Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Most I've seen thus far is that it benefits those who're inept at having a long skill thrown in their queue for planned absences from the game.

Obviously, "things happen" and you can't plan for everything in life ... but honestly, is a few hours/days of missed skill time that important? Battleclinic, for example, estimates my SP at just about 85 million. I'm short by at least 10m SP due to absences over the years (time,financial, "I'm a dumbass and forgot to set a skill for a week over Christmas break", etc considerations).

edit -- maybe the best "buff" to the skill queue would be to straight up take it out.

I support your idea.

Haters gonna hate, but this would only improve the game and not harm anyone.

I admire your positive attitude, despite having the setbacks of not getting all the SP you might have otherwise.

Maybe someday, people can export training plans from EVE Mon, and this will be a distant memory of 'the old days'.
Maybe Mag's feelings are shared by more than I expect, and we are seen as all just whining about not being able to log in like they can. (For the most part, I am able to log in reliably too, I just have empathy for those who cannot)

Whatever the case, a positive attitude makes this and any other game more fun for everyone.

10 million SP difference... you don't need to see setbacks in anything, but many players would consider that an enormous loss.
As you do not, I will respect that you accept this as the cost of playing, and move on.


That is definitely a good system, especially as you put it, if you have many short skills.

That's one of the reasons I am trying to not make any huge changes. I see the que stopping itself after that last skill level as unnecessary. You already expressed an interest in the skill, using the accepted que system, having it set to keep that same skill going until it stops more naturally at level 5 makes sense.

(Maybe you only wanted level 4, but it would stop on it's own after level 2 where it was, and your schedule would not let you fix it in time. Tell it to FINISH IT, and then rearrange the skills later in the regular que while it keeps working to finish level 4 instead)

You have a good head for planning skills.

I wish everyone had that going for them. On a side note, a lot of players are trying to be very specific with their training, and want pure indy, or pure PvP toons. They might not have as much flexibility with their training options.

Actually your use of the word is incorrect in this context. CCP and the majority of the player base, can see that 24 hours is balanced in regards to the queue length. Your idea to lengthen it, creates imbalance. That's not an improvement.

An increase, is an increase, is an increase, no matter how you try to gloss over it.

I'll state this again, I follow CCP's ideals that the current queue is balanced at 24 hours. The onus is upon you to give a valid reason why this is needed. Telling us that some people are bad at using the current one, is irrelevant and not a basis for change.

I'm already aware that no matter what I say, you'll simply keep posting bad excuses and poor reasoning. All the while thinking they some how give credence to this idea.
Now your argument has moved on to saying that because it will automatically start another skill, that somehow means you're more committed. Personally I don't think logging in less, can be considered as more commitment.

Now you're being disingenuous, to suggest it's not going to be an effective increase. Some level 5's take weeks and even ranks 1 skills take days. That's days or weeks more than the current queue. Fact.

Your one sided opinion is exactly that.

They could organise themselves better and have level 5 skills they want ready to train. Fact.

But as I said, people not being able to use the current queue correctly, because of RL or simply bad planning, is not a valid basis for change.

You suggested this idea would mean they are committing more. I'm simply pointing out that going by the aims of the idea, more time with RL less with the game, is hardly what anyone would deem as more commitment. Fact.

It gives everyone the same advantage and is a balanced mechanic. Fact.

You're asking for a change, based on conjecture about peoples private lives. You may as well just say, 'I want it'.

I will take your word that the skill you used to fill your training que is something you would train at this point, even if you were able to log in daily to update the que. This accepts that you will achieve your goals at the same point, allowing you to enjoy new ships or abilities without additional delay.
I am also impressed with your modesty, in suggesting that most players are able and willing to also do this,and it is not an indicator that you have any above average talent with organizing.
Myself, I keep running into people who have trouble organizing sentences, let alone a training que with skill spacing requirements.

Please understand, the common assumption being used against this idea is just that, an assumption.

It is, simply put: All players have the ability to organize themselves so that they can have a desired skill available to train that will cover extended absences.

It assumes that all players have organizational skills up to this level, for one. As this is not a game requirement, and they are not being paid to play, but rather paying to play, it adds player time as well as financial cost to the game requirements.
Trivial to yourself, and no doubt Mag's, and you probably see this as reasonable.

That is an opinion.

It is supported by the status quo of the game currently, by default. No indication shows this as an intended limit by design.
Design was coming from the other direction in making the que, this just takes it one step further, by logical extension.
It is entirely reasonable to assume they would have added this at the time, had it occurred to them, but they were already adding in an entirely new feature, and they were justifiably proud of what they were adding already.

Unless you work for CCP, refuting that by default means you know what they were thinking, and trying to achieve, not just what they put out to the public as PR.

Mag's: Working as intended, especially when you will have no negative repercussion to the change, loses credibility. People have motive's for everything, and while you may be selflessly defending the time of the developers, you more than likely have a motive.
I suspect you feel they need to budget their time and efforts, and this idea would be a waste of their time by comparison.

I counter this with an engineer's perspective: The change should be trivial to code in, and when included with other items already in the area of skills, they are going to be working on that code set anyways.

I rarely train short skills anymore.

Just remove the queue altogether.

Ahhh, good. I will give the credit due one with experience in that case.

Well documented code can be either complicated, or simple, depending on your perspective.
If they tied together multiple functions to react to a single code, then yes, you will have a cascade of changes resulting from any change.

Now, if the code has aspects that can be isolated, as is likely with a skill que reacting to variable pilot statistics, combined with varied skill levels and such, each skill has an effective value that is unique when combined with the pilot training it.
(Character A takes 4 days with a skill, while the same skill takes 5 days on character B)

Whenever they add or modify any skill, they need to access the database holding the skills with their details and respective difficulty levels.

My idea adds the equivalent of a conditional check, being:
If skill level is below 5, and FINISH IT flag is 1, then start current level +1, else next skill if present