These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Latest CSM notes : Rumours of attribute points/implants being removed.

First post First post
Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#201 - 2015-01-27 05:43:28 UTC
Learning implants are fine. You don't need them and losing them is just risk vs reward at work.
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#202 - 2015-01-27 05:46:29 UTC
Oh and to clarify my position.

I think the attribute allocation/remap system is unnecessary baggage that adds nothing to the game, and encourages rookies to delay training essential skills for them to function in combat *right now* because they are remapped away from them.

I think that destructible implants which speed up training of certain classes of skills, and that offer a wide variety of risk vs reward options (dirt cheap +1s, fairly priced +3s, legitimately expensive +5s) add to the game. However, the present implementation provides a significant incentive to stay in areas of space where you are unlikely to lose pods (i.e. low and high).

I don't have the solution overall.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Dracones
Tarsis Inc
#203 - 2015-01-27 05:54:27 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:

Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning?


I use learning implants, but not other ones. To me the learning implants feel like I really need to have them in or I'm gimping myself full time. With other implants if I don't have them I'm only gimping myself for that small fraction of real life time I may be doing that activity.

Combat implants might only be working 1 hour of the week. Fitting implants might benefit me a few hours out of the week. But learning implants are working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. So it's absolutely insane to not spend 20, 30 or 50 mil on a set when I can earn that in a couple hours of playing.

They're sort of a necessary evil. I don't mind the cost of them. There's a real risk vs reward choice in flying with them. But I don't get all excited over buying and installing them.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#204 - 2015-01-27 06:27:41 UTC
Dracones wrote:
CCP Darwin wrote:

Great, but why? Can you explain your reasoning?


I use learning implants, but not other ones. To me the learning implants feel like I really need to have them in or I'm gimping myself full time. With other implants if I don't have them I'm only gimping myself for that small fraction of real life time I may be doing that activity.

Combat implants might only be working 1 hour of the week. Fitting implants might benefit me a few hours out of the week. But learning implants are working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. So it's absolutely insane to not spend 20, 30 or 50 mil on a set when I can earn that in a couple hours of playing.

They're sort of a necessary evil. I don't mind the cost of them. There's a real risk vs reward choice in flying with them. But I don't get all excited over buying and installing them.


Just because you want them does not mean you need them. I want to fly my megathron in every fleet I enter and that requires rather expensive implants. Both of us are making a choice.
Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution
#205 - 2015-01-27 06:28:23 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh?


I'm not on the team that brought this question up with the CSM, but I do have a question for you.

If your practice, normally, is to spend, say, 50 million ISK for a pod full of implants today, why would that not be your practice tomorrow, if learning implants were to be removed?

Wouldn't you just spend your money on hardwirings instead, and maybe get an even larger edge in combat?

Or, is your concern that learning implants would be viewed by the average player as inherently more valuable than non-learning-implants, so their willingness to spend on their pod decreases?

I ask because it's not evident to me that making skill training speed independent of implants will somehow reduce the overall average value of a pod, or the average risk that a player is willing to take on its contents.



Hardwirings may benefit me in a fight where the margins are thin -- in other words, when I've done something wrong and haven't stacked the field.

Learning implants benefit me whether I get into any fight at all, or dont.

So, yes, the value of learning implants is greater than the value of hardwirings.
Zappity
Kurved Trading
#206 - 2015-01-27 06:32:25 UTC
The problem with learning implants is that they don't contribute to in game activities. Having them active means you are less likely to be doing something else which other people can interact with. So when I'm in my +5 learning I'm not in my snakes, or industry, or whatever else.

Encouraging people into learning clones rather than 'interacting' clones is bad game design.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#207 - 2015-01-27 06:33:20 UTC
Zappity wrote:
The problem with learning implants is that they don't contribute to in game activities. Having them active means you are less likely to be doing something else which other people can interact with. So when I'm in my +5 learning I'm not in my snakes, or industry, or whatever else.

Encouraging people into learning clones rather than 'interacting' clones is bad game design.


Thats not the implants that entirely down to you.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#208 - 2015-01-27 06:49:22 UTC
Attributes themselves aren't especially relevant.

But removing implants is just not a good idea. They are a big aspect of risk vs reward, the more you have in your head the more you stand to benefit, but the more you might lose.

Implants should stay, that shouldn't even be in question.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Grookshank
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#209 - 2015-01-27 06:59:19 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh?


