These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dave Stark
#1061 - 2015-02-17 14:10:22 UTC
Warric NazGhoul wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
let me pose the question then;

why is it ok for new players to train skills slower? why is that a good thing for the game?



Why is it ok for new players to have less skillpoints over all
Why is it ok for new player to have "worse" ships then old player
Why is it ok for new players to .....

Ill tell you why, its because this is a MMO, not space shooter. All in EVE create a want to be better/have more. Be it isk or ships or killboard stats. If you remove this you will kill the game.

Would be interesting to know how long the average player that picks up lets say Battlefield play that came compare to EVE. For me I played Battlefield for maybe a month or two, and that's a really good game.

I played EVE on and off for 8.


i play both games - for different reasons.

the irony of battlefield is the guns you get at the start are some of the best.
Warric NazGhoul
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1062 - 2015-02-17 14:10:32 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
the problem is, the choice isn't meaningful. don't get me wrong - i'm all for choice, if it has meaning. the problem with SP is as i keep saying - you're just picking between two bad outcomes.

things i think are done right that are closely related to this topic - hardwirings.

Hardwirings are risked in combat, and also give you an edge in combat. do you edge out that last 5% with implants, or do you just go with an empty clone and keep your losses low if you aren't confident that extra 5% will tip it far enough in your favour?

or "do i armour tank, or shield tank?" do i want ewar, or extra damage? meaningful choices.

but picking what skills you train slowly just isn't interesting or engaging, it's like being asked if you want to be punched in the gut, or the jaw. by mike tyson, in his prime.

thankfully most of us don't have to deal with off remap skills much, if at all, and that's nice. however that doesn't mean we shouldn't try and improve the system just because we've, essentially, surpassed it.

There are other ways to teach newbies all those things - but limiting the areas of the game they can experience by hampering their SP/hour from the start isn't the way to teach them those things. mercilessly blowing up their untanked t1 industrial carrying all their worldly possessions is when they jump in to uedama without a scout is.



So you want to remove skillpoints then, skillpoints are never "interesting or engaging", skillpoints are the only laddering (and a pretty soft one) in EVE
Deacon Abox
Black Eagle5
#1063 - 2015-02-17 14:14:44 UTC
It's good that the whole issue of the Achura 3 charisma attribute stupidity was brought up. That situation was harmful to the game. However, the fix of removing all racial differences from the game was itself harmful. Now it doesn't matter hardly at all and Eve has lost something.

Many would probably say good riddance to all that racial stuff. But it did add interesting game play. And the blandness of the current character generation is sad. The game should never be made so easy that all choice is removed and you never can make a bad one. Sadly though that appears to be where it is headed.

New players will always be at a disadvantage. I was, even with my first character, in 2006. But if you love this game it does not debilitate you. Other things such as removing the BPO lottery but leaving T2 BPOs in the game are more harmful to newbies. I had skilled and ground standings in order to get into the lottery and then they ended it. I then went into invention but found there was no way to compete with the wonderful ME on T2 BPOs for ships. But that is an aside, and I've seen many complain about T2 BPO complainers. So I moved on into other parts of the game and found much fun, even if I did not build tech II ships. Point is you try to avoid becoming some nullsec Scrublord's meatshield, and you find a niche.

Removing attribute implants and attributes as a whole is taking a sledge hammer to, if it is even a problem, a problem that really only requires some scissors, needle and thread. And that is really only catering to OCD min/maxing game players. And, there is no way to avoid the pain of needing some breadth of sp in the beginning. It will not go away with the removal of attributes.

Sigh. But then this whole sledge hammer paradigm is EVE too. Go ahead and take away something that made the game interesting and enjoyable for many of your players. Players that stayed many years through horrible balancing such as the 3 year Drake era, the Acura attribute advantage, etc. You will lose many of those veteran players by dumbing down the game. But I suppose you think you will gain more new players. Hope they stick around for you.

CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting off button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.

Gabriel Ironfist
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1064 - 2015-02-17 14:21:59 UTC
First of all "What a Thread". I have been reading it for the past hour and some post I read completely while others I had to skip because it made no sense what so ever, but that is the reality of life and it is actually the reality in EvE. We can not make everyone happy. the world we live in is far from perfect, why do you expect the digital version to be so?

Not only in this forum but in the game you hear rants and complains about such and such is such a bad thing and needs to go, or someone wants a ship but cant have it etc etc. Well EvE is as real as it gets to real life and I do not think when you want a car that you dreamed of someone drops it to you garage and hands you the keys for it.

