These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#581 - 2015-02-09 16:48:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Rift
Makari Aeron wrote:
CCP Darwin wrote:
Noting one more time that I'm not a game designer and not on the team considering these changes, just participating in the conversation. :)

Gregor Parud wrote:
No, everyone makes choices, risk assessments and compromises.

I think you missed my point, which was that the attribute system explicitly punishes behavior that it's probably better to encourage for new players, trying out a range of different skills, ships, modules. Choices with consequences are great, they're what makes EVE what it is, but a choice between optimal play and fun play is probably not where you want to end up as a game designer.

(Edit: To be perfectly clear about what I mean, optimal play with the attribute system means picking skills that match one's current remap rather than the skill one would like to play around with in the game. For a veteran player who's already tried everything EVE has to offer or who is already juggling multiple accounts, this is not as much an issue, but for a new player, it gets in the way of trying out different types of gameplay.)

An example of a meaningful choice that isn't like that is the choice between fitting a PvP ship for more tank vs. extra damage. There's a downside to fitting a very light tank, but the upside (doing more damage) leads to more fun gameplay. And, you could make the argument the other direction, too, that having a strong tank can be fun in its own way.

I think one of the reasons that the attribute system is getting a look is that all the choices you can make with attributes feel kind of bad. The time scale of the impact of a decision is so long that you never really know if you're making a mistake by committing to a remap, and the reward is so deferred and so abstract that the system always feels like it's punishing you.


I started playing with learning skills and as such I spent the majority of my first 3 months training those up. As such I was rather gimped. Why? Because I wanted to learn to how to train things more quickly. At the same time, I also did neural remaps to speed up my time along with +4 implants. However, I truly cared how quickly I trained things because I wanted to get right into it.

Most of my friends who started playing within the last two years don't particularly care for remaps. They simply put in +4/+5 implant sets, set themselves to the most "balanced" attribute system and carry on their day so they can train what they wish at a penalty. However, they also don't really plan ahead. They train things partially and swap skills out based on what they need right then and there. Hell, I end up making some of their skill queues for them because they can't be bothered to make a skill queue that far ahead. Granted, I love making massive skill queues and have personally started working on my "10 year plan" which encompasses every skill I should train since I'm out of skills I *want* to train.

While I am a fan of the remap system because of how quickly you can train up "spec'd" skills (assuming you plan far enough ahead), it really does penalize new players who needs to train up 5, 6, or even more different attribute combinations. The younger players are never truly gaining benefits from the attribute system until after 2+ years when they have found their niche and the skill attributes to go along with it. I would still object to the removal of the attribute system because I feel it is an integral portion of the game, especially for skill training. One must plan ahead in order to gain the most benefits from skill training.

On the other hand, I support the removal of the attribute system because it allows players to train as they wish and enjoy the game. There truly is not a good answer for this and I look forward to further discussions with actual metrics as well as new ideas to replace this system.



Don't think as training with a balanced attributes as a penalty but as a the standard and a focused remap is the bonus one gets for focusing on one area.
Dominique Vasilkovsky
#582 - 2015-02-09 17:15:47 UTC
Lady Rift wrote:
Don't think as training with a balanced attributes as a penalty but as a the standard and a focused remap is the bonus one gets for focusing on one area.

Except focused is the standard and has been since the remaps were introduced. Balanced is for those that don't mind falling behind.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#583 - 2015-02-09 17:25:34 UTC
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
Don't think as training with a balanced attributes as a penalty but as a the standard and a focused remap is the bonus one gets for focusing on one area.

Except focused is the standard and has been since the remaps were introduced. Balanced is for those that don't mind falling behind.

I think Balanced is by far the more common, at least early on. Focused is for people with long term plans.

Also, I get what CCP is saying, but, we get THREE Remaps when we star a new char. For that first year we can quickly change gears. So I can't say I agree that it "forces" anyone to remap and then train skills sub-optimally.
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#584 - 2015-02-09 18:17:19 UTC
Learning implants are actually is not a very good game mechanic. They might appear to be a good for the game on the first look though. Here's the main problems with them gathered from my personal experience:

1. New players do not understand how they work.
As Cybernetics is not available initially, a true newbie has no idea how important they are in the long run. And if said newbie did not start via recruit-a-friend program then this person won't even have money to afford +3 set after tutorial (+2 at best). Coupled with neural remap limitation it can slow down progression for a newbie by a very large margin.