I'm not on the team that brought this question up with the CSM, but I do have a question for you.

If your practice, normally, is to spend, say, 50 million ISK for a pod full of implants today, why would that not be your practice tomorrow, if learning implants were to be removed?

Wouldn't you just spend your money on hardwirings instead, and maybe get an even larger edge in combat?

Or, is your concern that learning implants would be viewed by the average player as inherently more valuable than non-learning-implants, so their willingness to spend on their pod decreases?

I ask because it's not evident to me that making skill training speed independent of implants will somehow reduce the overall average value of a pod, or the average risk that a player is willing to take on its contents.


Because - at least for low SP players who are not utterly poor - SP is more valuable than ISK or anything else really. Not spending ISK on learning implants if you can somehow afford them, is a huge mistake imho. When I get podded in combat, I plug in new learning implants asap, I doubt I would do the same with hardwirings.
Aiyshimin
Yamagata Syndicate
Shadow Cartel
#210 - 2015-01-27 07:00:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Aiyshimin
I enjoy the planning aspects of attributes and learning bonuses from implants, and they are major factors in character development which already is pretty shallow area in this game.

I've never seen any good reasoning for their removal and can't support this direction.

If you think newbies need some help, make better tutorials and monthly remaps for the first year.

Please don't dumb down the gameplay.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#211 - 2015-01-27 07:12:13 UTC
Zappity wrote:
The problem with learning implants is that they don't contribute to in game activities. Having them active means you are less likely to be doing something else which other people can interact with. So when I'm in my +5 learning I'm not in my snakes, or industry, or whatever else.

Encouraging people into learning clones rather than 'interacting' clones is bad game design.

Then CCP must change the implants, not just removing them. If we have more diversity in learning implants that can also boost skills there won't be a problem what to choose. Also price is insane sometimes, far more than ships hulls. Scanning set is worth about 2 bilions? Watch me how i fly in covop with it...It's same as high SP character and cheap frig before the clone changes.
I'm always flying with learning +4 with rest of slots occupied by skills hardwires. Benefit from +4 will always stay in the pod, even if destroyed.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville

Temba Mapindazi
#212 - 2015-01-27 08:26:13 UTC
It seems like CCP is once again at dumbing down the game. It is their game so I do not argue their right or ability to do so. I do question their motive and execution.

I wonder if CCP has an educator or a corporate trainer on staff? I know at one time they did employ an economist to help them keep their in game economy on the right track. Perhaps a great deal of the difficult learning curve of EVE could be resolved if experienced educators or trainers instead of talented game designers and programmers took a shot at revamping tutorials and perhaps made some online tutorials to supplement game play for newbies.

Getting the hang of how to fit your ship is never really explained anywhere in game that I have found, and that is pretty darn important. So taking out stuff to make the game more accessible to newer players might not be the best idea.

Perhaps a better more effective way to teach and indoctrinate new players in the ways of New Eden is what is required.

So I say before you strip away anymore of the game we like, try seeing if you can make what you already have more accessible and user friendly.

A combat pilot must have two goals to survive,  #1 get the first shot in every fight , #2 get the last shot in every fight!

Luscius Uta
#213 - 2015-01-27 09:10:43 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:


Or, is your concern that learning implants would be viewed by the average player as inherently more valuable than non-learning-implants, so their willingness to spend on their pod decreases?

I ask because it's not evident to me that making skill training speed independent of implants will somehow reduce the overall average value of a pod, or the average risk that a player is willing to take on its contents.


Considering that they are the only type of implants who can be effective even when you are logged off, I'd say that learning implants are significantly more valuable than others. Furthermore, if I don't have plugged them in, my skill tranining time is significantly reduced and I consider SP to be the most valuable resource in EVE.
That makes learning implants mandatory for my clones, which is not the case for non-learning implants.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.

Aiyshimin
Yamagata Syndicate
Shadow Cartel
#214 - 2015-01-27 09:15:06 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
CCP Darwin wrote:


Or, is your concern that learning implants would be viewed by the average player as inherently more valuable than non-learning-implants, so their willingness to spend on their pod decreases?

I ask because it's not evident to me that making skill training speed independent of implants will somehow reduce the overall average value of a pod, or the average risk that a player is willing to take on its contents.


