These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 Points remapping/buying™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#541 - 2015-09-21 15:50:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Aerasia wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Oh, and given how the profit potential is unbounded...how do you argue against that? Just curious?
I don't have to, because it's not a problem. Your doomsday scenario can also be described as "What if more people subbed to EVE, and decided not to mine for a living? Oh, the humanity!"


What? That is in no way equivalent.

Let me see, CCP can potentially make lots of RL money is some how related to mining in game.

GMAFB. Roll

Oh and congratulations on making the stupidest post in the thread. Well done.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#542 - 2015-09-21 15:52:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Dror
Teckos Pech wrote:
What? That is in no way equivalent.

Let me see, CCP can potentially make lots of RL money is some how related to mining in game.

GMAFB. Roll

That's discussing in-game "profits", as is the original discussion in that reply line.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#543 - 2015-09-21 15:58:16 UTC
Dror wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
What? That is in no way equivalent.

Let me see, CCP can potentially make lots of RL money is some how related to mining in game.

GMAFB. Roll

Oh and congratulations on making the stupidest post in the thread. Well done.

That's discussing in-game "profits", as is the original discussion in that reply line.


So, my point is that this could set up a very bad scenario where CCP would have potentially increasing pressure to essentially inflate SP in the game. That is bad for the long term viability of the game.

You are Aerasia constant hand wave any issue having to do with game balance.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#544 - 2015-09-21 16:05:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Dror
Teckos Pech wrote:
So, my point is that this could set up a very bad scenario where CCP would have potentially increasing pressure to essentially inflate SP in the game. That is bad for the long term viability of the game.

You are Aerasia constant hand wave any issue having to do with game balance.

That's a digression from what's already discussed.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Aerasia wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
In other words, if CCP decided to start selling SP directly, there would be an incentive for CCP to push as many SP into the game as possible. The cost to CCP is minimal, if not zero, thus every sale would be pure profits. With an unlimited upper bound on the number of SP that could be pushed into the game, the potential profit is theoretically unbounded as well. If CCPs revenues from subscriptions start to fall, then the incentive to use the SP sales to counter that effect would provide an increasing incentive to basically "inflate" SP.
And I can't completely argue against this point. I doubt CCP has gone along with the idea that multiple accounts are basically SOP for over a decade because they think having to remember 15 passwords is core gameplay.

Of course, I also don't *have* to argue that point too much because while I think Mike's argument that allowing purchasable SP will collapse the game is silly, my own preference is to remove SP entirely - neatly sidestepping the possible black, capitalist heart of CCP.

Yes, I know you and a few others have advocated for removing all SP, and while that gets around my issue of CCP inflating SP it also can be terribly unbalancing. For example, I have 3 accounts. Currently 2 have characters who can park an ishtar in an anomaly and rake in ISK. With removing SP, I'll be able to rake 33% more ISK than I do now. If I can rake in say 1.5 billion now, with no SP I'll bring in 2 billion. I doubt I'm alone so we'll see a substantial increase in ISK entering the game. That can be unbalancing. Sure your noob can fly a Claw or a Taranis, but what if they cost 75 million or more for just the hull? They wont be flying that ship until they have the ISK.

You guys just don't think at all when it comes to game balance. Not all, IMO.

Oh, and given how the profit potential is unbounded...how do you argue against that? Just curious?


Which returns back on what's just said about it being a non-issue.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#545 - 2015-09-21 16:08:56 UTC
Dror wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
So, my point is that this could set up a very bad scenario where CCP would have potentially increasing pressure to essentially inflate SP in the game. That is bad for the long term viability of the game.

You are Aerasia constant hand wave any issue having to do with game balance.

That's a digression from what's already discussed.


The only "digression" I see here is you and Aerasia's inability to respond to what I've actually written.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#546 - 2015-09-21 16:13:09 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Dror wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
So, my point is that this could set up a very bad scenario where CCP would have potentially increasing pressure to essentially inflate SP in the game. That is bad for the long term viability of the game.

You are Aerasia constant hand wave any issue having to do with game balance.

That's a digression from what's already discussed.


The only "digression" I see here is you and Aerasia's inability to respond to what I've actually written.

It's really simple.

"Why should I rebut on purchasing SP? Even motivation science shows, and the company has stated, that extrinsic is of much less value than intrinsic. 'If these are established by neither SP nor its purchase, then the argument is very little about if SP purchases could effect the game.'"