2. Learning implants highly reduce willingness to engage in PvP activity.
When I only started to play Eve implants +4 were the main reason not to step my foot into 0.0. After losing few sets +3 it was very painful to replace. Nowadays I use them here and there and it doesn't stop me from combat but reduces willingness to use certain shiptypes: Interdictor is a suicide most of the time, who wants to lose implants in his own bubble?

3. Learning implants lower usage of Hardwirings.
When you already spent a lot on your pod, you do not want to make this loss-mail even shinier. Carrying all these implants around and keeping a stockpile in case of loses already adds hassle.


However Implants have their own good sides that somehow justify their presence: they take away LP and some ISK from the game when purchased and, unlike ships and modules, cannot be re-used on other character. Not sure how big of impact it has on the economy as a whole, but I doubt it's an unsolvable problem overall.
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#585 - 2015-02-09 18:22:13 UTC
Sniper Smith wrote:

Also, I get what CCP is saying, but, we get THREE Remaps when we star a new char. For that first year we can quickly change gears. So I can't say I agree that it "forces" anyone to remap and then train skills sub-optimally.


New players do not know what is "balanced". They do not understand yet how to utilize these 3 remaps and may irreversibly waste them on their first month of play to accelerate getting into first BS or something like that.
This system is more beneficial for vets creating another account and planning remaps ahead of the road to maximize training speed.
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
#586 - 2015-02-09 18:36:53 UTC
Leannor wrote:
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:
remove remap.

give a new attirbute bonus slot. (only bonus implants can be fit in this slot)

create new bonus implants bpo's with 3% 4% 5% 6% increase to training time on all attributes.

implants lasts for 3 months, cannot be removed once fit.

they die with pod deaths.

cost of implants bpo reflected by level of bonus given.

makes it easy to understand and gives us some new content to make isk from.







this, but remove attributes totally. just 'skill boost' slot.


well if attributes where all the same level for all why need them ? agreed.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#587 - 2015-02-09 18:53:27 UTC
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:
Sniper Smith wrote:

Also, I get what CCP is saying, but, we get THREE Remaps when we star a new char. For that first year we can quickly change gears. So I can't say I agree that it "forces" anyone to remap and then train skills sub-optimally.


New players do not know what is "balanced". They do not understand yet how to utilize these 3 remaps and may irreversibly waste them on their first month of play to accelerate getting into first BS or something like that.
This system is more beneficial for vets creating another account and planning remaps ahead of the road to maximize training speed.

As someone who has most of my accounts in the Rookie Corps.. news players tend not to use the remaps at all. Even when they ask about them. Every now and then you see someone who's blown one, but most just stick with the standard map for the beginning.

I'm sure if CCP wanted to they could give us some numbers, average maps for age, remaps used and when, etc.

Now don't get me wrong, Eve's explanation of HOW remaps and all that stuff works is abysmal at best in game. Not that I'm sure there's any easy way to do so. But this is the complexity I DON'T want removed from Eve.

I learned how to do this stuff, learned what it meant, made skill plans to take advantage of my yearly remap, and my Bonus. People who don't shouldn't get the same advantage. Does that mean some start slow? Sure. But why is that a bad thing? Why does everyone need to be equal.. Maybe rather than giving us SP CCP can just decide what skills we should learn? How we should fit the ships? How we should play.. No. It's choices. It's up to individuals to take the initiative to learn, and if not, then they will lag behind. It's part of the Complexity that made me want to try Eve, and made me stick around.
Memphis Baas
#588 - 2015-02-09 19:26:12 UTC
We can argue back and forth, but none of us have any actual data to back up the "facts" that keep being mentioned:

- newbies don't use remaps
- newbies do use remaps
- newbies don't understand remaps
- the average attribute usage is a "balanced" remap
- the average attribute usage is a "focused" remap
- having implants discourages PVP
- having implants doesn't matter - equal numbers of people pewpew with or without implants
- jump clones are being used for quick bursts of PVP then back to training
- jump clones are only being used for travel
- most people would prefer to keep implants
- most people would prefer to get rid of implants
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#589 - 2015-02-09 19:56:30 UTC
Removing learning implants and granting the full "max" possible SP/Hour for all skills would be the best for the game overall.

