These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#541 - 2015-02-07 14:08:07 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:

I think it's going into removing attributes, remaps and learning implants direction. If players won't have the choices they won't choose wrong (i think it was in a movie i saw few months ago).


Clone grades were removed because it was a non-choice. If we are removing non-choices, why does it make sense to turn a choice into a non-choice.

That is a feature of EvE lots of us love, that it is entirely possible (and indeed a frequent occurance) to choose wrong.
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#542 - 2015-02-07 14:10:34 UTC
Solhild wrote:
This opens the door to an annual skill remap which means that players could deconstruct unwanted skills and load them into a new area ready for another year invested in the game. That would definitely be an improvement.


Gimme, gimme, gimme Roll

We are still arguing whether CCP give you an inch or a yard, and your already staking your claim on a mile. Truly, some people are never satisfied.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#543 - 2015-02-07 15:06:13 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Clone grades were removed because it was a non-choice. If we are removing non-choices, why does it make sense to turn a choice into a non-choice.

I didn't say i support this i just think it may happen. There are so many layers of the problem that removing the problem at all of them would be simplest solution.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#544 - 2015-02-07 17:20:31 UTC
Honestly the implant attributes should go. Its a needless system that ....

Its stupid. I'll be frank. It makes people risk adverse. My heads full of training implants, let me not go into lowsec/nullsec/wormhole space.

Kick training implants to the curb. Implants should make the pilot and the ship more effective. That is a decision you make to increase the value of your gameplay. The attribute implants really restrict people from committing to different gameplay becase (implants in my head) argument.

Kick them to the curb, make weaker versions of all the other implants (virtues, slaves, etc). For those screaming (no that would wreck gameplay?). Fine, make it so that they can't remove their implants in space when they have a timer on them. I'm sure they would love not being able to pull their implants before they die, ruining their killboard as they get podded in lowsec in their slaveset.

I'd do something like that.

Remove the training implants
Remove the ability to pull implants in space when you have a timer.

I would aim to do that. Hate it if you like, but I hate when we catch a person and they pull their implants before they get podded to "save" their killboard.

No training implants, people would leave highsec more and not fear dying that much because (damn I'll lose skillpoint training speed because implants).

Yaay!!!!
Solhild
Doomheim
#545 - 2015-02-07 17:20:32 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Solhild wrote:
This opens the door to an annual skill remap which means that players could deconstruct unwanted skills and load them into a new area ready for another year invested in the game. That would definitely be an improvement.


Gimme, gimme, gimme Roll

We are still arguing whether CCP give you an inch or a yard, and your already staking your claim on a mile. Truly, some people are never satisfied.


Not really sure what's wrong with you. I'm simply suggesting an opportunity to add choice to the game.
Pelle Wittewoa
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#546 - 2015-02-08 01:53:11 UTC
Pod death, and implants in? it should give some kind of reward to the killer (drops)!
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#547 - 2015-02-08 02:56:09 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Honestly the implant attributes should go. Its a needless system that ....

Its stupid. I'll be frank. It makes people risk adverse. My heads full of training implants, let me not go into lowsec/nullsec/wormhole space.

Kick training implants to the curb. Implants should make the pilot and the ship more effective. That is a decision you make to increase the value of your gameplay. The attribute implants really restrict people from committing to different gameplay becase (implants in my head) argument.

Kick them to the curb, make weaker versions of all the other implants (virtues, slaves, etc). For those screaming (no that would wreck gameplay?). Fine, make it so that they can't remove their implants in space when they have a timer on them. I'm sure they would love not being able to pull their implants before they die, ruining their killboard as they get podded in lowsec in their slaveset.

I'd do something like that.

Remove the training implants
Remove the ability to pull implants in space when you have a timer.

I would aim to do that. Hate it if you like, but I hate when we catch a person and they pull their implants before they get podded to "save" their killboard.

No training implants, people would leave highsec more and not fear dying that much because (damn I'll lose skillpoint training speed because implants).