Before going in to the attributes and implants, I would like to ask all of you a question and want an honest answer.

- Would you go into the low security or non secured areas (the gethos, dark alley ways, forests etc.) of your home towns in your underware??? What would the outcome be in most cases? This game is as close to reality of our world as it can get. so common sense is essential...

Risk... I sometimes sit on a station in low sec looking at the stars thanks to the wonderful graphics people at CCP it is so nice to watch. I even fell a sleep couple times and woke up still alive... even at war times. I am always honoured to be killed by those who are willing to take the risk and shoot me.

Going into implants... I do not think any of the implants should be removed, but their slot assignments and the ammount you can use can be freed up. (a stacking penalty can apply here) For me the customization factor is what makes EvE so fun. I see people want everything. they want all the benefits of all the implants, all the skills set to "6" then what will happen? They will still get their ships handed to them in pieces and their pod blown up because they cant fit their ship and wont align knowing that they will loose their ship. so then it will be "Oh lets remove ship fitting" time because the illeterate D***b F**K can't fit his ship or read the warning sign going to low sec.

implants are the niche that the experts want in their heads for fights. if you are not willing to take the risk and the other guy is, what gives you the right to complain about his success and your failures. Our successes are built on our failures which is called experience. As a good friend of mine said to me once. "It is upto you how much you want to spend on learning"

If you can not take the Risk when you know you are immortal, what good are you?

Attributes: It is an other customization option so I like it. I would prefer to have the remap timer reduced to 3 months and maximum remaps you can have is set to 5 so it cannot accumulate over time. this will give players the option to speed their training at certain areas they wish.

Have jump clone creation available only in starter systems or all stations. remove the grinding need for jump clone creation. so new player can enjoy the benefits of it. and older players can go out in space and duel each other. so if you are in a situation they goes beyond your risk level you can just use a fresh clone to do what you want.

(if jump clone creation is allowed in all stations, then no implant/boosters/links/concord intervention option can be set for arranged duals which will make things equal)

Those who are good at this game will be good no matter what you do. and those suck at it will continue to suck what ever you do. I think the crazy learning curve of this game is what sets it apart from other MMO's in the market.

Before you leave a station you have to say" it is a good day to die" do not fear death. It can not keep you from waking up again in the EvE universe.. only you, keep youselves bound by fear of loosing...

Fly Safe my fellow capuleers!
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#1065 - 2015-02-17 14:22:58 UTC
Deacon Abox wrote:
Go ahead and take away something that made the game interesting and enjoyable for many of your players. Players that stayed many years through horrible balancing such as the 3 year Drake era, the Acura attribute advantage, etc. You will lose many of those veteran players by dumbing down the game. But I suppose you think you will gain more new players. Hope they stick around for you.


The game's complexity and what makes it interesting should come from ships, fittings, fleet compositions, tactics and above all piloting though, don't you agree?

And I really disagree that learning implants and attributes have made the game any more interesting anyway to be honest. Using hardwirings maybe, but generally when I have to think about learning 'plants and remaps it's a chore not something I actively want to log in to deal with.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#1066 - 2015-02-17 14:26:36 UTC
Tia Aves wrote:
Deacon Abox wrote:
Go ahead and take away something that made the game interesting and enjoyable for many of your players. Players that stayed many years through horrible balancing such as the 3 year Drake era, the Acura attribute advantage, etc. You will lose many of those veteran players by dumbing down the game. But I suppose you think you will gain more new players. Hope they stick around for you.


The game's complexity and what makes it interesting should come from ships, fittings, fleet compositions, tactics and above all piloting though, don't you agree?

And I really disagree that learning implants and attributes have made the game any more interesting anyway to be honest. Using hardwirings maybe, but generally when I have to think about learning 'plants and remaps it's a chore not something I actively want to log in to deal with.


If there's a play style that you personally don't like and actually is kinda detrimental to your own play style choices, would you want that removed?
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1067 - 2015-02-17 14:28:17 UTC
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#1068 - 2015-02-17 14:31:55 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
If there's a play style that you personally don't like and actually is kinda detrimental to your own play style choices, would you want that removed?


