is me, building up a character is risky because of +5, I better stay docked. We should remove the risk for people who have OCD and plan 17 years ahead" or "lets make the game a better experience for people who actually play the game, and at least try to not have Malcanis' law fck it all up".

The first one isn't doing anything, isn't a content creator and isn't an active contributor to the sandbox. Simply put, I don't give 2 fcks about those (as ironic as that is). The second one to me sounds like the way to go, removing learning implants is NOT the solution to this, it'll backfire as explained.
Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#264 - 2015-01-27 14:54:12 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.


Speaking for myself and probably several others who I have discussed this topic with...Remove the learning implants. Personally, I will just start rolling at the very least LG sets in every char at that point which would dramatically increase my average. I am sure many might forgo implants to offset this but anyone with any amount of wealth in EVE is rolling +5s because they are required for SP/hr rather than PVP/QOL edges.

If I can have an edge instead I would take it.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#265 - 2015-01-27 14:56:40 UTC
Aryth wrote:
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.


Speaking for myself and probably several others who I have discussed this topic with...Remove the learning implants. Personally, I will just start rolling at the very least LG sets in every char at that point which would dramatically increase my average. I am sure many might forgo implants to offset this but anyone with any amount of wealth in EVE is rolling +5s because they are required for SP/hr rather than PVP/QOL edges.

If I can have an edge instead I would take it.



Would this give you an advantage in a fight over newer players who lack the disposable income for them? And would that advantage be more than the 5-10% higher SP you'd have in case you'd had it invested in learning implants?
Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
#266 - 2015-01-27 15:03:22 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:

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.


Started in August '09 and just passed the 120m SP.
Continuous training with mostly +5/+4, aligning skills and training PER/WIL or INT/ME for a year straight after some time (with some exceptions).
That is a third more.
OFC, one can still be a happy pilot with 50mil or 20mil SP, but still a significant difference...
Memphis Baas
#267 - 2015-01-27 15:04:34 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
So which is it.


The guy who stays docked still pays his subscription, so you may not care about him but CCP does.

As for which is it, they're trying to turn the first type into the second type. Get the people who stay docked to build characters to undock. Even if they don't actively search out PVP, they can still be targets. Which is more content for PVP'ers.

For CCP the decision is: do we get more money by changing the game to appease the WoW types, or do we keep the game the same because the awesome PVP that these guys are doing is attracting tons of new people without us lifting a finger?
Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#268 - 2015-01-27 15:12:30 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Aryth wrote:
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.


Speaking for myself and probably several others who I have discussed this topic with...Remove the learning implants. Personally, I will just start rolling at the very least LG sets in every char at that point which would dramatically increase my average. I am sure many might forgo implants to offset this but anyone with any amount of wealth in EVE is rolling +5s because they are required for SP/hr rather than PVP/QOL edges.

If I can have an edge instead I would take it.



Would this give you an advantage in a fight over newer players who lack the disposable income for them? And would that advantage be more than the 5-10% higher SP you'd have in case you'd had it invested in learning implants?


Yes to both. It also gives you a much higher RISK profile in your pod. If CCP would ever do the implants from corpses thing they teased years ago that would be fun as hell. Pod high SP player with HG set and harvest his corpse. With some loss of course.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#269 - 2015-01-27 15:12:48 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
So which is it.


The guy who stays docked still pays his subscription, so you may not care about him but CCP does.

As for which is it, they're trying to turn the first type into the second type. Get the people who stay docked to build characters to undock. Even if they don't actively search out PVP, they can still be targets. Which is more content for PVP'ers.

For CCP the decision is: do we get more money by changing the game to appease the WoW types, or do we keep the game the same because the awesome PVP that these guys are doing is attracting tons of new people without us lifting a finger?


First type are alts or people who will find any excuse to not go. Just as with trying to convince PVEers to PVP, you can't. If they wanted to add to the sandbox (assuming they're a main) they would have done so by now.

The second bit really is the crux, it's not so much about "dumbing down" (although it certainly is a factor). It's that it turns the game more into p2w. Learning implants are the balancing factor as to why not "everyone" is running stat increasing (slave, crystal, snake etc) implants. Remove that and it turns into "spend money, buy implants because what else would you use those implant slots for".

It'll backfire.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#270 - 2015-01-27 15:13:35 UTC
Aryth wrote:
Yes to both.


Just as I predicted.
Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
#271 - 2015-01-27 15:15:59 UTC
I just have to think of a comparison with League of legends. For those who are not familiar:
there are 2 different perk systems (Masteries & Runes) that let you customize your character before any fight. No restrictions to flexibility whatsoever. Everything can be changed completely between two fights. Runes have to be bought before they can be used (they are, however, not destroyed)

Transferred to EVE...

Why not dump the idea of implants altogether?

We could have fittings for pods instead. The whole pod would then become more similar to a ship.
-completely separate from clones and jump clone timers
-all implants would become modules for pods
-fitting restrictions possible through different slots (1:1 transition would be 10 different slot types, 1 each)
-Genolution Auroral implant would become a pod SKIN (same as planned for ships)
-you could save different fittings for pods as for ships
-maximum flexibility
-all used implants would still be destroyed (option: could be dropped?) on pod destruction
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#272 - 2015-01-27 15:21:57 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
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?