Considering that they are the only type of implants who can be effective even when you are logged off, I'd say that learning implants are significantly more valuable than others. Furthermore, if I don't have plugged them in, my skill tranining time is significantly reduced and I consider SP to be the most valuable resource in EVE.
That makes learning implants mandatory for my clones, which is not the case for non-learning implants.


Then again, it's really a matter of perspective- SP isn't valuable per se, and training time without implants is normal, plugging them in simply increases it.

Dominique Vasilkovsky
#215 - 2015-01-27 09:49:42 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Zappity wrote:
The problem with learning implants is that they don't contribute to in game activities. Having them active means you are less likely to be doing something else which other people can interact with. So when I'm in my +5 learning I'm not in my snakes, or industry, or whatever else.

Encouraging people into learning clones rather than 'interacting' clones is bad game design.


Thats not the implants that entirely down to you.

True but why promote a feature that makes people chose inactivity for a large percentage of the playerbase? If the option for attribute implants didn't exist people wouldn't get themselfs locked in "in the wrong clone" in the first place.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#216 - 2015-01-27 09:51:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
CCP Darwin wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh?


I'm not on the team that brought this question up with the CSM, but I do have a question for you.

If your practice, normally, is to spend, say, 50 million ISK for a pod full of implants today, why would that not be your practice tomorrow, if learning implants were to be removed?

Wouldn't you just spend your money on hardwirings instead, and maybe get an even larger edge in combat?

Or, is your concern that learning implants would be viewed by the average player as inherently more valuable than non-learning-implants, so their willingness to spend on their pod decreases?

I ask because it's not evident to me that making skill training speed independent of implants will somehow reduce the overall average value of a pod, or the average risk that a player is willing to take on its contents.



The problem is choice, or the removal thereof. I don't care about pod value.

This isn't about "streamlining" anymore, this is becoming "lets remove choices that may have consequences because players told us they don't like consequences". Some people choose to train fast, others choose to train slightly slower but at a lower cost per pod loss. Again others might go for pirate implants because that suits what they're doing at that moment. EVE is about making choices, pro active ones, to adapt and overcome the situation at hand.

See, the logic of "well doesn't every want to train fast, we mighty as well make it baseline" is of course something most people will agree to for their own personal benefit, not because it's good for the game or fitting for the game. If you'd ask people "would you want to start new characters with 100 bil isk" you'd probably get the same percentage of positive answers as you get to this change. That's how much value you should put on test groups like that: none at all.

On top of that, the logic of "lets remove them because everyone wants to use them anyway" can also easily apply to Slave implants. everyone wants to have those, might as well remove them and make it baseline. Everyone wants to scan faster, might as well make it baseline. Everyone wants snakes, might as well make them baseline. It's such a terrible logic it's beyond words.



Removing learning skills made good sense, they were terrible in a "you won't be playing the game for the first 2 months" and while technically they were of course choices realistically they were not, at some point you'd "choose" to train them resulting in zero "useful SP gain". No learning skills = good luck with that. Medical clone removal was logical, they didn't give one any sort of choice that would benefit players in different ways. No medical clone upgrade = good luck with that. Learning implants are not in that same realm, they ARE choices. One of many actually, all competing for the same slots and that is a GOOD thing because it forces the player to make intelligent decisions based on his situation, which can have consequences. Even more so with the ease of jump clones there literally is no valid reason other than "many players told us they don't like to have to make choices".


I can see various reasons why one would want to ponder on removing learning skills:

- make missions, a main source for learning implants, less important and worthwhile. Easily solved by making implants drop from exploration, there's already precedents for this
- open up those implant slots for funky other options. Making more and funky implants does not somehow mean that others need to be removed, it just means players have more options. More options = good, less options = bad
- players are non-effort, lazy and really don't like how there's risk or planning involved in things. I doubt this will need explanation
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#217 - 2015-01-27 09:52:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
Then we get to the whole "it's better for the newbies" logic, which is inherently false. "newbies can't pay for implants and as such this benefits older, richer players" looks like it makes sense but it doesn't. It's actually the other way round.

Lets say a newbie grabs a Rifter and goes solo pvping, he runs into another Rifter flown by a much older player. He's already at an SP disadvantage (which doesn't necessarily mean he'll lose), what are the chances the older player will have slave implants (assuming a plated Rifter) if learning implants got removed? So now that newbie isn't only battling SP and experience, but now also combat related implants.

