These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#821 - 2015-02-14 07:42:08 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid."

Heh, what a crock.

Just like how 'scatter cans' spewing loot at hacking sites was such a great idea and even though the playerbase said it was stupid, the development team decided to implement the change anyway under the pretense that it would promote and incite fleet exploration. Obviously it didn't do that and consequently was removed due to reduced player participation in that content. That's just one example. There's been plenty of other stupid things the development team has done over the years as well.

Personally I'm getting sick and tired of people trying to dictate to me how I should play this game. I pay my subscription and what I do with my game time is my business. If I choose to sit in a station and do nothing but train skills all the time then that's my right to do so as a paying customer.


DMC

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Midgard Academy
#822 - 2015-02-14 08:16:13 UTC
Why should we remove attribute implants? is it the risk of losing it in pvp? Have people not seen some of the pods being blown up in 0.0, they are sometimes worth more than the ships.

I learned a long time ago to use jump clones with cheaper implants in case i got podded in pvp, so you know I wouldnt feel bad. But implants today are not the same prices as they were 3 years ago. I dont feel bad losing a full set of +4s now. If you dont want to lose it, dont wear it. If you are afraid jump clones exist for a reason.

Why Can't I have a picture signature.

Also please support graphical immersion, bring back the art that brought people to EvE online originaly.
Celestia Via
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#823 - 2015-02-14 09:25:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Celestia Via
Rinai Vero wrote:


Can you ever think of a situation where your stats actually had an effect on your roleplay in EVE?

Like, say you remap all your int into cha... do you all of a sudden start auto piloting billions of isk worth of assets through known gatecamps planning on charming any hostiles?

Character sheets have no impact on EVE as an "RPG" as you are presenting it... and they shouldn't. Your *actions* in game are your roleplay, and only your actions distinguish your character. If you care about RP, how you play should reflect that regardless of your stats.

Is your Civire character a Caldari Loyalist? Probably not consistent RP to be running missions for Fed Navy LP. That's impactful to your play in a way that a Civire racial stat bonus to Wilpower vs Brutor +1 to Strengh probably never will be.

EVE doesn't need game mechanics to make characters have "more human - relatable traits." That's your job as a human who plays EVE: to portray your own character in the sandbox.


I was not talking about RP really, was I?

Roleplayers make their own stories, dont worry about them.
Its non-roleplayers that need the extra investment. Lets be real, everyone for example cares what their toon looks like.
Some are pretty, some are tough, some are deliberately ugly etc. but they all show that their owners spent time on their appearance.
Thats because the character is a human and relatable. One does not have to be an RPer to relate to their character, it just happens to everyone at some level.

and I insist that Eve characters need to be more relatable. Not for roleplayers, for everyone else. What do you hear people say most of the time? I love my ship, I love my isk, I love my mods. What would be so bad about people loving their toons as well??
And they would if they had any reason to. Reason like humanlike unique traits. Like attributes for example.

Edit: I cannot believe theres still people arguing on the implants cost issue.. The cost is irrelevant, the cost is a lie!!
If you wanna risk your ISK theres plenty of ways to do it, from buying expensive ships to blow up to gambling it on a ISK casino site.
Learning implant cost is irrelevant to everything.

"We marched for days and nights, under sun, in the rain. Our minds and bodies ached for rest, but in our hearts there was nothing but the fight."
CCP Darwin
C C P
C C P Alliance
#824 - 2015-02-14 10:11:00 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Darwin
Rain6637 wrote:
For devs: do your job, read feedback. I resent the "be nice to devs or they won't read your comments" bit of logic, if you can't tell. It's a cop-out, especially in this player culture.

I think we can all survive a little impassioned language. My point was that solely dismissing an argument as "stupid" with no real discussion wasn't likely to carry the conversation forward. "That's a stupid idea because A, B, C" is different from "OK, that's stupid, let's move on."

Quote:
This is making me wonder if instead of starting forum discussions about topics, I should open support tickets with questions. I have enough accounts to have 10 questions running at a time.

Please don't open support tickets about development-related questions, because the GMs won't be able to do much for you and it just gets in the way of other people's issues getting addressed. Of course, with practical in-game issues today, opening a ticket is quite welcome and appropriate.

Quote:
Yeah. Sometimes I just want answers, and this thread has revealed itself as being pointless.

There are no answers at this time. No decision has been made yet on what any of these possible game changes would be, so all we can do is discuss implications of possibilities. If you wanted concrete information about what changes are going to be made to the game in this regard, you won't get it, but the developers don't have that either.

Quote:
Most relevant threads get decent DEV activity, it's just that there's no point in faking interest if there's already a design decision made. We're Don Quichotting against something that's already decided.

That's not really how it works. Someone on the development team may hold a strong opinion, but they'll read your arguments and at least ask themselves whether it changes their mind. Feedback does change developer minds on things all the time, but also reasonable people can disagree with your argument. It can go either way.

CCP Darwin  •  Senior Software Engineer, Art & Graphics, EVE Online  •  @mark_wilkins
Jane Shapperd
Quafe Commandos
The Commonwealth.
#825 - 2015-02-14 10:48:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Jane Shapperd
My solution still up there and honestly no one seems to have anything against it .
If you have anything against my solution please post explaining to me why its bad, i will post some frequent arguments and counter them. So please read them before you type the very same argument !!!

Okay.

A - Remap is horrible , It should be scraped as whole.
the main problem with it its not forgiving if you screw it up , also it doesn't provide a good choice for new players to train into specific ships. For example say i am newbie and i wanna be a guardian pilot i'd have to remap 4 times to be perfect guardian pilot while maintain highest Sp/hour assuming i have all +5 implants .

here are the remaps :

1- Will power - Perception : to train Amarr cruiser to 5
2- Intel - Memory : to train armor tank . remote armor reps , remote cap , cap management , target management ,etc...
3- Perception - Will power : to train logistics to 5
4- Memory - Perception : to train combat and/or repair drones .

Don't get me wrong that is almost the same thing i done excluding Remapping for the last two things Memory - Perception and Perception - Will power .
Basically my first year was a shot gun attributes spared among all attributes , 2nd year was Will power - Perception , 3rd year is Intel - Memory . ( i managed to be an almost perfect guardian pilot in my 2nd year ) i am currently training JDC 5 with half correct attribute ) used to be on Will power - Perception remap JDC 5 takes 34 days , i remapped half remap to ntel - Memory and managed to cut 4 days from JDC 5 (That not even full remap ). The reason why i didn't do Intel - Perception is because Intel - Memory skills way more longer than navigation skill tree and i would need to train that as soon as i am done from JDC 5.

Basically i am not bitching about the current system i know what the **** i am doing. But for newbies sake it doesn't help them at all. it just fucks them over and over for wanting to be a perfect pilot for a particular ship .

my suggestion is scrap the whole remap and giving all pilots the same attributes.
This will achieve :
I- people not feeling bad about their bad choice for a whole year.
II - Giving newbies the same base training as veteran pilots and preventing newbies from screwing their self up .

B- Implants :
I love implants as they are.
This is just an effort to keep them unchanged or minimize the change that is going to happen to them .

Now from the posts in this threadnaught many people established many problems with implants and they can be concluded in these points .

1- Learning implants does not help or give a bonus to the ship i am undocking in . I basically spend 105mills on +5 that wont help me when undocking. Basically it encourages me to stay docked.
2 - Learning implants fills some slots i use for my pvp clone.
3- expensive implants prevents me from undocking and joining frigate roams as they cost more than frigates .

My suggestion is :
1- Keep Hardwiring implants as they are.
there were some arguments against them but they don't hold up .
2- Remove attribute bonus from all faction implants.

3- Move training implants to slots 11-15. ( while keeping training speed boost as the current system)

4- Give a bonus when having at least two learning implants while keeping training sp( bonus doesn't get effected if u have more than 2 learning implants , as the current system requires you to have only two learning implants to get the max sp/hour)

The bonus is basically based on your learning implant , ship bonuses and size.
(size for balancing reasons)
Lets say +5 gives you 0.5 of your ship bonus , +4 gives you 0.4 of your ship bonus and so forth.
t1 Small ships (aka frigates and destroyers) gets the full bonus from your implant.
t2 , t3 small ships and t1 medium ships gets half the bonus from your implant.
t2, t3 medium ships and large ships gets quarter the bonus from your implant.
t2 large ships and capital ships get the one eighth the bonus from your implant.

So what does that mean ? lets take a ship as an example assuming you have +5 implant .
First e.g , The Rifter .

