These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Skill reallocation Option needs to finally be added and why
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#561 - 2013-01-19 02:24:03 UTC
Knorkor wrote:
What I would like to see is the option to remove one skill at a time with a cooldown of at least 1 year and a cost of at least 100 Million for a lvl 5 Skill, which comes down to 20 Million per level and the skill book should be lost.
This way some more money would go out of the system and a player could correct an earlier mistake and gain a small benefit from it.

For example, I'd like to get rid of Mining Drones Skill completely. It was mistake learning it, because Mining Drones are just utter nonsense in my eyes once you sit in a Hulk.

So this way I could correct this minor mistake and put the few SP to better use.


A one time per character all respec would be fine by me, but with great cost and really only time. I have something like 2 Billion in mind. It should NOT cost a PLEX though, only ISK that gets taken out of the system.


I could have seen if you said 500 billion or something, but 2 billion? That's like... nothing...

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#562 - 2013-01-19 02:25:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
Cheshire Katt wrote:
I like how you say that "All MMOs have this ability". Maybe you should think about that comment. That is part of the appeal of Eve Online. They break from the norm that most MMOs have. They are unique. We, the players, don't WANT to be every other MMO. We want to continue to adapt, learn to beat the system, and not make this another instant gratification game like WoW.


I'm going to have to agree with this.

However, skill reimbursement (because d i don't. Like the idea of reallocation) is quite different.

Let me propose it a little better.

Can only be done once a year.
Is limited to 3-4 million sp, so less than what you could train in a year thus negating the benefit suggested for mapping and spamming skills.
Any skill chosen to remove SP from will be destroyed.
SP is lost if a skill possess more than the allotted SP reimbursement, thus players attempting to remove SP from a high end skill will be penalized. Making this program designed mostly for low end skills.
Any unused points will be added together the following year. So if you don't use your reimbursement, you can stack 2 or more years, thus allowing you to refund high end skills, but rarely.
Lastly, due to the removal of skills this essentially becomes an isk dump, and Perhaps an isk surcharge could be added of 100 isk per sp refunded, thus costing 300-400 mil to do a per year if used. This may not seem like much but when you add all players together that would use this program, then it removes a significant amount of isk from the game and any isk dump is better than none.

Someone had suggested the use of a plex to earn the refund, however, plexes do not remove isk from the game, only move it around.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#563 - 2013-01-19 02:32:34 UTC
Skill reimbursement already happens, when then delete a skill the skill points in that skill are returned to you. What you described is still reallocation of skill points.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#564 - 2013-01-19 02:33:10 UTC
That doesn't negate the benefit of spamming and remapping. The idea is bad and CCP is actively moving away from these kinds of ideas. They're looking to increase the divide between races and make our choices more significant, not less.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#565 - 2013-01-19 02:38:17 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
That doesn't negate the benefit of spamming and remapping. The idea is bad and CCP is actively moving away from these kinds of ideas. They're looking to increase the divide between races and make our choices more significant, not less.

-Liang

Try this Liang, get up and head to your nearest wall with your favorite hat in your hand. While yelling in your hat watch the wall to see how much it will give. This thread will give an equal amount.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#566 - 2013-01-19 02:43:37 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
That doesn't negate the benefit of spamming and remapping. The idea is bad and CCP is actively moving away from these kinds of ideas. They're looking to increase the divide between races and make our choices more significant, not less.

-Liang

Try this Liang, get up and head to your nearest wall with your favorite hat in your hand. While yelling in your hat watch the wall to see how much it will give. This thread will give an equal amount.


Doesn't change the fact that what he said (in the quoted post) is still 100% accurate.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#567 - 2013-01-19 02:45:04 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
That doesn't negate the benefit of spamming and remapping. The idea is bad and CCP is actively moving away from these kinds of ideas. They're looking to increase the divide between races and make our choices more significant, not less.

-Liang



Well, since it would be a fairly significant amount of SP less than you could earn in a year, it would negate the benefits of remapping and spamming skills and many would lead to many days of waisted training if you didn't train skills you actually needed.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#568 - 2013-01-19 02:50:23 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Cheshire Katt wrote:
I like how you say that "All MMOs have this ability". Maybe you should think about that comment. That is part of the appeal of Eve Online. They break from the norm that most MMOs have. They are unique. We, the players, don't WANT to be every other MMO. We want to continue to adapt, learn to beat the system, and not make this another instant gratification game like WoW.


