These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Proposal] Get rid of learning implants.

Author
Cheimos
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#361 - 2012-01-19 18:07:45 UTC
Supported.
Jish Ness
Veldspar Loving
#362 - 2012-01-20 03:37:53 UTC
Andski wrote:
and i presented a balanced argument so i don't know what he's on about vOv



"They discourage people from playing EVE. You're still paying your subscription, sure, but you're not playing the game. You don't want to jump to your empty/combat clone and lose a day of "optimal" training so you can have some fun, and then have to jump back to your training clone the next day."

You can have fun even in your learning implants clone. What you're saying here is that you don't want to risk them. You're asking for convenience here, not balance. The risk vs reward balance already exists.

"This affects nullsec (especially wormhole) players doubly so - losing your ship in a bubble is a surefire way to get podded. People in Empire still have a better chance of warping their pods out of harm's way, and thus have no qualms about running missions or otherwise ~flying in space~ with their implants, unless of course they are at war. That, however, is not our playstyle."

YOUR playstyle. As I stated, you're complaining that the game doesn't work the way YOU want it to.

"They are seeded exclusively through LP stores rather than being made in-game entirely."

So are faction ships and modules but you see people flying with those in nullsec.

"Characters that need pirate faction implants for any reason (supercapital pilots with slave/nomad sets, freighter/JF pilots with nomads, etc.) are essentially stuck with +3s. But this isn't about pirate implants."

You get to choose what bonuses you want out of your implants. More armor HP, lower sig radius, more agility, or faster learning speed. You have choices here, and you're complaining that you can't have more than one.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#363 - 2012-01-20 03:41:46 UTC
you sure love learning implants lawl

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Jish Ness
Veldspar Loving
#364 - 2012-01-20 03:58:44 UTC
Sure I do. They let me learn faster, and I believe that a bonus like that should stay the way it is. A choice between learning, ship boosts, or simply not risking implants out on the field.
Boo mkII
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#365 - 2012-01-20 13:07:07 UTC
Jish Ness wrote:
Sure I do. They let me learn faster, and I believe that a bonus like that should stay the way it is. A choice between learning, ship boosts, or simply not risking implants out on the field.


No. The game rewards risk averse play a lot already, and it's absolutely not needed. It's just a barrier for engaging in risky yet fun activities. When I had a couple spare hours when my character was younger, I used to go look for a fight in a 8M fit Rifter. I met random guys doing so, we blew each other up, and it was fun.

But I won't do that now with +5s. There are tons of skills I'd need trained for yesterday, and I won't give up one day of learning bonuses for a 30 min roam. So you have one less solo pvper in space (and I'm sure I'm not the only one).



And with veterans it only gets worse. You may have more money available, but you can only have so much clones (i.e. so much implants sets). And you may need so much different sets...
- carrier clone (slave set)
- nano clone (snake set)
- incursion clone (high sec, learning & hardwire implants)
- Racial pvp logi (low grade racial sensor strength)
- "low cost" combat clone (+3s or +4s of Intel/Mem or Per/Wil depending on you training)
... list goes on.

And the medical alone can cost more than your ship hull.





All this puts off people from engaging in risky activities, which is bad for the game and the other players. The most people in space to meet / fight, the better.


Remove the learning implants. Lower / Remove the medical clone price.
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#366 - 2012-01-20 13:13:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
Boo mkII wrote:

[...]
All this puts off people from engaging in risky activities, which is bad for the game and the other players. The most people in space to meet / fight, the better.


Remove the learning implants. Lower / Remove the medical clone price.


Bravo and well said. The removal of learning implants will vitalize PvP and that's why I support it.

Arguments about risk aversion are purely idealistic and have little practical merit. Everybody has different thresholds of ISK they're willing to risk, lowering the minimum cost of a pod loss is only going to bring more people out into areas where their pod is at risk. If you can't feel the thrill without an expensive clone, nobody is forcing you to fly a cheap clone. Simple as that. If you're afraid that low-income plebs will suddenly have an advantage over your rich ass, well, you can spend all the ISK used for implants on hardwirings, pirate implants, faction loot, etc to give yourself the advantage.