It has two bonuses 5% to small projectile damage and 10% bonus to small projectile falloff
the learning implant bonus would give you 2.5% projectile damage and 5% bonus to small projectile falloff.
at max skills that's like having Minmatar frigates trained to 5.5.
should be worth using an implants that is way more expensive than the hull.

another e.g is the Armageddon
It has to It has two bonuses 10% to drone damage, energy neuts and vamps range.
the learning implant bonus would give you 1.25% to drone damage , energy neuts and vamps range.
at max skills it like having Amarr battleship trained to 5.125.
Now that should be worth it since the implant you undocked is a bit cheaper than the hull.

What would it achieve ?

I - Encourage people to undock in their learning implants.
II- Solve the issue with undocking with expensive implants in frigates.
III- Solve with being unable to use a learning and pvp clone at once.
IV- ke


Frequent arguments and counters :

A - I don't use pvp because my implants.
well this bonus give u a reason to undock and pvp in you ships.
If you don't like that , then ******* Jump clone.

B - My pvp clone is more expensive than my learning and i don't mind risking either.
Well now u have the ability to have both implants in 1 clone Risk as you like.

C- Jump cloning is not a viable choice because the cool down .
Well jump clone provides you a very safe option to store your implants without fearing of losing them.
The cool down time is a consequence of having you implants saved. YOU should weight the risk vs reward correctly before jump cloning .

D- remove implants.
the beats the whole idea of training faster than the other guy next to you

If you have any arguments against my solution be my guest
Mihnea Tepes
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#826 - 2015-02-14 11:06:45 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Phoenix Czech wrote:
Two things I do not like on this:
1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap.
2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).


1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis.

2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer.

A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty.

Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid."



I agree with Phoenix Czech.

Can I ask you one simple question? I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.
Jane Shapperd
Quafe Commandos
The Commonwealth.
#827 - 2015-02-14 11:20:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Jane Shapperd
Mihnea Tepes wrote:
CCP Darwin wrote:
Phoenix Czech wrote:
Two things I do not like on this:
1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap.
2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).


1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis.

2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer.

A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty.

Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid."



I agree with Phoenix Czech.

Can I ask you one simple question? I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.





Memphis Baas wrote:
I don't own this game. All I have is a license to access this game's servers with its client.
CCP doesn't owe me anything for being a player.
Any time and effort I put in this game is a waste of my life.

Therefore CCP retains the right to change anything they want, including shutting down the servers for good when this becomes unprofitable, and they don't owe me anything.

Like any game.



^^This

so when they say something will changed , you'd better have a good explanation to convince them not to .
After all its their game not ours
Thonys Visser
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#828 - 2015-02-14 11:27:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Thonys Visser
Well ....it is simple
He or she who has implants in his ...head..Thinks... two times before going into battle

so if you want more people in pvp ...the implants must re-spawn in the new cloon

Otherwise a care bears thinks twice

http://youtu.be/ql1QIqS_pq0 ( C Dion Think twice )

and yes i am still a miner after 3 year
and never saw -o.o for the past 2 years

why not ....? Well i think twice
Jane Shapperd
Quafe Commandos
The Commonwealth.
#829 - 2015-02-14 11:36:25 UTC
Thonys Visser wrote:
Well ....it is simple
He or she who has implants in his ...head..Thinks... two times before going into battle

so if you want more people in pvp ...the implants must re-spawn in the new cloon

Otherwise a care bears thinks twice

http://youtu.be/ql1QIqS_pq0 ( C Dion Think twice )

and yes i am still a miner after 3 year
and never saw -o.o for the past 2 years

why not ....? Well i think twice


That beats the risk vs reward and removes the joy of destroying some1's else implants
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#830 - 2015-02-14 11:43:59 UTC
Mihnea Tepes wrote:

I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.

Probably you missed the discussions about that going on for a while ... there is a significant number of players lobbying for a change in the attribute system.

I'm my own NPC alt.
Thonys Visser
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#831 - 2015-02-14 11:48:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Thonys Visser
Quote:
That beats the risk vs reward and removes the joy of destroying some1's else implants


i see you do not get my point ...

besides that ..
on forehand you do not know if there is value in that cloon
so if there are no implants in that cloons head you are heavenly disappointed i presume

the point is i do not take any risk
if i have 300 mil of value in my cloons head
and i must battle a 50 mil vessel
the risk is just to high
Jane Shapperd
Quafe Commandos
The Commonwealth.
#832 - 2015-02-14 11:57:37 UTC
Thonys Visser wrote:
Quote:
That beats the risk vs reward and removes the joy of destroying some1's else implants


i see you do not get my point ...