Learning implants can be replaced with additional types of hardwiring/pirate/Jovian?/Sleeper? implants that have different effects.

A new player can completely get hosed by not understanding the remap process and picking a bad (charisma?) remap first. Players may have to wait months to try out new ships/modules that come out simply because their remap is horrible for that item.

Maintaining base training times for skills is all around a good thing- however, punishing players for trying to crosstrain against their current remap is no longer viable in Eve as it stands today.

Eve used to have a place for highly specialized characters that were "locked in" to specific professions. However, the market is saturated with so many thousands of characters for sale with different specializations that it does not make sense to retain the current system as it is. This does not mean there should be a Plex/Aurum for SP system, as that would be on the same level of dumb as walking in stations.

The only players that are against removing learning implants are those that are either:

a) in the implant markets

or

b) butt hurt pubbies that feel like everyone should have to go through what they went through when they started the game

or

c) short-sighted "thinker" types that believe that keeping implants is an additional risk or somehow good for the game

Those are literally the only three options, and they are all bad.


In before someone tries to again provide a dumb argument that implants are a risk assessment etc etc- people that are stuck in +5s (or even +4s) become risk averse to the point where they will generally not go out and expose themselves. Removing that "mandatory" risk assessment means that more people will generally be more active and exposed in space, or replace that isk with other implants that literally only work if they're undocked.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#590 - 2015-02-09 20:06:13 UTC
Living in a noob corp, better than removing implants or other nonsnese, if you want encourage PVP, then I suggest make it easier to make Jumpclones. In CAS we have people with Rorq's that regularly hold "Jumpclone Sessions" for the newbies (and anyone else) who want to make one. Lots of those people then use their new clone to go down to the CAS/CAStabouts base in Null and play, if only for a little while.

If we want to accept the premis that says implants make people not want to PVP, then make it easier for them to get clones without implants. Lower the standings needed to get them, or make it so your "School" stations will always give you one.. hell make getting one part of the training missions. If you have one clone, you're gonna use implants in it, and not want to lose it. If you can get more, you're more likely to leave one free for PvP (IF your are interested in PvP.. obviously people that don't want to, won't.)

It takes a fair it of time to get a corp standing to 8 for your own JC Creation.. Many won't trust going into low/null to a Rorq or an outpost just to make them.. for sure not if their current clone is expensive.

Hell, my 'holy grail' would be for CCP to add a "clean clone", one that can't have implants, and have it's creation be during the training missions. You'd learn how to make it from a cap in deadspace, learn the whole procedure for jumping into one, etc. Then you'd be left with a clone that can't use implants, perfect for PvP. I doubt CCP would ever do it, but I think it would be a great addition. That way all new players would always have a clone ready to go. If they want to PbP then there it is, they have the original good clone that can put whatever they want in, and they have their clean one. If they don't want to PvP, then they can never look at it again. Done.
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#591 - 2015-02-09 20:52:49 UTC
Solhild wrote:
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Solhild wrote:
This opens the door to an annual skill remap which means that players could deconstruct unwanted skills and load them into a new area ready for another year invested in the game. That would definitely be an improvement.


Gimme, gimme, gimme Roll

We are still arguing whether CCP give you an inch or a yard, and your already staking your claim on a mile. Truly, some people are never satisfied.


Not really sure what's wrong with you. I'm simply suggesting an opportunity to remove choice from the game.

Ftfy.

Remove standings and insurance.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#592 - 2015-02-09 21:13:55 UTC
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Removing learning implants and granting the full "max" possible SP/Hour for all skills would be the best for the game overall me.
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#593 - 2015-02-09 21:51:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Omniblivion
Gregor Parud wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Removing learning implants and granting the full "max" possible SP/Hour for all skills would be the best for the game overall me.



All of your posts in this thread are dumb, you should stop, really. If you think I manually train new characters I want to play with instead of just buying them on the forums, Roll


Since that previous comment will get ISD'd, I'm copypasting something I wrote on SA:

Mr Omniblivion wrote:
New players get hosed as attributes are severely limiting for a newer player, and older players can just purchase a character if they want to move to a completely new specialization.


Basically, a new player to eve doesn't sit down and say "Hmm, I am going to specialize in Int/Mem because I expect to not actually fly my ship for a month while I train these support skills". A new player will just start training skills, likely what his corp tells him to train, and either Not Remap or Remap to an awful layout by accident, not knowing otherwise.

How do I know this? I'm involved in two major newbee recruitment programs for Goonswarm Federation and talk to new players on a daily basis. Literally every single time we explain how the attribute system works over mumble, it's followed by "... it's really stupid, welcome to eve"

But please, continue to argue your short sighted opinion on why people should have to make a choice about committing their ability to train skills for a year when that does nothing but prevent people from getting more ships into (and blown out of) space.
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#594 - 2015-02-09 22:17:17 UTC
Let's table the remapping discussion for a bit. Surely the learning implants are a tad less contentious?

You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Mathias Raholan
Iron.Guard
Fraternity.
#595 - 2015-02-09 22:18:49 UTC
I keep reading "New players won't understand... " a lot in this topic. While I'm all for doing stuff to retain people and make some things more simple, but for the love of god let them figure something out over time. I didn't know a lot my first days, neither did a majority of players. This is like some weird helicopter parenting.
Dominique Vasilkovsky
#596 - 2015-02-09 22:30:01 UTC
Mathias Raholan wrote:
I keep reading "New players won't understand... " a lot in this topic. While I'm all for doing stuff to retain people and make some things more simple, but for the love of god let them figure something out over time. I didn't know a lot my first days, neither did a majority of players. This is like some weird helicopter parenting.


The game will still remain nice and complex long after the learning attributes are gone. You still need to plan what skills to train, just that you finally can train them in a logical order without any penalty. You will still need to figure out what ship to fly and how to fit it. You will still need to figure out how to properly fly said fit.
Reiisha
#597 - 2015-02-09 22:42:22 UTC
Attributes are a left over of an archaic game design idea, customization for the sake of customization.

The thing is, they worked when you couldn't change them! Remapping took away the point they had though (customization had been replaced with basically an annoying game mechanic).

Why not remove attributes and introduce something else to give players the chance to customize their characters beyond skills and their looks? Whatever that may be.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#598 - 2015-02-09 22:44:24 UTC
Mathias Raholan wrote:
I keep reading "New players won't understand... " a lot in this topic. While I'm all for doing stuff to retain people and make some things more simple, but for the love of god let them figure something out over time. I didn't know a lot my first days, neither did a majority of players. This is like some weird helicopter parenting.


I don't even...
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#599 - 2015-02-09 22:48:53 UTC
Chance Ravinne wrote:
Let's table the remapping discussion for a bit. Surely the learning implants are a tad less contentious?


The remapping/Attribute implants are hand-in-hand. Remapping is just another permanent form of attribute enhancer.

Solution

-Remove attributes affecting SP/hour. Give everyone the max SP/Hour for whatever skill

-Change attributes to give a small bonus to the actual skills that utilize them, with the same Primary/Secondary classifications

-Keep attribute implants in the game


Problem solved Cool
Memphis Baas
#600 - 2015-02-09 23:00:38 UTC
So if someone remaps to Per Wil then they get, say:

- 2% bonus to gunnery, missiles, drones (in effect 2-6% DPS bonus from the guns)
- 2% bonus to whatever the ship bonuses are (typically DPS, sometimes ewar range, resists, or the like)

And if they remap Int Mem then they get, say:

- 2% bonus to armor, shields, capacitor, targeting, etc (support skills)
- 2% bonus to refining, manufacturing, mining

Something like that?

It would be somewhat difficult to balance, mostly because ship bonuses are typically support type bonuses, so the Int/Mem mapping seems to have more bonuses than the Per/Wil mapping would give. I'm also guessing that they may prefer to introduce 2% implants to give the bonuses, rather than keeping, and complicating, the attribute programming.