And this translates to bigger scenarios as well: "haves" will be much more powerful in combat/scanning/whatever than "not haves". If the logic is "ppl can't pay for learning implants" then the "people can't pay for combat implants" also applies. Now guess why capable, rich, 0.0 groups want to remove learning implants; they can't raise the ceiling anymore with pure skill points, now they're looking for other advantages.

Malcanis' law applies: it would benefit older/richer players more than new players because suddenly older ones are not held back anymore by their "need" to use learning implants so they can pile on the advantages in form of performance affecting implants. Training SP faster doesn't affect actual current gameplay, it just affects progress towards some (probably lulzy) long term goal. Skill points are a balancing factor that HELPS newbies, because of the increase in SP cost per skill lvl and because of the lvl cap. All older players can do is diversify more, not become better (than others) at what they already can do so overall skill points are very useful but in an actual confrontation/situation they're a liming factor for older players. Which is GOOD.




So here's the reasons why people will tell you that learning implants need to go:

- "I hate risk". This is EVE, HTFU
- "I don't like having to make choices". HTFU
- "I think that # skill points are all important". They're not and if you feel they are they you have the choice of using implants for it
- "it'll help newbies". It won't, it'll actually help older richer players because suddenly they're not held back anymore and can go full combat implants that DO affect actual current performance

All of those are selfish, short term good long term bad choices because that's what most players will opt for. (for an explanation on that I'd refer you to Richard Bartles' "Why virtual worlds are designed by newbies", it's a must read for game designers).



TL;DR: People want learning implants gone for the wrong reasons, mostly selfish and hidden agenda ones. Removing choice is a) bad and b) allows older players to go crazy on implants that WILL affect current gameplay scenario and WILL give them the upper hand. You're giving older, richer players MORE advantages. Not less.
Dominique Vasilkovsky
#218 - 2015-01-27 09:57:31 UTC
Chaotix Morwen wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Chaotix Morwen wrote:
Why is everybody obsessed with removing choices from this game? Learning implants have always given people the choice of risk vs reward, you people are essentially asking for the reward without the risk.

I'll bet you loved the choice given back when we had learning skills to train as well.

It isn't about risk, it is about a stupid mechanic that shouldn't have been added to start with. I would happily replace my +5s with highgrade pirate implants if it wasn't for the SP/h penalty currently imposed.


The learning skills werent a choice, there wasnt the pick between SP, ship efficency or cost, it was just spend time for bonuses. With implants you can have learning implants, pirate implants or nothing at all, 3 choices which you can intermix as you wish. With choice comes risk. Just because you struggle with choices doesnt mean its a stupid mechanic.

Are you seriously saying you wont use pirate implants for the sake of 1.5 sp/m? Does that meager little sp gain mean so much as to gimp your ships?

It's the same argument, you didn't have to do the learning skills, sure would be silly long term if you didn't get them trained but no one forced you. Same with the attribute implants. Not to mention the attribute implants were added to make up for the bad learning skill mechanic in the first place.

Up until recently high grade implants were +3 not +4. That 3SP/m would total to 11m SP for the 7 years I have had +5's plugged in.
Dominique Vasilkovsky
#219 - 2015-01-27 10:01:17 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
people accept risk in this pvp centric MMO where consequences can be harsh?


I'm not on the team that brought this question up with the CSM, but I do have a question for you.

If your practice, normally, is to spend, say, 50 million ISK for a pod full of implants today, why would that not be your practice tomorrow, if learning implants were to be removed?

Wouldn't you just spend your money on hardwirings instead, and maybe get an even larger edge in combat?

Or, is your concern that learning implants would be viewed by the average player as inherently more valuable than non-learning-implants, so their willingness to spend on their pod decreases?

I ask because it's not evident to me that making skill training speed independent of implants will somehow reduce the overall average value of a pod, or the average risk that a player is willing to take on its contents.

Currently I have 530M worth of attribute implants and 600M worth of hardwires, with no attributes tied to the implants I would have 2-4b worth of pirate implants plugged in instead.
Qn'qura Zalas Zula
Doomheim
#220 - 2015-01-27 10:06:05 UTC
The learning implants are hardly engaging though.
More people would no doubt be using entire low/mid grade pirate sets instead for the stats.
Myself amongst them.

Proper Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance