Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I agree with this, but I think we need to consider why they should be removed. You point is valid OP, having expensive items in your skull that actively dissuade players from wanting to get out and play with (or more often shoot) other players is the opposite of the climate EvE is supposed to cultivate. But there are reasons why these implants have not been removed yet, so let's dig into them:

1) They're an ISK sink.
This is plainly obvious; Every time someone loses a pod with a head full of +3's or +4's they may very well be losing up to 60M in ISK. ISK sinks in this game are few and balanced ones are difficult to implement. Simply removing learning implants would not only cause more ISK to continue to build up in the system of which I am of the opinion there is too much already, most of which is distributed quite unevenly (Don't take this the wrong way, I don't think everyone should be equal, but I do think that the current skew of wealth in this game can hinder the will to PvP or take risks, an idea which is backed up by this situation with learning implants although there can be an entire debate held on the subject). In order to counteract this, some other ISK sink would have to be added or modified. This would probably boil down to either an increase in the costs of ships and gear (which get destroyed easier then pods do) or an increase in clone costs (which is a system that has already been talked about and is considered to be a bad mechanic as well due to the fact that it penalizes someone for no other reason then faithfully subscribing and playing EvE for a long time).

2) They're a time sink (Yes, you read that correctly).
Removing them and compensating for them with increased training time potentially decreases the amount of time, on average, players spend training skills as not all players having learning implants in their heads, especially the more PvP centric ones. Although I'm sure that it would not happen on a great enough scale to really affect the average in this case reducing the amount of time it takes to accomplish something in the game can reduce the amount of time people stay subscribed if they get bored upon reaching their goal. While many of us would simply state that we don't want people who can't make their own entertainment by interacting with others in this game, we need to look at it for what it is, a potential reduction in revenue for CCP. While this is a much smaller reason then #1 to oppose removing them, it is still important to at least take it into consideration. I'm sure that there was tons of talking at CCP for this reason before they decided to change the turret training times as radically they are, and it may very well be the reason it hasn't happened until now.

These are the two cons that we need to think about before we implement (or rather remove, in this case) anything. Now for the pros:

1) They're only kind of an ISK sink.
Learning implants are, by themselves, a decent ISK sink. However, they are only an ISK sink in PvP, as NPC's will not pod you, and the very system itself is in opposition to where they can be lost! Removing them from the game, and therefor removing the feeling of risk that accompanies PvPing with them encourages people who normally don't fight but live in more dangerous space (read nullbears) to get out and help defend their space, and possibly die in a fire. It further encourages new pilots to leave the safety of highsec to go out (and die in a fire) as opposed to feeling restricted by this super expensive +2 willpower implant they just bought. And it encourages medium age players to use that jump clone or quickly grab a frig for some lowsec fun. It also means that pirates (especially the up and coming ones) are no longer getting punished by mechanics for their actions in the regions of space where the mechanics are supposed to support them. Finally, more people going out and taking some risk would breath more life into lowsec and nullsec. I think removing learning implants may very well increase the total number of ship/gear losses to the point of compensating for the loss of this ISK sink, although if it doesn't and a supplementary ISK sink needs to be added a little down the line then CCP can cross that bridge when they come to it.

2) They're only a time sink.
Having learning implants in game, or rather, the potential lack-there-of in players heads, does serve to extend the amount of time that players stay subscribed; Particularly the ones who lose pods a lot. But the reality is that a system that delays player progress in the hopes of extending player interest in the game is a weak one. At the end of that road, the player may, nay, probably, will still quit. However, the removal of this potential time spent subscribed is more then justified if the replacement results in more players having fun and thus choosing to remain subscribed for a far longer period then if they were just impeded by mechanics. A player who feels less like they are being punished for going out and experiencing the games more risky regions is far more likely to meet and fall in with other players who can provide the experience that they, hopefully, came to EvE looking for. And if they meet people and have fun chatting, fighting, pirating or simply have fun from the tension that can be provided by more dangerous space then they are far more inclined to stick around. And players who stick around for a few years are worth far more revenue then players who stuck around for what should have been 4 months dragged out to 6 because they dared to venture outside of the safety net that is highsec or because they got killed, lost their nice implants and feel spiteful because of it.

TLDR: I think that I could support the removal of such implants, and as for the baseline, I would not oppose it being set at +3 providing that some combat implants were readily available with minor attribute bonuses. +1

bad idea..

ISK changing hands from one player to another is not an ISK sink. An ISK sink is only when ISK gets moved out of player hands. Which means the only ISK sink from implant destruction is the cost of purchasing it at an LP store and the tax taken in market transactions.

Checking here: +4 implants only sink 12 million ISK each. That's 60mil for a full set, 48mil if they skip the charisma implant.
+3s sink 5.25 million ISK each.

At the same time, the ISK sink of people buying new clones will go up, because you've got more people losing pods in PvP. Still, if CCP need to introduce new ISK sinks they will.


How long will it take a player to train every ship useful to a 0.0 alliance, and all its supporting skills to 5 both with and without learning implants ?

If you want your timesink argument to be credible, you need to quantify the timesink.

It's only a sink if it is removed from the economy. If a player harvests the materials, builds the implant and then sells it on the market, the ISK moves from one player to another, not a player to nonexistence.

By being able to craft them, they are no longer a sink.

I'm talking about them being a sink in regards to their destruction via pod loss, not due to the LP and ISK cost commonly associated with acquiring them. Although your point is at least half correct, as being able to build implants does change them from an ISK sink into a time sink, which could be argued as an ISK sink in of itself, but that is neither here nor there. Also, nearest I can tell the only buildable implants are the new warp speed ones, the ascendency set, not any of the attribute implants, so it doesn't apply to the points being made in this thread. At best I see your point that if someone buys a set of implants constructed by another player and then loses them that it is not an ISK sink as materials are being destroyed, not the ISK in of itself, but that doesn't apply here due to the aforementioned reason that Rubicon will not allow us to build +4 attribute implants and the like (that I know of).

Why do you want to remove choices from this game?

And no, learning implants are not the reason for being risk averse, it's inbuilt characteristic of one's personality. Learning implants aren't even a good excuse, as all the PVPers use them as well. Or even more expensive pirate implant sets.

This doesn't fly, sorry

I have never owned a +5 implant, and switch to +3s when I get war decc'd or go into low-sec. I do not believe I am alone in this.

It's actually quite painful to do, I just have to remind myself I pay for a sub to play the game, not spin ships in station.

because the choice of "do fun stuff, or have more sp" isn't a fun or interesting choice.

except it does fly because it's the exact reason i don't bother pvping. the hassle of replacing implants and losing sp isn't worth me bothering with pvp.

jumpclones are completely irrelevant as you're still losing out on SP before you even get podded. jump clones do nothing to change the situation. you're still in the choice between sp vs risky things, or sp and risky things vs hassle. there's always a dull and uninteresting trade that adds nothing to the game except some people simply not bothering to do certain things.

Jump clones are completely relevant, as they allow you to remove the cost that makes your risk averse nature win you over.

Eve should be about choices. I choose to fly with whatever I have in my head and my +5 implants clone is by far the cheapest one I have. But if I need that extra armour, shield, speed etc, then I'll choose the more expensive set and it won't stop me playing. Even if I get less SP per hour.

My choice is playing with the right tools available and enjoying the game. (When RL allows of course) Removal of those choices for poor excuses, simply doesn't wash.