I'm going to have to agree with this.

However, skill reimbursement (because d i don't. Like the idea of reallocation) is quite different.

Let me propose it a little better.

Can only be done once a year.
Is limited to 3-4 million sp, so less than what you could train in a year thus negating the benefit suggested for mapping and spamming skills.
Any skill chosen to remove SP from will be destroyed.
SP is lost if a skill possess more than the allotted SP reimbursement, thus players attempting to remove SP from a high end skill will be penalized. Making this program designed mostly for low end skills.
Any unused points will be added together the following year. So if you don't use your reimbursement, you can stack 2 or more years, thus allowing you to refund high end skills, but rarely.
Lastly, due to the removal of skills this essentially becomes an isk dump, and Perhaps an isk surcharge could be added of 100 isk per sp refunded, thus costing 300-400 mil to do a per year if used. This may not seem like much but when you add all players together that would use this program, then it removes a significant amount of isk from the game and any isk dump is better than none.

Someone had suggested the use of a plex to earn the refund, however, plexes do not remove isk from the game, only move it around.


i like the limit on how much SP can be re-allocated. but i'm still against the idea

i'd still say its a re-allocation rather than a reimbursement because reimbursement suggests to me that CCP have wronged u and are reimbursing u. Instead, this transfer of SP's from one skill to another is entirely voluntary and there has been no wrong doing. also, players could use this even if there was no nerf, and in such cases would not be a reimbursement. Re-allocation is more appropriate in most cases i feel.

i'm still against the idea because i'm a firm believer in living with ur mistakes and getting things right the first time giving u that edge over ppl who make mistakes and amend later. Also, not putting ur eggs in one basket.

yes this post IS opinion

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#569 - 2013-01-19 02:51:30 UTC
Paikis wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
That doesn't negate the benefit of spamming and remapping. The idea is bad and CCP is actively moving away from these kinds of ideas. They're looking to increase the divide between races and make our choices more significant, not less.

-Liang

Try this Liang, get up and head to your nearest wall with your favorite hat in your hand. While yelling in your hat watch the wall to see how much it will give. This thread will give an equal amount.


Doesn't change the fact that what he said (in the quoted post) is still 100% accurate.

Never said it wasn't point was to matter how well the facts are worded they will not listen.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#570 - 2013-01-19 02:53:13 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Cheshire Katt wrote:
I like how you say that "All MMOs have this ability". Maybe you should think about that comment. That is part of the appeal of Eve Online. They break from the norm that most MMOs have. They are unique. We, the players, don't WANT to be every other MMO. We want to continue to adapt, learn to beat the system, and not make this another instant gratification game like WoW.


I'm going to have to agree with this.

However, skill reimbursement (because d i don't. Like the idea of reallocation) is quite different.

Let me propose it a little better.

Can only be done once a year.
Is limited to 3-4 million sp, so less than what you could train in a year thus negating the benefit suggested for mapping and spamming skills.
Any skill chosen to remove SP from will be destroyed.
SP is lost if a skill possess more than the allotted SP reimbursement, thus players attempting to remove SP from a high end skill will be penalized. Making this program designed mostly for low end skills.
Any unused points will be added together the following year. So if you don't use your reimbursement, you can stack 2 or more years, thus allowing you to refund high end skills, but rarely.
Lastly, due to the removal of skills this essentially becomes an isk dump, and Perhaps an isk surcharge could be added of 100 isk per sp refunded, thus costing 300-400 mil to do a per year if used. This may not seem like much but when you add all players together that would use this program, then it removes a significant amount of isk from the game and any isk dump is better than none.

Someone had suggested the use of a plex to earn the refund, however, plexes do not remove isk from the game, only move it around.


i like the limit on how much SP can be re-allocated. but i'm still against the idea

i'd still say its a re-allocation rather than a reimbursement because reimbursement suggests to me that CCP have wronged u and are reimbursing u. Instead, this transfer of SP's from one skill to another is entirely voluntary and there has been no wrong doing. also, players could use this even if there was no nerf, and in such cases would not be a reimbursement. Re-allocation is more appropriate in most cases i feel.

i'm still against the idea because i'm a firm believer in living with ur mistakes and getting things right the first time giving u that edge over ppl who make mistakes and amend later. Also, not putting ur eggs in one basket.

yes this post IS opinion



Well, the reason why I say reimbursement instead of reallocation is because reallocation suggest that you can place that SP into any skill reguardless of whether you own the skill or not.