Risk...go into low/null/w-space with expensive implants.

Or use a clone with cheap or no implants.

Choices....but hey...lets take choice away.

You know what stops me from doing pvp, losing a ship. Lets make it so you don't lose a ship. More pvp would be had by all.
Ben Ishikela
#548 - 2015-02-08 03:12:13 UTC
Raymond Moons wrote:
I like the idea of a training speed Booster pill. If it had a max duration of 24 hours (with the booster duration skill at 5) it would encourage people to log in every day to keep their SP gain up. The side effects could be a chance of -1 (scaled to implant) to one or more attributes. Which also slows training in some skills. So if you want the +5 pill you also have the most risk of getting a temporary attribute nerf.(...) A synth skill booster could be awarded to noobs in the turorial and would not only show them that they can get a training bonus from pills but also introduce them to the other performance boosters. Since boosters are temporary I'd expect them to cost less for a single pill and would represent less isk loss in one go if podded. The pills could have a material cost (...). Plus you could time your consumption around your typical PvP play times anyway.
Also encouraging drug use is so very bad ass, and so very Eve!(...)

This.

Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#549 - 2015-02-08 04:42:12 UTC
Pelle Wittewoa wrote:
Pod death, and implants in? it should give some kind of reward to the killer (drops)!

It does.. Nice Killmails :p
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#550 - 2015-02-09 03:35:11 UTC
Solhild wrote:
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Solhild wrote:
This opens the door to an annual skill remap which means that players could deconstruct unwanted skills and load them into a new area ready for another year invested in the game. That would definitely be an improvement.


Gimme, gimme, gimme Roll

We are still arguing whether CCP give you an inch or a yard, and your already staking your claim on a mile. Truly, some people are never satisfied.


Not really sure what's wrong with you. I'm simply suggesting an opportunity to add choice to the game.

No, what you're suggesting doesn't add choice. It removes the consequences of choice.
Giju
Mimoco
#551 - 2015-02-09 04:23:30 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.



I think the main point is that hardwirings, as you say, give you an edge in combat. So it's purely a choice , if you desire that "edge".

The thing with learning implants, at least from my perspective, is that by not having them it costs you more real cash money not to have them. The difference in time taken to train skills over one year between no implants and plus5's equates to a extra money to pay for your account for the same amount of skill points. It comes down to a value for money issue. Real money..
Beta Maoye
#552 - 2015-02-09 07:22:03 UTC
No objection to remove attributes/implants.

If they decided to keep the attribute and implant things, the remap restriction should be eased. Make the remap available each month for a certain sum of isk. Give pilots more freedom to choose their directions. One year is too long for today's computer game. Most people will not be interested in planning one year ahead for a video game.

The wide span of skill trees have already created very divisified characters and play styles. Master of any one area of skill sets already requires long period of time. I don't see any reason to keep the one-year restriction.
Leannor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#553 - 2015-02-09 09:18:41 UTC
Giju 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.



I think the main point is that hardwirings, as you say, give you an edge in combat. So it's purely a choice , if you desire that "edge".

The thing with learning implants, at least from my perspective, is that by not having them it costs you more real cash money not to have them. The difference in time taken to train skills over one year between no implants and plus5's equates to a extra money to pay for your account for the same amount of skill points. It comes down to a value for money issue. Real money..



but you're forgetting they cost isk, and the only way to get isk is to spend real time to earn it, thus using up real time money spent on time in game. And there's a wide range of cost.

Swings and roudnabouts my friend. (and you spend what you can afford, those with big wallets have done something to get those bigger wallats so don't go down the disproportionate road quite so easily)

"Lykouleon wrote:

STOP TOUCHING ICONIC SHIP PARTS"
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#554 - 2015-02-09 10:00:23 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
...a major developer concern was that the current system forces people to learn skills in a less-useful order if they want to optimize for SP/hour.