No? I don't really understand how your question is related to the thread topic.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1069 - 2015-02-17 14:32:52 UTC
Tia, just so you know, I'm not sure why you're being grilled for wanting a change that makes your gameplay better.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Walter Raliegh
The Shorty Regime
#1070 - 2015-02-17 14:35:06 UTC
I'm reading the thread and just to put something out there while were on the topic of changing attribute system. Perhaps if you do not remove the system in its entirety, maybe create something that actually "develops" the attributes. EVE is unique in that your attributes never grow. you can play for 10 years but your base attribute points never grow. I had the Idea that if you get podded you get an increase in some attribute points almost as some learning survival instinct that the clone passes to the medical clone from the lessons learned from it's death. It could also serve as a learning curve and make new players more likely to experience null/sec and WH spaces. You could calculate in diminishing returns each time you die and for a given time frame though so some one doesn't go out on a suicide spree to try and get a bunch of attribute points.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1071 - 2015-02-17 14:39:58 UTC
Walter Raliegh wrote:
I'm reading the thread and just to put something out there while were on the topic of changing attribute system. Perhaps if you do not remove the system in its entirety, maybe create something that actually "develops" the attributes. EVE is unique in that your attributes never grow. you can play for 10 years but your base attribute points never grow. I had the Idea that if you get podded you get an increase in some attribute points almost as some learning survival instinct that the clone passes to the medical clone from the lessons learned from it's death. It could also serve as a learning curve and make new players more likely to experience null/sec and WH spaces. You could calculate in diminishing returns each time you die and for a given time frame though so some one doesn't go out on a suicide spree to try and get a bunch of attribute points.


This is just a stupid remake of the stupid learning skills of old.
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#1072 - 2015-02-17 14:40:03 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Tia, just so you know, I'm not sure why you're being grilled for wanting a change that makes your gameplay better.


Yeah I know, and I feel like I have a pretty open mind about it to be honest. Although i'm generally for removal personally as I think it would be beneficial to the game as a whole i'd like to say that:
- My alt is training caps and is full Per/Wil mapped with +5's in, if CCP were to remove implants and attributes and give us a intermediate rate then I would lose out. I think CCP settling on an intermediate rate is much more likely than giving us the max rate.
- Generally in the last couple of months I have killed a lot more pods than I have lost. Removing learning implants would no doubt be detrimental to my KB.

So its not like its just me fighting for whatever is going to benefit me most.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1073 - 2015-02-17 14:57:48 UTC
EVE players like to tout the concept of rookies getting within striking distance of vets, but I don't think it's as true as people think. After participating in this thread, my feelings about the utility curve of characters has changed, to worse than before. And yeah, there's still some residual disparity in SP accumulation even after the removal of learning skills.

You have these vets who are skilling at full clip, with a lot of prereqs already under their belt, while new characters still have to train Cybernetics to IV or V and then come up with the ISK for attribute implants.

I already know the next order of business for changes is skill prereqs that are V, when they could be I or III. T2 ship prereqs, in particular. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they're some of the worst offenders of placing a time wall in front of characters.

Anyway. If the goal is to allow new characters to hit the ground running at the same speed as vet characters, variable attributes have to go. Implants, though, I think should stay, as a modification of base attributes.

I know it seems like I'm simply repeating myself, but I'm just arriving at the same conclusion after considering new arguments made in the thread.

Remaps are just awkward. I won't ever miss them if they go away. Variation by attribute is preserved (and there's still a reason to list them on skills) if we keep attribute implants.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Memphis Baas
#1074 - 2015-02-17 15:00:54 UTC
Tia Aves wrote:
So its not like its just me fighting for whatever is going to benefit me most.


Only one person in this thread is trying to make that sound like it's a bad thing.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1075 - 2015-02-17 15:12:50 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
EVE players like to tout the concept of rookies getting within striking distance of vets, but I don't think it's as true as people think. After participating in this thread, my feelings about the utility curve of characters has changed, to worse than before. And yeah, there's still some residual disparity in SP accumulation even after the removal of learning skills.

You have these vets who are skilling at full clip, with a lot of prereqs already under their belt, while new characters still have to train Cybernetics to IV or V and then come up with the ISK for attribute implants.

I already know the next order of business for changes is skill prereqs that are V, when they could be I or III. T2 ship prereqs, in particular. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they're some of the worst offenders of placing a time wall in front of characters.

Anyway. If the goal is to allow new characters to hit the ground running at the same speed as vet characters, variable attributes have to go. Implants, though, I think should stay, as a modification of base attributes.

I know it seems like I'm simply repeating myself, but I'm just arriving at the same conclusion after considering new arguments made in the thread.