However, reimbursement refunds the SP, removes the skill, and allows you to place it wherever you like, so long as you own the skill.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#571 - 2013-01-19 02:57:04 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Paikis wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
That doesn't negate the benefit of spamming and remapping. The idea is bad and CCP is actively moving away from these kinds of ideas. They're looking to increase the divide between races and make our choices more significant, not less.

-Liang

Try this Liang, get up and head to your nearest wall with your favorite hat in your hand. While yelling in your hat watch the wall to see how much it will give. This thread will give an equal amount.


Doesn't change the fact that what he said (in the quoted post) is still 100% accurate.

Never said it wasn't point was to matter how well the facts are worded they will not listen.



What facts?

As I've stated, everything said in this thread is a matter of opinion.

If you feel this will help Eve, it's your opinion.

If you feel this would hurt Eve, it's your opinion.

There are no facts to suggest either.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#572 - 2013-01-19 03:05:49 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:

What facts?

As I've stated, everything said in this thread is a matter of opinion.

If you feel this will help Eve, it's your opinion.

If you feel this would hurt Eve, it's your opinion.

There are no facts to suggest either.


There are lots of facts to suggest this would hurt Eve, but there's far more to suggest CCP is interested in heading exactly the opposite direction of this proposal. That's why they're increasing race specific skills and removing cross-racial skills and working diligently to increase the effect of our skill training choices and increase the skill distance between FOTMs...

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#573 - 2013-01-19 03:22:53 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:

What facts?

As I've stated, everything said in this thread is a matter of opinion.

If you feel this will help Eve, it's your opinion.

If you feel this would hurt Eve, it's your opinion.

There are no facts to suggest either.


There are lots of facts to suggest this would hurt Eve, but there's far more to suggest CCP is interested in heading exactly the opposite direction of this proposal. That's why they're increasing race specific skills and removing cross-racial skills and working diligently to increase the effect of our skill training choices and increase the skill distance between FOTMs...

-Liang



Yeah, it seems more like the addition of racial destroyer and bc skills is CCP simply trying to create more skills without having to actually create skills.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#574 - 2013-01-19 05:03:04 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:

Yeah, it seems more like the addition of racial destroyer and bc skills is CCP simply trying to create more skills without having to actually create skills.


That is certainly one way to think of it, but it fundamentally misses the point. The point is to increase the distance between FOTMs, and to increase the effect of player choice. Not remove or even mitigate via skill redistribution. :)

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#575 - 2013-01-20 10:20:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Joe Risalo wrote:
Stuff about word vomit.
You can't help yourself, can you? I treat people, how they treat me or others. I couldn't care less if this upsets you or not. If you really just wanted to argue the points raised, then you should have done that from the start. But you opened that gate, so.....

Oh and I never get upset with threads. But will always point out someone's failure to understand the issues, with any ideas in one.

Joe Risalo wrote:
Oh, and just so you have a better understanding I found a nice little link for you.

http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/04/19/the-daily-grind-how-do-you-define-pay-to-win/

I underlined the important parts.

There is no agreed apon definition of "pay-to-win", therefore, any definition of the term is merely opinion.

HOwever, it goes on to state that some players feel convenience items are "pay-to-win".

A PLEX would fall under the catagory of a convenience item that allows your character to become more powerful in less time.

How so?

Well, buying plexes for the isk to buy a character makes you more powerful.

Buying plexes to get isk for attribute implants surely makes you more powerful, quicker.

Hell, it's Eve. Isk is a major part of being powerful, so transfering a plex for isk alone allows you to be more powerful.


So, you're buying an item with real cash that give the convenience of earning items much faster than someone who attempts to earn the isk the old school way.
And since there's not an actual agreed apon definition of "pay-to-win".

Right now PTW is entirely opinionated, and since this is the case, my opinion in the matter is not wrong.
Which again, misses the whole point.

If ship or module, or any item for that matter, was created through this process, then I would say YES you have a point. Even if that item was available through normal game play. Simply because it was spawned and not created through normal game play.

But it doesn't work that way and thus cannot be Pay2Win. No matter what link you use.

The real life money pays for game time and that remains the case. Swapping it for ISK, doesn't then remove the real life cost of that game time onto the ISK, it remains on the game time. This is why Eve is also NOT Free2Play, because people have paid for game time. Nothing else in the process of the Plex except the Plex itself, is created outside of the player normal game play.