besides that ..
on forehand you do not know if there is value in that cloon
so if there are no implants in that cloons head you are heavenly disappointed i presume

the point is i do not take any risk
if i have 300 mil of value in my cloons head
and i must battle a 50 mil vessel
the risk is just to high

i get your point

which is why i suggested in my earlier post adding a bonus depending on your ships size and the implant bonus

u get better bonus as in smaller ships than larger ships
and you get better bonus by better implants
Inovy Dacella
Empire Assault Corp
Dead Terrorists
#833 - 2015-02-14 12:03:28 UTC
IMO, training implants are good because I find balancing the cost and risk verses reward interesting. They push you to think and make choices. Even so, I think they could be removed from the game if they are simultaneously replaced with something more interesting. For example different clone types, and more hardwire variety.

If you take away a toy, please replace it with another.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#834 - 2015-02-14 12:31:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
Thonys Visser wrote:
Well ....it is simple
He or she who has implants in his ...head..Thinks... two times before going into battle

so if you want more people in pvp ...the implants must re-spawn in the new cloon

Otherwise a care bears thinks twice

http://youtu.be/ql1QIqS_pq0 ( C Dion Think twice )

and yes i am still a miner after 3 year
and never saw -o.o for the past 2 years

why not ....? Well i think twice


Stop lying. If you're still a miner after 3 years then it's not because of implants.




Thonys Visser wrote:
Quote:
That beats the risk vs reward and removes the joy of destroying some1's else implants


i see you do not get my point ...

besides that ..
on forehand you do not know if there is value in that cloon
so if there are no implants in that cloons head you are heavenly disappointed i presume

the point is i do not take any risk
if i have 300 mil of value in my cloons head
and i must battle a 50 mil vessel
the risk is just to high


Nothing is keeping you from using jump clones for a (few) day(s) to pvp. You not PVPing doesn't have anything to do with implant cost.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#835 - 2015-02-14 12:33:55 UTC
Tipa Riot wrote:
Mihnea Tepes wrote:

I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.

Probably you missed the discussions about that going on for a while ... there is a significant number of players lobbying for a change in the attribute system.


If people would come up with the idea that new characters should start with 50 mil SP, 20 bil isk and a free Nyx you'd probably get the same (amount of) people lobbying for it.
Mihnea Tepes
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#836 - 2015-02-14 12:53:02 UTC
Jane Shapperd wrote:
Mihnea Tepes wrote:
CCP Darwin wrote:
Phoenix Czech wrote:
Two things I do not like on this:
1) It will probably lead to slow skilling. Skilling is already slow enough even with +5 implants and max. remap.
2) Actual atribute system force me to thing about skilling. Make plans for sklil que and remaps. It force me to use my brain. Removing this mechanic simply move eve closer to stupid arcade game types. If I would like play games where pushing two buttons is maximum possible, I would play another game (Pac Man for example).


1) is an assumption that really doesn't have a basis.

2) Regardless of skill training speed, there are plenty of difficult choices to make in a system where you can only train one (out of hundreds) of skills at once, and they usually take days, or longer.

A system that required you to solve a math problem before adding a skill to your skill queue would also force you to use your brain while choosing skills, but it would be a ridiculous gameplay roadblock. Tests of knowledge or skill that have no relevance to the rest of the game aren't inherently valuable solely because they add difficulty.

Finally, I'd advise that if you're trying to change the mind of the development team, you're best off arguing your case rather than dismissing arguments on the other side of the question as "stupid."



I agree with Phoenix Czech.

Can I ask you one simple question? I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.





Memphis Baas wrote:
I don't own this game. All I have is a license to access this game's servers with its client.
CCP doesn't owe me anything for being a player.
Any time and effort I put in this game is a waste of my life.

Therefore CCP retains the right to change anything they want, including shutting down the servers for good when this becomes unprofitable, and they don't owe me anything.

Like any game.



^^This

so when they say something will changed , you'd better have a good explanation to convince them not to .
After all its their game not ours


Correct me if I am wrong, but this game is not for free and as I pay for something, I should be treated as a customer.

Regarding lobby, i can see you posting here mostly about how you want a change.
Implants are not cheap, you need to skill them too (+5 implants especially) and its everyone's choice to have them or to not have them.
If you are afraid to lose them or you don't know how to make isk in game, your choice, but stop putting your complexes or insecurity on other members in game.
Diemos Hiaraki
Septentrion
#837 - 2015-02-14 12:58:34 UTC
snip
Mihnea Tepes wrote:

I agree with Phoenix Czech.