"But what about in-game economics and what would happen with a bunch of alts?"

"This is a non-issue, because it's the same as asking if a bunch of players joined the game."

Replying again about purchasing SP seems pretty worthless. There are already arguments there about removing SP that are without discussion.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#547 - 2015-09-21 16:47:32 UTC
Dror wrote:
"But what about in-game economics and what would happen with a bunch of alts?"

"This is a non-issue, because it's the same as asking if a bunch of players joined the game."
To give Teckos the benefit of the doubt I think he might have been alluding to the idea that if an alt has perfect ability to earn cash near AFK, what incentive would CCP have to stop that practice?

And as with the previous SP buying idea, there isn't really one. But then, it's also not a change from the current situation. By his own argument he's already got 2 AFK-ratters. Running PI empires on each character isn't an uncommon practice. "Power of 2" promotions didn't happen by accident.

On the other hand, CCP has been seen to act against those interests. ISBoxer restrictions had no financial motivation. And whether you think it's vaporware or not, the idea of "Brain in a box" removing OGB is also a step towards nerfing alt-aholics.

But the argument is either "If you remove SP, CCP might keep doing what they're already doing.", your summary of "This is a non-issue, because it's the same as asking if a bunch of players joined the game." or simply "I spent a lot of time building this skill queue - don't take that away!"
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#548 - 2015-09-23 18:03:19 UTC
Hrm... Seen this topic many times, but just had a different idea....

What if we SP transfer by time as part of training?

It is limited to skills with similar attributes possibly but what if while training, you transfer SP off one skill onto another one as that skill trains.

For example, you have Gallente frigate V and want to train caldari V instead. I assign that skill to untrain, and while the normal SP builds, the sp is removed from that one skill and added to the other. Thereby essentially "doubling" the rate of training, at expense of what you already trained.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#549 - 2015-09-24 22:03:54 UTC
An interesting discussion is producing the following idea (which is probably only worth the read if interested in the premise of an EVE-like game with multiple times its average PCU):

What Plausibly Happens with Removed SP
Capital Ships: The Game
Capital Escalations, Carrier/SuperCarrier ratting.. yeah. Mineral prices skyrocket like crazy due to the mass ISK generation and capital ship construction
Supers fighting supers to protect super fetuses
B-R gameplay consistently
Subs flooding the game from all the stories

Why is this relevant? What makes this seem interesting?
A common idea is that B-R stories are a main and effective advertisement. Setting up lots of skirmishes is supposedly CCP's main design direction.

Per CCP, "There's a ton of information [and evidence] on how intrinsic motivation is much better for creativity and engagement. Extrinsic rewards erode motivation, focus the gameplay on the reward structure, help de-track other goals and ideas, and develop dependence on those rewards for a guide." An "experience" system (SP) is an extrinsic reward.

Expectations
Why would fresh subs expect B-R? More on point, why would fresh subs come for B-R? Some studies would list these game traits as fantasy, socialization, and competence. They're interested in the skillfulness of flying well, socialization and teamwork, and the story aspect of the experience.

So, what comes with that fantasy? Most spaceship-game progression is completely about flying bigger ships. That lines up with this game's story of massive capitals. Then there's the experience of flying multiple types of ships, flying in support of the capital fleet, protecting their production -- competence and mastery.

What happens where none of these expectations are met, through limited engagements and fitting and ship options? So the expectations are "Capitals: The Game"?


Common Criticisms
  • Tidi
    • An abundance of capitals can be limited as necessary through ISK payouts like bounties or another tweak of their appeal; and there are already few enough reasons for merging a bunch of fleets in one place. Those capitals can be anywhere, and they'll get caught more regularly. If that still ends up in poor infrastructure response, it's probably within fix.

  • Rifters costing 50M
    • It's unreasonable, the idea that the market could support enough caps for over-inflating itself, especially from affording frigates. Either both are semi-affordable, or neither are. What's the probability, a few cap investments empty the market? Then what? It fills back up. This either stabilizes or stays that way or gets patched in some form. Characters benefit from keeping prices low, so there's plenty of reason for min-maxing whatever defines that. In this case, it's plausibly just mining and producing ships. This also has the benefit of providing that "I'm making ships" feeling and of evening out the supply vs the demand that's, purportedly, majorly in favor of demand.