And that is the part that amazes me most.
Under current game design, players have to make decisions: either learn high-priority skill, or keep training with optimal SP/hour.
Players making decisions was always considered a good game design. And suddenly, this is "a major concern". WTF?
Leannor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#555 - 2015-02-09 10:14:23 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
CCP Darwin wrote:
...a major developer concern was that the current system forces people to learn skills in a less-useful order if they want to optimize for SP/hour.

And that is the part that amazes me most.
Under current game design, players have to make decisions: either learn high-priority skill, or keep training with optimal SP/hour.
Players making decisions was always considered a good game design. And suddenly, this is "a major concern". WTF?


I agree, where is the issue here? You know the score, you know what at risk, you know what the options are. You make a choice, and you either get SP epeen, or ability Epeen. People have different priorities. For every vet out there bragging about how many SP they have, there's a hundred more dedicated lesser SP person than could woop their ass in whatever they do. Be it mission, mining or fighting.

"Lykouleon wrote:

STOP TOUCHING ICONIC SHIP PARTS"
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
#556 - 2015-02-09 10:26:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Unezka Turigahl
Skia Aumer wrote:
either learn high-priority skill, or keep training with optimal SP/hour.


Sounds like learning skills.

Deciding what ship to fly, how to fit it, and how to fly it... these are interesting choices. Deciding to hang in hisec with +5s and train fast or derp around in null/WH and train slow... this is not an interesting choice. Fiddling around with jump clones and jump clone timers to try to have the best of both worlds is also not particularly compelling game play.
Leannor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#557 - 2015-02-09 10:36:24 UTC
Unezka Turigahl wrote:
Skia Aumer wrote:
either learn high-priority skill, or keep training with optimal SP/hour.


Sounds like learning skills.

Deciding what ship to fly, how to fit it, and how to fly it... these are interesting choices. Deciding to hang in hisec with +5s and train fast or derp around in null/WH and train slow... this is not an interesting choice. Fiddling around with jump clones and jump clone timers to try to have the best of both worlds is also not particularly compelling game play.


and that's just it. A choice with repercussions.

You p[lay it safe, and you get ahead in SP but get behind in the game play. Or you play it risky and get ahead in both. Or you play it simple and get ahead in gameplay and not in SP.

There is always a choice, and always a consequence for each choice.

That's the beauty of EVE. No other game has such interactive skill abilities. It's what makes EVE so immersive. Start peeling that away, eventually you'll get to a point where it's WOW (or rather DULL).

And yes, if you do 'start' peeling, you're more predisposed to peel the next layer away (even though you say you won't be now) and so on. History proves this (sometimes for better, sometiems for worse). Here, it is certainly for worse - if maintaning EVE as an mature game of intellgence is the objective.

"Lykouleon wrote:

STOP TOUCHING ICONIC SHIP PARTS"
flaming phantom
Unlimited LTD
#558 - 2015-02-09 11:10:00 UTC
I orignally posted quite a few comments (pages?) back expressing my dislike about removing implants and skill points.

After some thinking about it, I have changed my mind. I have realized this because I sometimes have the issue that I can only feasibly play once a week. I then have a choice if i don't want to risk my expensive clone:
1. clone jump to my clone without my expensive learning implants. Then I can't jump back untill the next day. Since I can't log in the next day, I basically go several days without effecient training.
2. don't jump, get more sp over the next few days, and don't pvp

I know it's my choice to not jump and not risk my implants, but if I am paying for game time (i.e. sp), then I would like to get my maximum amount I can. So i basically end up just pvping on nights when i know i can get back on the next day to switch my clone around. If we removed that system, then I know it wouldn't matter where I parked my clone for a few days when I won't get on, quite likely leading to me pvping more on those single nights i get the chance

All great men have mustaches
CCP Darwin
C C P
C C P Alliance
#559 - 2015-02-09 11:42:29 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Darwin
I'll again offer my caveat that I'm not on the team considering possible changes to the attribute system, just engaging in the conversation and speaking for another point of view.