And if you're a highsec bear that's afraid of losing the privilege of flying with his hard-earned 5's that he'll most likely never lose, you can go jump into a lake for all I care.
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#367 - 2012-01-20 14:41:07 UTC
I am sure that quite a lot of people here disagree with the proposal just because a goon posted it- so they think there simply has to be some secret, evil agenda behind it.
Funny, how far this hatred can go.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#368 - 2012-01-20 17:00:56 UTC
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
I am sure that quite a lot of people here disagree with the proposal just because a goon posted it- so they think there simply has to be some secret, evil agenda behind it.
Funny, how far this hatred can go.

I'm sure quite a lot of people here will ignore all the downsides that have been clearly pointed out to this proposal, and think people who don't like the proposal must just have something against the goons.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#369 - 2012-01-20 18:11:13 UTC
Obvious goonswarm testicle troll is obvious.

Obvious Mittani link is obvious.

Nobody cares what you think.

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#370 - 2012-01-20 18:41:23 UTC
Asuka Solo wrote:
Obvious goonswarm testicle troll is obvious.

Obvious Mittani link is obvious.

Nobody cares what you think.


Now what a kind person you are...

Maybe I wouldn't care about my opinion, too, if I were you.
But I do care about the proposal, because I think it is a very good idea and would help me- a desperate carebear that got stuck in highsec forever- a great deal to have more fun in eve.
The main argument people are posting here is: evil 0.0 alliances would profit from it (true. everybody would profit), so I am against it. They would rather see that nobody gets such a nice benefit, since the mere idea that their hated archenemies would get the same benefit is just unbearable for them.
I am in no way affiliated with the goons, I know nothing about 0.0 politics and I do not care, to be honest.
I would personally profit if learning implants were removed, that's why I support the idea- and I do not mind if other people profit as well, I wouldn't even mind if they profited slightly more than me.
I would be free to get some casual pvp in lowsec whenever I want, that's all that matters to me.

Have a nice day.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.

Boo mkII
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#371 - 2012-01-20 19:32:51 UTC
Cearain wrote:
I'm sure quite a lot of people here will ignore all the downsides that have been clearly pointed out to this proposal, and think people who don't like the proposal must just have something against the goons.


Could you please sum up these downsides ?


Because so far, I have read mostly the Risk vs Reward argument.
i.e. you play without implants (no risk, no reward) or you play with (risk and reward).

But you do not mention the third option :
You don't play, so you still get the reward and have no risk. How can that be good for the game ?



If a mechanic makes some people prefer not playing, it is a bad mechanic.





I'm not against implants. But since the learning ones are so good, they are needed by everyone.
Just like the learning skills. What did you use to say to a new player in his very first days ? "Train your learning skills, and Train Cybernetics 1, by the way, here are +3s"

Want an example ? easy, page 1 :

Gerard Gendri wrote:
Innominate wrote:
Learning implants are exactly like the old learning skills. They provide strong motivation to avoid playing the game, an effect which has a particularly strong effect on newbies.

Get rid of learning implants, add more combat implants.


I have first hand experience with this.

My own brother started playing EVE recently. Yesterday I asked if he wanted go along with me on a 2 man roam to be my tacklebro. He didn't want to go because he would have to travel 40 jumps to get to where I was and he would have to podjump to get there quickly, wiping out his +3s I gave him.

Instead he logged off and played some starcraft.


This is a bad thing for EVE.



Or a TS3 discussion from a random renter corp deep in 0.0 :

- Player A : "Hey ! there's a 6-men roam coming our way. Let's swarm them with a 10-men T1 frigs !"
- Player B : "Nah, my JC is still on cooldown and my medical costs 10 times the frigate"
- Player A : "hmm... so we can go with 10 BCs ? Do we have logistics pilots ?"
- Player C : "sorry, i have only 1 BC left here, and my wallet is down to 40M, so I'll just stay docked"

Really, how can this be good for the game ?



Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#372 - 2012-01-20 19:40:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
Asuka Solo wrote:
Obvious goonswarm testicle troll is obvious.

Obvious Mittani link is obvious.

Nobody cares what you think.


Now what a kind person you are...

Maybe I wouldn't care about my opinion, too, if I were you.
But I do care about the proposal, because I think it is a very good idea and would help me- a desperate carebear that got stuck in highsec forever- a great deal to have more fun in eve.


Seriously if you can't have your skills training at less than the absolute optimal for a 24 hour time period of jump cloning you are a bit too obsessive compulsive to be doing pvp anyway. You need to loosen your grip if you want to have fun pvping in eve and based on your attitude toward skill training you are way too uptight. Things don't always go exactly as you would like.


Zimmy Zeta wrote:

The main argument people are posting here is: evil 0.0 alliances would profit from it (true. everybody would profit), so I am against it. They would rather see that nobody gets such a nice benefit, since the mere idea that their hated archenemies would get the same benefit is just unbearable for them. ...


Among others you forgot the argument that there are trillions of isk in learning implants going into the eve economy. Erasing that from the economy will all but kill every lp store in eve. Sorry there is no reason to kill a large part of the game in order to cater to the crowd that is ridiculously uptight about learning.

Also if you would like to pvp there are low sec options that do not have bubbles so you can usually warp your pod out.

But nice strawman.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#373 - 2012-01-20 19:57:39 UTC
Boo mkII wrote:
Cearain wrote:
I'm sure quite a lot of people here will ignore all the downsides that have been clearly pointed out to this proposal, and think people who don't like the proposal must just have something against the goons.


Could you please sum up these downsides ?


Because so far, I have read mostly the Risk vs Reward argument.
i.e. you play without implants (no risk, no reward) or you play with (risk and reward).

But you do not mention the third option :
You don't play, so you still get the reward and have no risk. How can that be good for the game ?



If a mechanic makes some people prefer not playing, it is a bad mechanic.


Did you know some people prefer not to pvp because they may lose a ship?

So lets use your logic:
Pvp may cause people to lose a ship
Some people prefer not to pvp because they may lose a ship
Therefore pvp is a bad mechanic
Nice lets just make it impossible for players to attack eachother.

Your reasoning is bad.


Downsides:
1) It will kill the already floundering lp stores
2) How exactly is ccp going to reimburse people who paid a tone of isk for learning implants that are now worthless?
3) It will be a huge isk sink that is lost
4) It will be a large area of the market and economy will just all of a sudden stricken. Oops

Why? Well because people want bubbles to hold pods and others don't want to train a bit slower for 24 hours. Sorry thats not really all that great.

Again just make it so bubbles don't hold pods and your "problem," to the extent there is one, is solved.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#374 - 2012-01-20 19:57:58 UTC
Pretty sure that if they remove learning implants they will likely give us stat boosts to cover the missing +5 to each skill.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#375 - 2012-01-20 21:25:12 UTC
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:
Pretty sure that if they remove learning implants they will likely give us stat boosts to cover the missing +5 to each skill.


Yeah but what about the people who paid isk for the set. Are they going to be treated the same as those who didn't? This proposal seems to do that.

When they removed learning skills they gave the sp back, so people who invested time in the learning skills were reimbursed and those who didn't weren't.

Giving everyone the benefit of something only some paid for is not really more fair than simply taking the benefit away entirely. It just makes the dumb happy.

Might as well give everyone a hundred million skill points. Yay!

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#376 - 2012-01-20 21:42:39 UTC
Asuka Solo wrote:
Obvious goonswarm testicle troll is obvious.

Obvious Mittani link is obvious.

Nobody cares what you think.


so uh, who are you?

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Boo mkII
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#377 - 2012-01-20 22:44:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Boo mkII
Cearain wrote:
Your reasoning is bad.