Confirming that for most of my space life I've been rolling with Cybernetics 3.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#273 - 2015-01-27 15:22:05 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
The guy who stays docked still pays his subscription, so you may not care about him but CCP does.

It's not the fault of implants the guys stay docked, it's illusion that when he trained skills up with them he will be prepared for what will may come when he actually udock.
Removing implants won't solve anything, ppl who want to PvP will do so, as they do now.

Learning implants are optional, not must have to skill up.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Memphis Baas
#274 - 2015-01-27 15:22:48 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
First type are alts or people who will find any excuse to not go. Just as with trying to convince PVEers to PVP, you can't.


You're completely missing the point. Yes you despise or couldn't care less about them, but CCP does. Imagine that they get pissed off every time you tell people who are willing to pay their sub to HTFU or go away (back to WoW whatever).

Edward Olmops: Implants in your brain = same thing as rigs on your pod, at this point in time. Why bother changing the way the UI presents it conceptually? The underlying gameplay effect is the same.
Solops Crendraven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#275 - 2015-01-27 15:23:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Solops Crendraven
Gregor Parud wrote:
Solops Crendraven wrote:
AkJon Ferguson wrote:
Please just give us all the skills at V so that we never have to log in again and be done with it already! tia

Skills at Level V Splendid Idea! Next Change: You Buy A Ship Its Unlocked Forever It Gets Destroyed And Spawns Again Just Like Your Clones However Thats For the next thread.



I see you're adopting the itrollu.jpg tactic.
Whats A itrolly .Jpg tactic?
Rumours if CCP will Takes Away atributes Points/implants and skills .Regardless Dosnt serve a purpose for my style of play and for many others new players or semi In This game I do respect the opinions of those who oppose this. I dont got time to grind away in one game I play many I just wanna jump in Blow up ships without worrying if I need a inplant or set up my attributes wrong or just plain stuck with 2 years of skills that is worthless because I believed in that Hype on the Trailers. All I ask Is Just give us the options to Reset our SP And attributes anytime we want. Implants can stay I just wish it wasn't so damn expensive.

Moving To Las Vegas Watch Me Play Poker! enter link description here
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
#276 - 2015-01-27 15:26:31 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

If CCP is gonna remove learning implants, they should do it for the right reasons (ie they can deliver better gameplay options without them, lie it was with learning skills) and not the wrong reasons ("hey, if we remove these things, people will pvp their backsides off!!").



This. Personally I think attributes should be nuked. They serve no purpose anymore and limit training options. But learning implants don't need to be scrapped if you nuke attributes. They can easily just work on various skills and skills groups.

You can have cheap newbie level implants that work on frigate/small weapon systems. They can even be pretty high SP buffs to help newer players catch up with the vets. Then you can go down the chain where capital learning implants cost hundreds of millions.

I don't think the inherent system of "I risk more, so I learn faster" is a bad system at all. The problem is that it needs to be tiered better and a lot more flexible. Maybe I'm training Amarr BS V so I just buy a cheap implant that only hits that skill alone but works well on it. That way I can focus train, still PvP and not worry about loss as much. Or maybe I'm space rich and just prefer to spend billions on high SP learning implants that work for me across the board with all skills.

We need more choice, flexibility and options.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#277 - 2015-01-27 15:27:47 UTC
Solops Crendraven wrote:
Whats A itrolly .Jpg tactic?


You
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#278 - 2015-01-27 15:29:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
Memphis Baas wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
First type are alts or people who will find any excuse to not go. Just as with trying to convince PVEers to PVP, you can't.


You're completely missing the point. Yes you despise or couldn't care less about them, but CCP does. Imagine that they get pissed off every time you tell people who are willing to pay their sub to HTFU or go away (back to WoW whatever).

Edward Olmops: Implants in your brain = same thing as rigs on your pod, at this point in time. Why bother changing the way the UI presents it conceptually? The underlying gameplay effect is the same.


a) it'll be a very small portion of the players and b) what would you rather have more of? Said small portion going "Waah, people don't like my OCD" or all newer players going "waah, this game favours older players way too much, it's p2w because I need to buy plex to pay for slaves and crystals to compete".
Solops Crendraven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#279 - 2015-01-27 15:37:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Solops Crendraven
Gregor Parud wrote:
Solops Crendraven wrote:
Whats A itrolly .Jpg tactic?


You

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated
Im sure you wouldnt say this to my Face And your personal Attacks of calling me stupid have nothing to do with This Thread. I suggest you read the Forum rules http://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/forum-moderation-policy

Moving To Las Vegas Watch Me Play Poker! enter link description here
Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
#280 - 2015-01-27 15:38:41 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:

Edward Olmops: Implants in your brain = same thing as rigs on your pod, at this point in time. Why bother changing the way the UI presents it conceptually? The underlying gameplay effect is the same.


I stated earlier that I am not using many hardwirings, because they are too inflexible.
There may be times when I want to burn 10 times the same fitting (like in faction warfare), but most of the time I switch between lots of ships... armor vs. shield, different roles, different weapon systems, different tactics.

Any given hardwiring is just worthless 95% of the time, because I don't fly anything it gives a bonus on.

If I don't use them, it's because of this and not because they are too expensive or the risk is too high.

[it is true though that I never use pirate implants because they hurt SP/h. For the same reasons I never use Strategic Cruisers.]