You cannot simply ignore the game time and it's cost, in order to prove Pay2Win or Free2Play.

Why do you think there was such a massive uproar, with the Eve community over NEX and not over the Plex? Because they feared, (and rightly so) that the NEX store would be a place to buy ships and ammo for real cash. Thus making it MT and Pay2Win.

That is the fundamental difference here.

Joe Risalo wrote:
As far as my suggestion of a once a year opportunity for an SP refund, well, your opinion that it will kill the game isn't wrong, however my opinion that it won't kill the game isn't wrong either.

Hell, if you wish to get logical in the matter, the closest comparison we have to use for this is the removal of learning skills.

Many players said it would kill the game, others said it would make like better.

Well, CCP did it anyway, and well. Is life better or worse?

I guess that's your opinion as well, but seeing as how you're still playing the game, I'm assuming it didn't kill Eve.



Opinions are like @ssholes, everyone has got one, and since both of these things are opinionated because we have no direct definition or proof in either cicumstance, then everything mentioned in this thread is nothing more than opinion and no one is wrong....

And if you try to argue that I'm wrong because neither of these two subjects are opinionated, then do me a favor and find proof cause i'm tired of hearing it.
Yes whether it will kill the game, is opinion. But we base ours on current game mechanics and the issues that would arise from this change.

For you to begin to be right in any way, you first need to show a reason why this is even needed. In other words, there needs to be a problem you want to solve. So far, neither you or the OP has done this. That's what make you and he wrong in every way, opinion or not.

But you'll now say, "Oh but we have a reason, it's when CCP rebalances our ships and makes them worthless for us."

But this again, misses the point. CCP are rebalancing that ship, to solve a problem not to create one. Thus you are asking for a solution, to a solution. Not a solution to a problem. The fact that you may have a problem with CCP's solution, is irrelevant. As game play and it's balance therein, supersedes the individual.

Then there is of course the fact you have already accepted changes, when you agreed to the EULA.

The removal of learning skills, was a matter of balance. Because learning skills directly affected new players game play, in a bad way. I cannot remember anyone saying it would kill the game. Many said it removed choices and consequences, but they are meaningless in this regard. Because when something becomes a must have, choice and consequence is negated.

Don't presume to know my stance on anything.
Linkage.
Linkage.
Linkage.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#576 - 2013-01-20 12:47:53 UTC
Mag's wrote:
You can't help yourself, can you? I treat people, how they treat me or others. I couldn't care less if this upsets you or not. If you really just wanted to argue the points raised, then you should have done that from the start. But now the gates are open, so.....

Oh and I never get upset with threads. But will always point out someone's failure to understand the issues, with any ideas in one.


You wanted this thread to die, it pretty much had....So don't blame it's continuation on me.. You started it back up...

Quote:
Which again, misses the whole point.

If ship or module, or any item for that matter, was created through this process, then I would say YES you have a point. Even if that item was available through normal game play. Simply because it was spawned and not created through normal game play.

But it doesn't work that way and thus cannot be Pay2Win. No matter what link you use.

The real life money pays for game time and that remains the case. Swapping it for ISK, doesn't then remove the real life cost of that game time onto the ISK, it remains on the game time. This is why Eve is also NOT Free2Play, because people have paid for game time. Nothing else in the process of the Plex except the Plex itself, is created outside of the player normal game play.

You cannot simply ignore the game time and it's cost, in order to prove Pay2Win or Free2Play.

Why do you think there was such a massive uproar, with the Eve community over NEX and not over the Plex? Because they feared, (and rightly so) that the NEX store would be a place to buy ships and ammo for real cash. Thus making it MT and Pay2Win.

That is the fundamental difference here.


Wow dude....

I'm not harpin on ya, but that was the biggest contradiction of words I've heard in a long time and I'm suprised anyone liked that comment before reading it.

"or any item for that matter, was created through this process"

A Plex is an item.... Why does it not count since it was created through this manner?

"Even if that item was available through normal game play"

And Again... Hell a Plex isn't even really available through normal play unless someone else pays real cash

"Swapping it for ISK, doesn't then remove the real life cost of that game time onto the ISK"

Yet, if you paid real cash for a ship/module/fitting would it not still be, that item cost cash, so it doesn't remove the real life cost of that item into isk.