No it's not. My point is that people have enough incentive to avoid risks already, and the learning implants are an unnecessary burden. They prevent certain people to participate in some parts of the game, which is bad.


Hell, it doesn't even changes anything to the outcome of a fight, since they are not combat-related. What does it change that your target has or hasn't attribute enhancers ?



Cearain wrote:
Downsides:
1) It will kill the already floundering lp stores
2) How exactly is ccp going to reimburse people who paid a tone of isk for learning implants that are now worthless?
3) It will be a huge isk sink that is lost
4) It will be a large area of the market and economy will just all of a sudden stricken. Oops

Why? Well because people want bubbles to hold pods and others don't want to train a bit slower for 24 hours. Sorry thats not really all that great.


So the LP store is floundering ? Really ? You have data behind that ? If so, how can this represent a large area of the market ? And why would economy stricken ?Ugh

The ISK sink will not change : people will still use their LP, which will sink the same amount of ISK.

Regarding the reimbursement, I don't care. They didn't want to reimburse skillbooks because it would inject lots of fresh isk in the game, which would have caused inflation. If they give LP/ISK for the implants, I suppose you can buy another item in the LP Store, so the operation is neutral for the inflation. But I'm sure this can be sorted out. I'm not an economy specialist, and this is not the topic here. Which brings me to...


None of the points you bring are actually related to the implants themselves ! If they are issues, they can be solved in a completely independant way.


I have yet to read a real reason against such a change, other than "I worked hard for something, now I want everyone to suffer the same way I did"
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#378 - 2012-01-21 00:10:59 UTC
Boo mkII wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Your reasoning is bad.

No it's not. My point is that people have enough incentive to avoid risks already, and the learning implants are an unnecessary burden. They prevent certain people to participate in some parts of the game, which is bad.


Hell, it doesn't even changes anything to the outcome of a fight, since they are not combat-related. What does it change that your target has or hasn't attribute enhancers ?



Cearain wrote:
Downsides:
1) It will kill the already floundering lp stores
2) How exactly is ccp going to reimburse people who paid a tone of isk for learning implants that are now worthless?
3) It will be a huge isk sink that is lost
4) It will be a large area of the market and economy will just all of a sudden stricken. Oops

Why? Well because people want bubbles to hold pods and others don't want to train a bit slower for 24 hours. Sorry thats not really all that great.


1) So the LP store is floundering ?
2) Really ?
3)You have data behind that ?
4) If so, how can this represent a large area of the market ?
5)And why would economy stricken ?Ugh

6) The ISK sink will not change : people will still use their LP, which will sink the same amount of ISK.

7)Regarding the reimbursement, I don't care.


I numbered your responses/questions so its easier to track my answers/ responses

1) Yep
2) Really
3) No ccp hasn't realeased but they said they were looking into it in a thread about the lp store tanking
4) By being a large part of the market.
5) I didn't say the economy is would be stricken
6) Not really if the store is broken people will no longer get lp and sink their isk in it.
7) Ok you don't care if items that you bought just suddenly disappear from the game without any reimbursment. Others disagree you shouldn't ignore them.


Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#379 - 2012-01-21 00:40:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmy Zeta
Andski wrote:
Asuka Solo wrote:
Obvious goonswarm testicle troll is obvious.

Obvious Mittani link is obvious.

Nobody cares what you think.


so uh, who are you?


Hmm..interesting question......

A few hours ago, I would have replied "A seriously pissed off carebear who cannot stand those tedious highsec mining OPs any longer and is close to going postal on his own corp (IF YOU READ THIS: YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED, FROM NOW ON, IT IS YOUR OWN FAULT, YOU COULD AND SHOULD HAVE STOPPED ME)."

But now, since Asuka and Cearain have so eloquently proven that I have to be one of your alts........I am confused and not really sure anymore.......

....

...

..who am I ?......

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.

Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#380 - 2012-01-21 01:18:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmy Zeta
double post because I am dumb

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.