Can I ask you one simple question? I didn't notice players requesting such a change of game mechanism and this is significant change. System we have now works just fine, we didn't ask you to change it, so why we need to beg you to listen to the fact that we, as players, just completely disagree with you.



IIRC Tippia had a thread in F&ID a couple of years back that ran for a while with comments from greater minds than my own about clone costs, implants and jump clones. Folks have been asking for changes to get more pilots out of high sec for years and with CCP in a risk taking mood they appear to be looking at all options that appear to young Eve pilots as a barrier; attributes and implants is only a tiny part of that problem.

I want new players to remain in game and if Eve is to thrive (and in a lot of ways appears to be getting better atm) I think a lot of the old perceptions will need to be challenged. The solution for this particular issue I think is to reduce the cost of learning implants by seeding Blueprints for and +3 and +4 (with +5 made through invention and associated an advanced implant indy skill.) Make the basic implants worthless and they are no longer perceived problem for the new/young character. No need to change the pirate ones or hardwiring under those circumstances (risk being a problem experienced players should worry about; new players should be empowered with their new immortal bodies imo.) For attributes introduce a skill (trained to 3 automatically for new players) called 'automatic neural mapping' or something akin to that which maps attributes without anyone having to worry about it. Jump clones also need standings requirements reduced imo, but that isn't something I'd worry about too much if the price of basic learning implants went down dramatically.
Soltys
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#838 - 2015-02-14 13:23:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Soltys
The proper solution is to enrich the mechanics, adjust what's not so well adjusted and put everything into players hands.
Dumbing the game down to the lowest common denominator (remove this, remove that, equalize those) is not the solution.

E.g. what I orignally posted in the F&I section. Seems many answers there were mostly from "let's dumb everything down, it will be awesome and equalized then" crowd.

For simplicity repost here after edits:

On a related note - if the subject is on the platter - shouldn't there be some feedback sticky ?


Well, the current system is good. It perhaps needs a bit more flexiblity or - so to speak - control in the players hands. But not removal or dumbing down ...

1) Regarding remap points

Introduce something like "Remap pill". The only source are players - add BPOs, skillbook that enables its production (perhaps only in POSes) and consumption (with some sensible prerequisite skills).

Choose sensible materials (lots to choose from - rocks, gas, ice, planets, moons, drops) and settle the cost at some sensible value (say, 100m ? perhaps more ? something not utterly trivial, but still mattering).

Put it in booster group, consuming it enables the player for the following 15 minutes to freely play with its attributes. Last setup becomes permanent after the timeout, obviously.

After adding the above, get rid of all timed / bonus remap points. It's not like new players need to touch attributes for "baby" skilling up, and for most level 3s/4s (and low rank 5s) it's meaningless to do so either way. When they grow up and learn the game more, then they can focus on planning and remapping.

Example:

"remap pill" booster
effects:
- allows attribute remapping for 15 minutes
side effects:
- unable to take another pill for 30 days

Neurotoxin Control influences the cons. Neurotoxin Recovery doesn't work on this.

BPOs seeded in usual station, can be produced in POS only. Required resources for production T.B.D.

2) Implants

Introduce normal BPOs for only standard (+1 to +5, perhaps up to +7) implants with obvious stuff (skillbook(s) prerequisite) without going into too big complexities (except +5 and better ones). This will drive the prices down and patch the "risk aversion" factor to be more in common with losing T1/T2 junk than expensive faction bling.

Emphasis: the point is to turn +1 - +4 into something equivalent to T1 rigs, and +5 (and better ones) into equivalent of T2 rigs. With full control in players' hands.

This opens other (future) options as well - giving players ability to produce implants with other/bonus effects from all slots.

3) Other stuff

Cerebral Accelerators - these could be moved to invention and more complex production. From standard BPOs (see #2 above) to appropriate grade of cerebral accelerator (of only that particular attribute), then lift "newbies" only limitation. It's guaranteed hit and can be sensibly balanced.

Possible cons: 20% chance to have negative effect on other attributes (4 rolls, 1 roll per each remaining attribute, chance can be lessened with skills).

