These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

How would EVE break if we removed skills altogether?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#521 - 2015-10-15 12:58:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
Dror wrote:
...
Again.. quite the generalization. Martial arts are one of the few activities that are set up as a group learning activity. Yet, even then -- it's still just in a classroom with others, following an instructor. It's not sparring nor relying on others until much later.

Massive generalization there yourself, there are very very few practice drills I have learnt so far that do not rely on a partner working with you with pads and or gloves. Sparring is pretty much immediate in this instance. I'm sure many martial arts would be the same.

Ed: Also try practicing football on your own, maybe tennis, perhaps fencing, or well anything else where you have to compete with others.

As to your point about player corps not being a major factor in player retention you are wrong. A player corp will give a new player advice on what they can do, how to do it, where to do it, safety measures to take etc etc. This would all still be required even if you removed SP. Having perfect level V skills will still not help a retriever in losec when any combat ships jumps it for instance.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#522 - 2015-10-15 13:29:31 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Dror wrote:
...
Again.. quite the generalization. Martial arts are one of the few activities that are set up as a group learning activity. Yet, even then -- it's still just in a classroom with others, following an instructor. It's not sparring nor relying on others until much later.

Massive generalization there yourself, there are very very few practice drills I have learnt so far that do not rely on a partner working with you with pads and or gloves. Sparring is pretty much immediate in this instance. I'm sure many martial arts would be the same.

Ed: Also try practicing football on your own, maybe tennis, perhaps fencing, or well anything else where you have to compete with others.

As to your point about player corps not being a major factor in player retention you are wrong. A player corp will give a new player advice on what they can do, how to do it, where to do it, safety measures to take etc etc. This would all still be required even if you removed SP. Having perfect level V skills will still not help a retriever in losec when any combat ships jumps it for instance.

Yet, it's analogous to signing up for an EVEUni class. Team sports are inherently a group activity. Though, apparently the base correlation is "fun". That's what's shown on sports and game participation surveys. There's a lot more to this than being in a corp. If they're not having fun, why would they join? On the qualia study for interest in video games, socialization is a small portion of the overall reasons -- the others being fantasy, diversion, competition, challenge, and play phenomenon arousal. The top response on the top category, competition -- "I like to play to prove to my friends that I am the best." SP is a barrier in the progression for that, and that's a problem for retention and referrals.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#523 - 2015-10-15 17:37:34 UTC
So, what are you guys saying about character specialization and opportunity cost? ..And SP not being a problem?

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#524 - 2015-10-15 19:02:06 UTC
Dror wrote:
So, what are you guys saying about character specialization and opportunity cost? ..And SP not being a problem?


Personally I think it's a pretty stupid idea and pretty much destroys one of the central themes of EvE. SP is not a problem, never has been Older players not showing newer players how to make the most of what they have is the problem.

The new idea will lead to various ways to game the system and yet another stupid increase in PLEX cost. New players will pretty much feel that they *have* to buy these packs to be competitive which a) isn't true and b) is going to favour the rich players.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#525 - 2015-10-15 19:51:11 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Dror wrote:
So, what are you guys saying about character specialization and opportunity cost? ..And SP not being a problem?


Personally I think it's a pretty stupid idea and pretty much destroys one of the central themes of EvE. SP is not a problem, never has been Older players not showing newer players how to make the most of what they have is the problem.

The new idea will lead to various ways to game the system and yet another stupid increase in PLEX cost. New players will pretty much feel that they *have* to buy these packs to be competitive which a) isn't true and b) is going to favour the rich players.

You're making the whole of issues out to be a people problem. Prove it, then. Prove that motivation isn't some inherent process that design has to be submitted to. Prove that undermining player skillfulness is motivating, instead of its alternative of allowing progression and mastery.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#526 - 2015-10-16 20:39:18 UTC
Kirith Kodachi weighs in with the opinion that SP are a pointless gating mechanism: http://www.ninveah.com/2015/10/death-to-skill-system.html

"Gating mechanism" being RPG speak for, "the story in our RPG is so important we won't let you access further content until you have mimped through these hoops."