Leannor wrote:
I agree, where is the issue here? You know the score, you know what at risk, you know what the options are. You make a choice, and you either get SP epeen, or ability Epeen. People have different priorities. For every vet out there bragging about how many SP they have, there's a hundred more dedicated lesser SP person than could woop their ass in whatever they do. Be it mission, mining or fighting.


There are a couple of specific issues with how this system currently works that make it less than ideal, both related to the new player experience:

1) Most new players learn about the full impact of the attribute system very late, and because the effect of the system is cumulative (the degree to which person A with a less-optimal remap falls behind person B with an optimal remap increases over time) it's frustrating for new players to discover, months into the game, that they've possibly left a lot of skill points on the table.

(This differs crucially from the case where a new player discovers that they've been training what, for whatever reason, they consider the wrong thing, because at least they've probably been participating in gameplay in the meantime that takes advantage of that choice.)

2) A new player who for some reason fully understands the attribute system on day 1 and can't bear to play suboptimally faces an optimal choice of starting with an int/mem remap and training mainly tons of support and drone skills that should be at V, deferring for months the ship and weapon system skills that widen the range of what they can do in the game. This player, like the player in (1), isn't having much fun either.

Those two issues add up to a system that more severely punishes new players (whether they know the system or not) who experiment or dabble in skills, and I think one could make a very good argument that such experimentation is essential for new players to try a range of activities in the game and find their place.

Note that I haven't said a word about the impact of fitting implants on PvP. :)

CCP Darwin  •  Senior Software Engineer, Art & Graphics, EVE Online  •  @mark_wilkins
Leannor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#560 - 2015-02-09 11:43:18 UTC
flaming phantom wrote:
I orignally posted quite a few comments (pages?) back expressing my dislike about removing implants and skill points.

After some thinking about it, I have changed my mind. I have realized this because I sometimes have the issue that I can only feasibly play once a week. I then have a choice if i don't want to risk my expensive clone:
1. clone jump to my clone without my expensive learning implants. Then I can't jump back untill the next day. Since I can't log in the next day, I basically go several days without effecient training.
2. don't jump, get more sp over the next few days, and don't pvp

I know it's my choice to not jump and not risk my implants, but if I am paying for game time (i.e. sp), then I would like to get my maximum amount I can. So i basically end up just pvping on nights when i know i can get back on the next day to switch my clone around. If we removed that system, then I know it wouldn't matter where I parked my clone for a few days when I won't get on, quite likely leading to me pvping more on those single nights i get the chance



I see where you're coming from, but it's all about risk versus reward. If I loose a pimped out ship, it's still 'money' I've lost as everything you do in game is born from your time in game. I have a choice to pimp out my brain, or not. Do you take the risk, or don't you. Take away the ris,, you take away the adrenaline rush when you go into battle. Everything becomes a little bit safer. Less risky. Less fun. It would be the same logic if you moved to a freelancer style of ship replacement. You get blown up, no worries, you get back to station in same ship you lost. Same logic applies.

While there is risk, reward and open clear choice that's fairly priced for all, I'm remain unconvinced on removing a game play factor.

(Sure change, modification, ... but not removal).

There's also the other economical factor. There's a **** tonne of implants on market, as of today. Of which value will be wiped, how would that be fairly resolved? And for those who have invested millions (or billions) in existing implants. How would they be recompenesed for purcahses that are now useless by game mechanic change? Where would the cut of be for 'well, you knew it was coming'. Would this remove the existing combo implants which are not just attribute based (or would their attribute element just get removed?).

I have to say, the whole attribute re-mapping thing is, and always has been, a joke. One line of training flips around will difference optimal remaps. And one typical route of training will not last a year. To be set optimised for one skill for a whole year ... useless ... most people either even it all out, or drop charisma. That they could simplify... just one attribute maybe ... but, the ability to speed up and enhance, with risk, and cost, ... that imo shouldn't be removed.

My previous idea about skill related implant combos ... personally i think is best. :-)

"Lykouleon wrote:

STOP TOUCHING ICONIC SHIP PARTS"