Example:

"neural boost - basic" BPO -> BPC -> invention -> "Neural Cerebral Accelerator - basic" BPC
Can be produced in POS only. All cerebral accelerators share same slot.

effects:
- +9 willpower for N days (t.b.d.) (overall x3 effect of equivalent implant)
- duration N days

side effects:
- 20% chance for each other attribute to go -9 for N days

Neurotoxin Recovery and Neurotoxin Control influence the cons.

This keeps existing system in place, makes it far more flexible, enriches existing industry disciplines. Cost/complexity/difficulty can be banally balanced at will by CCP. At the same time real new players don't have to worry about it in the beginning and will naturally discover it in time.

Jita Flipping Inc.: Kovl & Kuvl
Jane Shapperd
Quafe Commandos
The Commonwealth.
#839 - 2015-02-14 13:23:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Jane Shapperd
Mihnea Tepes wrote:


Correct me if I am wrong, but this game is not for free and as I pay for something, I should be treated as a customer.

Regarding lobby, i can see you posting here mostly about how you want a change.
Implants are not cheap, you need to skill them too (+5 implants especially) and its everyone's choice to have them or to not have them.
If you are afraid to lose them or you don't know how to make isk in game, your choice, but stop putting your complexes or insecurity on other members in game.


Jane Shapperd wrote:

I love implants as they are ( i am feeling sad just thinking about what would happen if they get removed).
This is just an effort to keep them unchanged or minimize the change that is going to happen to them .


as i said earlier i don't wanna them changed or removed but CCP will change them no matter what u say ( after all its in CSM notes )
so i am trying to find a solution that would suit their goals while keeping what i love about implants

i use +5 implants all the time and i pvp in them i don't give a **** if i lose them as long as i train faster than other players
Jane Shapperd
Quafe Commandos
The Commonwealth.
#840 - 2015-02-14 13:37:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Jane Shapperd
Soltys wrote:

1) Regarding remap points

Introduce something like "Remap pill". The only source are players - add BPOs, skillbook that enables its production (perhaps only in POSes) and consumption (with some sensible prerequisite skills).

Choose sensible materials (lots to choose from - rocks, gas, ice, planets, moons, drops) and settle the cost at some sensible value (say, 100m ? perhaps more ? something not utterly trivial, but still mattering).

Put it in booster group, consuming it enables the player for the following 15 minutes to freely play with its attributes. Last setup becomes permanent after the timeout, obviously.

After adding the above, get rid of all timed / bonus remap points. It's not like new players need to touch attributes for "baby" skilling up, and for most level 3s/4s (and low rank 5s) it's meaningless to do so either way. When they grow up and learn the game more, then they can focus on planning and remapping.


+1 good idea


Soltys wrote:
2) Implants

Introduce normal BPOs for only standard (+1 to +5, perhaps up to +7) implants with obvious stuff (skillbook(s) prerequisite) without going into too big complexities (except +5 and better ones). This will drive the prices down and patch the "risk aversion" factor to be more in common with losing T1/T2 junk than expensive faction bling.

Emphasis: the point is to turn +1 - +4 into something equivalent to T1 rigs, and +5 (and better ones) into equivalent of T2 rigs. With full control in players' hands.

This opens other (future) options as well - giving players ability to produce implants with other/bonus effects from all slots.
.


This wouldn't change anything the price is not the problem making people undock/pvp in them is the problem
well why not hammer the lp cost and isk cost when u buy them from lp store that would serve the same suggestion u suggested

Soltys wrote:

3) Other stuff

Cerebral Accelerators - these could be moved to invention and more complex production. From standard BPOs (see #2 above) to appropriate grade of cerebral accelerator (of only that particular attribute), then lift "newbies" only limitation. It's guaranteed hit and can be sensibly balanced.

Possible cons: 20% chance to have negative effect on other attributes (4 rolls, 1 roll per each remaining attribute, chance can be lessened with skills).

Example:

"neural boost - basic" BPO -> BPC -> invention -> "Neural Cerebral Accelerator - basic" BPC
Can be produced in POS only. All cerebral accelerators share same slot.

effects:
- +9 willpower for N days (t.b.d.) (overall x3 effect of equivalent implant)
- duration 2 weeks

side effects:
- 20% chance for each other attribute to go -9 for N days

Neurotoxin Recovery and Neurotoxin Control influence the cons.

This keeps existing system in place, makes it far more flexible, enriches existing industry disciplines. Cost/complexity/difficulty can be banally balanced at will by CCP. At the same time real new players don't have to worry about it in the beginning and will naturally discover it in time.

+ 1 gives players very interesting choices