Remaps are just awkward. I won't ever miss them if they go away. Variation by attribute is preserved (and there's still a reason to list them on skills) if we keep attribute implants.


The "wall" in front of T2 ships is not as much of an issue because you can do pretty much all roles in T1 now unlike before where logi work was pretty much T2 cruisers or don't bother. The funny point about these change is the worst offender for this is still the most painful because to use T2 logistics you pretty much need to skill it to IV and have the very vast majority of the related support skill at V for it to even work.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#1076 - 2015-02-17 15:15:10 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
Tia Aves wrote:
So its not like its just me fighting for whatever is going to benefit me most.


Only one person in this thread is trying to make that sound like it's a bad thing.


No it's fine to do so, as long as it's not marketed as "better for the game and newbies". Just be honest about it.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1077 - 2015-02-17 15:15:23 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
The "wall" in front of T2 ships is not as much of an issue because you can do pretty much all roles in T1 now unlike before where logi work was pretty much T2 cruisers or don't bother. The funny point about these change is the worst offender for this is still the most painful because to use T2 logistics you pretty much need to skill it to IV and have the very vast majority of the related support skill at V for it to even work.

I like that part, though. So I don't see why not allow players to have T2 ships with **** skills.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Airane
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1078 - 2015-02-17 17:30:09 UTC
Suede wrote:
CCP Darwin wrote:
Grace Chang wrote:
CCP Darwin wrote:
Sniper Smith wrote:
Or better explained. That's been the biggest flaw, not that it's complex, that it's complex AND you're on your own to figure it out.

If a new player picks skills they don't want later, that's a different issue: at least their skill training has enabled some experimentation and gameplay that might satisfy their curiosity about things they ultimately don't wish to do in EVE. But, the attribute system is just complexity for its own sake.


It is not. It is something that forces a choice. Choice makes people (characters) differ. Notice any RPG worth its salt has attributes? For any of those games your reasoning applies as well. Ultimately it is not about complexity - it is about choice. The idea is, that as a player, you have to consider trade-offs that define your choice: essentially you choose between a short term benefit vs. a long term benefit. You have to THINK what is important to you and what might not be a priority.


Player choice is not a value in itself. Imagine (for a moment) that the skill system required players to train one of two skills early on. One skill cuts their hit points in half, for all time, on all ships. Another cuts their damage in half, for all time, on all ships.

This would be a choice. It's even a choice between two things that directly affect how the core combat game plays out. But, it's a choice that feels bad because it's a choice between two options with no upside, and it's not fun. It would just be bad game design.

When you attempt to play optimally with attribute remaps, you either pick skills in line with your remap (yawn, of course you do) or you find yourself forced to deviate from your remap and it feels bad.



It's just like my hypothetical skills, where best case you'd be optimized for tanking and flying a freighter (where they would provide no benefit), and worst case you'd be bashing a POS for two hours while optimized for tanking (where it would actively make the gameplay less fun).



Attributes is a bad system, just mean it locks you in the one side of traning plan where you have to wait to get new remap
to change to set other skills


nothing to do with Risks it is more down to the fact of what the CCP DEV posted

Mharius Skjem
Guardians of the Underworld
#1079 - 2015-02-17 20:24:26 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Mharius Skjem wrote:
If I wanted to play WOW I would just play WOW or SWTOR, but you know what? WOW/SWTOR is for pussies, there's no risk, and no penalty for death and dying. If you go into battle you risk nothing.

Tell you what, when your ship respawns back in station with your skill hardwiring implants that you had when you get podded, then we will have WOW in space, till then Eve is still Eve learning implants or not.



That's my point, this is a slippery slope, if we allow any more of this, what you've described is exactly what we'll end up with.

A recovering btter vet,  with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...

Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...
Mharius Skjem
Guardians of the Underworld
#1080 - 2015-02-17 20:36:20 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
let me pose the question then;

why is it ok for new players to train skills slower? why is that a good thing for the game?



This is the common misconception.

New players train their skills at the same rate as everyone else.

Buying implants speeds this up.

In other words in-game activities such as learning about, finding and getting an implant leads to a tangible benefit.

This is called gameplay and some people like myself find it to be immersive.

Id also like to add that getting podded can cause you to lose this ingame bonus, this is also called gameplay.

At no time though are you learning more slowly than anyone else in the game, you are just gaining an advantage and then risking it in something called gameplay.

Without loss, or the fear of loss, all gameplay is worthless.

A recovering btter vet,  with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...

Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...