I am also of the opinion that many people confuse "game has rewarded me for killing ten thousand boars" with "progression" when it is in fact anything but progress. SP are a reward for being subscribed, nothing more.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#527 - 2015-10-18 16:23:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Dror
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
2) This will not be for the benefit of new players unless you view them spending PLEX after PLEX on skill packs as a good thing for them. Older players and those that can afford to farm alts for SP will be those that benefit most from this. Also those entities who own the most lucrative space assets (such as moons...) will be able to farm alts to ensure they have perfect pilots in the most important areas making it even harder for smaller entities to encroach on their space.

Isn't this a really valid point on SP trading (the under-estimation of newbies to get ISK is less so)? Any amount of the elite can have any specific alt (and anywhere). The benefit for newbies is obvious, but at that point, why have SP?

Maybe this announced idea really increases the potential for a capital-level metagame, and that's (honestly) really helpful. It's no indication that industry is any more adequate at supply, unless there are those willing to literally pay to try out industry or mining (and also enjoy it enough for sustained interest). So, in all, removing SP provides great benefit beyond these by reducing the cost of entry to just initiative and creativity.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#528 - 2015-10-18 20:47:44 UTC
Dror wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
2) This will not be for the benefit of new players unless you view them spending PLEX after PLEX on skill packs as a good thing for them. Older players and those that can afford to farm alts for SP will be those that benefit most from this. Also those entities who own the most lucrative space assets (such as moons...) will be able to farm alts to ensure they have perfect pilots in the most important areas making it even harder for smaller entities to encroach on their space.

Isn't this a really valid point on SP trading (the under-estimation of newbies to get ISK is less so)? Any amount of the elite can have any specific alt (and anywhere). The benefit for newbies is obvious, but at that point, why have SP?

Maybe this announced idea really increases the potential for a capital-level metagame, and that's (honestly) really helpful. It's no indication that industry is any more adequate at supply, unless there are those willing to literally pay to try out industry or mining (and also enjoy it enough for sustained interest). So, in all, removing SP provides great benefit beyond these by reducing the cost of entry to just initiative and creativity.



One simple quote from the latest blog on SP from CCPRise (an idea I disagree with but hey-ho):

"The skill system is a fundamental part of EVE"

Since that is an absolute direct quote I would say this thread is pretty much defunct.
Soltys
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#529 - 2015-10-19 01:01:57 UTC
SP is a borrowed "mechanics" from ancient mmos, where character grind was "a must". Mostly "a must" to keep people in game chasing virtual carrot with as little effort from publisher/developer as possible (of course it still exists in current games, except that switched character grind to gear grind .... same **** essentially, just numbers in different place(s)).

So EvE got that too, with a twist - you don't have to do anything. In 2003 it was sort of "ok" - before T2, T3, capitals+ and stuff added from update to update. The potential quantity was within limits of common sense. There was no power creep in form of T2 and T3 either - when someone new got into frigates, the opponents would be flying same/similar thing - not a blinged T3D.

Now it's a bloated mess with a decade of history. Bloated to the point, where a simple character with 0 skills in science/industry/exploration/guns/drones/missiles/subsystems/ships/PI - but with decently developed supporting skills (without touching capitals and without extremes - so mostly IVs, some Vs, few IIIs) is 15m+ SP one the low end. Skills that basically make you feel not like a gimp while flying, fighting or trying to fit anything - and with ability to at least field some of T2 equipment (not all, and not T3).

Aside creating an artificial timewall that gives a semblance progression (real progression in this game is in learning & practicing), SP makes no sense.

Of course SP will not be removed - but it can be fixed/adjusted or turned into a commodity. So far it seems CCP prefers (for obvious reasons) the latter. Fixed - as I mentioned here earlier would involve:


  • ranks (anything x4 and higher needs serious look at or flat out trimming to x3 - with sole exception of maybe capitals++)
  • no ship, module or skill should have V as a prerequisite, unless the prerequisite is rank 1 skill
  • make skill gains non-linear, compacting majority of possible bonus into levels I-IV, with remaining 10% going into V. So instead of current linear spacing (20%-20%-20%-20%-20%) something like 30%-25%-20%-15%-10% would be better (so for example for typical 5% bonuse per skill level, that would translate to 7.5%, 6.25%, 5%, 3.75%, 2.5%
  • hide skillbooks behind significantly bigger ISK wall - instead of SP timewall


With those changes, both bazaar and SP trading can simply go away.

Jita Flipping Inc.: Kovl & Kuvl