"This is why Eve is also NOT Free2Play"

Agreed

"You cannot simply ignore the game time and it's cost, in order to prove Pay2Win or Free2Play"

It's not free to play and that's good, HOWEVER, in the case of Pay to Win, why can't you ignore the fact that the item you're selling is game time?
You said yourself that purchasing any item available through normal means with real world cash could be considered Pay to Win, yet purchasing game time with the specific intent to sell it to get ahead in the Eve Universe doesn't count as Pay to Win?


"(and rightly so) that the NEX store would be a place to buy ships and ammo for real cash. Thus making it MT and Pay2Win"
But wait, if this were this case wouldn't this have to constitute that PLEX as a Pay TO Win item?
I mean, the plex allows you to purchase NEX items doesn't it?
PLEXes are available to players through the market for isk aren't they?
So, if plexes are how you get NEX items, and PLEXes are available on the market to all players, but yet you constitute the NEX store as Pay to Win had it provided any items usable in combat.
That would make the PLEX the P2W item.
You pay for a PLEX and either trade it for isk or those items in the NEX store.
You said it yourself, i'm just broadening the spectrum because PLEXes are available with isk.


Quote:
Yes whether it will kill the game, is opionion. But we base ours on current game mechanics and the issues that would arise from this change.


An opinion is an opinion is an opinion.

You base your opinion of current game mechanics and the issues that COULD arise, not would arise.
Again, it's your OPINION that this would happen, not fact.
There is not proof to suggest any issues would arise

Quote:
For you to begin to be right in any way, you first need to show a reason why this is even needed. In other words, there needs to be a problem you want to solve. So far, neither you or the OP has done this. That's what make you and he wrong in every way, opinion or not.


You don't NEED things in order for them to be implemented.

I don't need frigs do you? I don't need battleships, capitals, bcs, cruisers, t3s, t2s, POS's, Outpost, stations, wormholes, null sec, low sec, planets, belts, moons, space.
Point is, if everything in Eve were required to be needed before they were implemented, we wouldn't have Eve.

Quote:
But this again, misses the point. CCP are rebalancing that ship, to solve a problem not to create one. Thus you are asking for a solution, to a solution. Not a solution to a problem.


Yes, CCP is solving a Problem by rebalancing the ship, however, that causes problems for some people who may have invested isk and SP into that ship. So when it loses effectiveness it's not their fault. CCP is the one who balanced the ship wrong in the first place.
However, this is not a reason to implement, but a reason to use a reallocation...
Mag's
Azn Empire
#577 - 2013-01-20 15:11:01 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Wow dude....

I'm not harpin on ya, but that was the biggest contradiction of words I've heard in a long time and I'm suprised anyone liked that comment before reading it.

"or any item for that matter, was created through this process"

A Plex is an item.... Why does it not count since it was created through this manner?

"Even if that item was available through normal game play"

And Again... Hell a Plex isn't even really available through normal play unless someone else pays real cash

"Swapping it for ISK, doesn't then remove the real life cost of that game time onto the ISK"

Yet, if you paid real cash for a ship/module/fitting would it not still be, that item cost cash, so it doesn't remove the real life cost of that item into isk.

"This is why Eve is also NOT Free2Play"

Agreed

"You cannot simply ignore the game time and it's cost, in order to prove Pay2Win or Free2Play"

It's not free to play and that's good, HOWEVER, in the case of Pay to Win, why can't you ignore the fact that the item you're selling is game time?
You said yourself that purchasing any item available through normal means with real world cash could be considered Pay to Win, yet purchasing game time with the specific intent to sell it to get ahead in the Eve Universe doesn't count as Pay to Win?


"(and rightly so) that the NEX store would be a place to buy ships and ammo for real cash. Thus making it MT and Pay2Win"
But wait, if this were this case wouldn't this have to constitute that PLEX as a Pay TO Win item?
I mean, the plex allows you to purchase NEX items doesn't it?
PLEXes are available to players through the market for isk aren't they?
So, if plexes are how you get NEX items, and PLEXes are available on the market to all players, but yet you constitute the NEX store as Pay to Win had it provided any items usable in combat.
That would make the PLEX the P2W item.
You pay for a PLEX and either trade it for isk or those items in the NEX store.
You said it yourself, i'm just broadening the spectrum because PLEXes are available with isk.
Did you miss the fact I already mentioned in that post, the Plex is made outside of normal game play?

But what contradiction? It's sole purpose is game time. It doesn't add LP, SP, XP, armour, shields, ships, etc. etc. That's the whole point and why the Plex is fundamentally different than Pay2Win.

