EVE General Discussion

Yes, and the designers who are looking at this question recognize that this is a big issue. There are various possible solutions (and there's probably some value in speaking up in this thread if you think of something interesting yourself that you feel would be a good step forward for the game.)

Edit: I'm not aware of anyone who's proposing removing implants. Eliminating attributes would require removing attribute bonuses on implants, of course, but possibly replaced by some other bonus of some kind.

Thanks. Implants have been a big money earner ever since dot, and they're entwined with loyalty points yada yada, so yeah, it certainly is not as simple as just removing a class of missile.

After following this thread, my ideal solution to the 'implants reduce PVP' dilema would be as follows.

First acknowledge that implants are but a replacable excuse for PVP avoidance, for most people. (Has there been a significant increase in PVP since clones were dumped?). If you're still insistant on addressing the issue ...

Second, consider greater ability to move within clones easier or move implnats easier. Idea 1) Simillar to Jump Fatigue, have clone fatigue. THis enables you, during one days activity, to login to your skill prioritised clone. Decide you're going to fight, jump to the PVP focused clone, fight, then after battle (say a few hours) jump back to skill clone and log off for the day. When you log in the next day rinse and repeat. After that second switch you need to wait 12 hours, after which you got 3hr wait. idea 2) You have JC as current, and can jump between them as current, but implants follow you around / or are located in a stations clone vat. And you're able to switch between implant sets within that station. (this excludes the ability to unplug and sell, just allows the ability to switch within the clone bay. Again, there can be a timer delay on this as idea 1).

Third ... personally I don't like the attribute idea, especially the one year re-map. And if your aim is to free up slots, or re-address this entirely, then (in conjunction with above, or not ) my previous idea of having each implant (ten at anyone time is good) made up of attribute (or not) plus skill specific boost. Like the way you have heat on modules. YOu can have boosters on up to ten skills at any one time. Maybe paired with the more generic '+5% Shield HP' type hardwiring, but the pairing of the choosing of the player - within various restrictions (like only sheild skills with a shield boost - or the opposite to avoid doubling impacts). [edit: probably not clear here, but this is advocating the entire removal of the whole attribute 'thing', and replacing it with just skill based boosters paired with existing hardwiring type implants]

Happy to talk offline, via evemail. :) I could talk now about how and why this would be good, and all the subtext remaifications of what I've said above ... but that would be a thesis, and even the above is probably enough to turn most people off before they get to the bottom. lol

Noting one more time that I'm not a game designer and not on the team considering these changes, just participating in the conversation. :)


I think you missed my point, which was that the attribute system explicitly punishes behavior that it's probably better to encourage for new players, trying out a range of different skills, ships, modules. Choices with consequences are great, they're what makes EVE what it is, but a choice between optimal play and fun play is probably not where you want to end up as a game designer.

(Edit: To be perfectly clear about what I mean, optimal play with the attribute system means picking skills that match one's current remap rather than the skill one would like to play around with in the game. For a veteran player who's already tried everything EVE has to offer or who is already juggling multiple accounts, this is not as much an issue, but for a new player, it gets in the way of trying out different types of gameplay.)

An example of a meaningful choice that isn't like that is the choice between fitting a PvP ship for more tank vs. extra damage. There's a downside to fitting a very light tank, but the upside (doing more damage) leads to more fun gameplay. And, you could make the argument the other direction, too, that having a strong tank can be fun in its own way.

I think one of the reasons that the attribute system is getting a look is that all the choices you can make with attributes feel kind of bad. The time scale of the impact of a decision is so long that you never really know if you're making a mistake by committing to a remap, and the reward is so deferred and so abstract that the system always feels like it's punishing you.

Actually, one very fair way of removing implants from the game? ...

Do not introduce anymore, remove any BPO/BPC (if any exist), and just let those on the market sell out. As people loose them, they slowly decrease.

This could be done covertly, so as not to raise prices until right near the end.

Or it could be done openly, so the current remaining implants out there rise in value.

All this with a back drop that after 'x' years, inactive players (for 'x' time) will have them removed, and then after 'x' more time, active players will have them removed also (where x plus x is known before hand and where that time period also is considered to be 'having ones money worth from them'. - that last bit will be a bigger debate.... lol)

Hmm, then my options above work. I have no love for the Attributes, other than sentimentality. Especially the lock in etc.

But removing implants - would be a bad idea imo.
Removing the ability to enhance skill training at some risk and/or cost - also bad imo.

Removing Attributes, and replacing that with skill specific (or, hell, even 'skill type' specific) SP boosters .. now there's an idea.

Adjusting JC'ing so that's it's possible to 'effectively' have an offline clone and an online clone, ... that's useful.

:)

The obvious is to replace the attribute increases with a flat % speed increase within certain skill categories. Most categories use the same Primary/Secondary (with the occasional exception), so say Attributes get binned, turn the Perception Implants in to Implants that increase training speed in the categories that used to have Perception as the main attribute.

remove remap.

give a new attirbute bonus slot. (only bonus implants can be fit in this slot)

create new bonus implants bpo's with 3% 4% 5% 6% increase to training time on all attributes.

implants lasts for 3 months, cannot be removed once fit.

they die with pod deaths.

cost of implants bpo reflected by level of bonus given.

makes it easy to understand and gives us some new content to make isk from.

If it weren't for (2), a better presentation of the feature might be a way to deal with (1) However...



Yes, I'm pretty sure that a brand-new player who plays optimally from day 1 by mapping for and focusing heavily on support skills is probably not having much fun, because they're not training skills that let them do new things (which is how you explore the game as a new player.) I agree that's not a scenario that often occurs in the game, but it would probably be the result of a complete understanding of the impact of the attribute system being granted to a new player on the first day.

Edit: I'm going to step back from this discussion a bit, since like I say I'm not involved in the design efforts discussed in the CSM minutes, and I don't want to stifle conversation on the matter in this thread. Whether you agree or disagree with the ideas I've put forth, I hope they've helped provide some perspective about why these game mechanics may be under discussion.

As the CSM Winter Summit notes state, these conversations are in an early stage and what form any related changes might make hasn't been worked out, so please continue offering your thoughts.

There's a pretty simple way to go about this.

Remove basic learning implants; leave pirate implant sets. Shift all skill hardwirings up five slots to 1-5, where they would now occupy the same slots as pirate implant sets do. Leave slot 6 available for pirate omegas and gang bonus mindlinks.

Remove implant slots 7-10.

Then, remove attributes entirely. Retool the SP gain formula to work as if every attribute was 32 (max remap with +5s.)

Boom, I fixed skill training. Yes, it would require you to choose between pirate implants and skill hardwirings; this is a good thing.

Just give every player every ability at 5 then everyone can be on equal footing. No consequences.

But then the cost of ships would be prohibitive to someone.

Then lets make every ship free.

Then everyone can be consequence and risk free and space ships can be blown up and everyone can brag about the killmails.