If you paid real life cash for a ship or module, you are directly buying a ship or module and yes, this could be argued as Pay2Win.
But with a Plex, you pay for game time. That game time doesn't magically disappear when you swap it for ISK. Plex constantly remains game time, till used or lost. That is the difference.

Joe Risalo wrote:
You don't NEED things in order for them to be implemented.

I don't need frigs do you? I don't need battleships, capitals, bcs, cruisers, t3s, t2s, POS's, Outpost, stations, wormholes, null sec, low sec, planets, belts, moons, space.
Point is, if everything in Eve were required to be needed before they were implemented, we wouldn't have Eve..

Quote:
But this again, misses the point. CCP are rebalancing that ship, to solve a problem not to create one. Thus you are asking for a solution, to a solution. Not a solution to a problem.


Yes, CCP is solving a Problem by rebalancing the ship, however, that causes problems for some people who may have invested isk and SP into that ship. So when it loses effectiveness it's not their fault. CCP is the one who balanced the ship wrong in the first place.
However, this is not a reason to implement, but a reason to use a reallocation...
When you want fundamental changes to game mechanics, the one thing you do need is a reason why and what problem you're trying to solve.

But as I knew you would try to use the your problem argument, I already addressed it in that post.

Mag's wrote:
The fact that you may have a problem with CCP's solution, is irrelevant. As game play and it's balance therein, supersedes the individual.

Then there is of course the fact you have already accepted changes, when you agreed to the EULA.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Malcorian Vandsteidt
Alpha Trades
Solyaris Chtonium
#578 - 2013-01-21 05:16:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcorian Vandsteidt
Cheshire Katt wrote:
I like how you say that "All MMOs have this ability". Maybe you should think about that comment. That is part of the appeal of Eve Online. They break from the norm that most MMOs have. They are unique. We, the players, don't WANT to be every other MMO. We want to continue to adapt, learn to beat the system, and not make this another instant gratification game like WoW.


Look up the Game: Perpetuum

It is Eve online, except with robots. Even their skill system is almost Identical (Except you earn SP per minuet, rather then for training skills, and you even earn this SP while logged off as long as your account is active like Eve Online's policy) You then spend that SP into skills you desire. (The Sp is also account wide until spent, so you can use it on any character)

And..

You can take 1 level out of a skill 5 times every 24 hours. (5 total levels and only 5 per 24 hours whether it be the same skill or another) Also many of their skills have 10 levels rather then just 5 like eve.

Their systems works perfectly, No one complains about it, or bitches, and it doesn't kill the game. (it's also free). And no one spams FOTM's or any of the other stupid reasons not to put this in game.

You all are simply paranoid.
Anthar Thebess
#579 - 2013-01-21 09:47:33 UTC
This should be only allowed when CCP mess with a skills, or change something directly connected to this ( in a negative way).

For example if CCP decides to remove bombs from bombers - all main skill connected to a bomber should be able to be restored and relocated.
Im not talking about frigate skills but only bomb use connected.

When CCP nerfed missiles - all missile connected skills should be reimbursable.

I know for CCP this is businesses, but for the CCP the most important thing should be to keep their customers happy.
I don't own account - i only pay for ability to play - agree - but if game rules are changed in a drastic way - also I as CCP customer should have a way to respond to this change in other way than training for the next 1 year .

As change in businesses is important - forcing your customer to get the whole damage of this change - is not so good for the businesses.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
AFK Father
AFK Chartered System Management
#580 - 2013-01-21 09:52:57 UTC
Malcorian Vandsteidt wrote:
Look up the Game: Perpetuum

It is Eve online, except with robots. Even their skill system is almost Identical (Except you earn SP per minuet, rather then for training skills, and you even earn this SP while logged off as long as your account is active like Eve Online's policy) You then spend that SP into skills you desire. (The Sp is also account wide until spent, so you can use it on any character)

And..

You can take 1 level out of a skill 5 times every 24 hours. (5 total levels and only 5 per 24 hours whether it be the same skill or another) Also many of their skills have 10 levels rather then just 5 like eve.

Their systems works perfectly, No one complains about it, or bitches, and it doesn't kill the game. (it's also free). And no one spams FOTM's or any of the other stupid reasons not to put this in game.

You all are simply paranoid.


if you like the game that players have only just recently reached 1 million ep then go play it.

you can either play boring alpha or nerfed to hell beta.
i suggest beta then you can whine on the forum when your stuff gets nerfed.