    There are also limitations on cap construction that can be dynamically enforced by strategy. X-Alliance is silent, probably farming? Better take their systems.

  • Alts Online: Security Status Becomes Worthless
    • Sec status could be tied to the account.

  • Other forms of "Alts Online"
    • One account allows one ship in space. More accounts require more subs. It's like asking what would happen if more subs joined the game.

  • Every ship being a faction ship or something
    • There are obvious limitations on ship production, including through LP, as well as limitations coming from funding options. What's the alternative, liquid ISK and assets keep stacking? The reason for spending ISK is a threat; and a threat requires initiative, which requires efficiency, which requires freedom.

    "SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
    Persephone IX
    Imperial Academy
    Amarr Empire
    #550 - 2015-09-25 20:46:59 UTC
    CCP, that's the thin end of the wedge, free bought skills? Unless you plan to go F2P and sell skillpoints instead. Which is equally bad.
    You want free sps? Its called character bazaar. Buy plex , pay the iskies, get the char, done. Free sps at your disposal.

    CCP, Can I Haz My Stuff?
    Utremi Fasolasi
    La Dolce Vita
    #551 - 2015-09-27 01:41:40 UTC
    It seems that all the various proposals about introducing Learning Boosters as an alternative to implants could fall under this thread too.

    - Player manufactured
    - Consumable
    - Limited Use
    - Drawbacks/possible side effects
    - Helps PVP and industrial characters both
    Halan Devan
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #552 - 2015-09-29 18:56:23 UTC
    I will not touch the topic of buying SP other than to just say "No!"

    But remapping is another idea... The biggest problem that i see is that people are being greedy and wanting to remap ALL their skill points, most likely instantly.

    This shouldn't just be a "click here to magically remap all SP on the character", it should require expenses and effort in game.

    Limit it to 10% of the characters total, also limit it to once a year much like remaps. Perhaps limit the amount of total SP remapped as well. We could give players the single starting remap for free then have them fork over PLEX after that first time, or make the higher level remapping implants (mentioned below) cost much more.

    Also require an implant that replaces ALL other implants in that clone, and give it a weeks ( or more for larger remap amounts) time to complete the remap. Depending on the SP retrained/remapped have different costs to the implant needed.

    Thus there is obviously no standard SP training during that time, and if you wind up podded during that time then you have to go back and start over from the beginning with the partial remap. And buy new implants.

    I think there are enough limits that CCP could put on how and when the idea to (partially) remap can be used that it could be worthwhile for many players and not just overpowered, yet allow those with poor training choices in the past to correct at least part of their new player mistakes if they choose to spend the time and/or Isk/PLEX.

    This shouldn't just be a "click and instantly remap all SP on the character", it should require expenses and effort in gameas outlined earlier.

    This could even be a one time affair offered to players if CCP ever gets to the point where they are removing character attributes from EvE.

    Disclaimer: All numbers used in the above post are vague suggestions, subject to alteration as needed.
    Dror
    Center for Advanced Studies
    Gallente Federation
    #553 - 2015-09-30 10:01:03 UTC
    Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
    It seems that all the various proposals about introducing Learning Boosters as an alternative to implants could fall under this thread too.

    - Player manufactured
    - Consumable
    - Limited Use
    - Drawbacks/possible side effects
    - Helps PVP and industrial characters both

    It has yet to be properly explained why -- if attributes are problematic because of forcing uninteresting training, and they are supposedly being discussed for removal with the only problem being how much LP is spent on learning implants -- that attributes can't just be all set at 27, at least until something is figured out for replacing implants (if at all).

    "SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.
    Maximus Aerelius
    PROPHET OF ENIGMA
    #554 - 2015-09-30 14:57:56 UTC
    ShahFluffers wrote:
    There is no "right" or "wrong" answer with regards to skillpoints. Merely what you find relevant now and irrelevant later... good for X situation and bad for Y situation.
    Either way, the power of the skills you train is always there. You just aren't using ALL of them at any given time (for whatever reason). And that is part of the "process" of this game.


    Example: when I was young I trained up MINING skills. I was pretty good at it and had a decent skillplan incorporating mining with PvP skills.
    Then one day I realized that I really did not like mining in any serious way and did not want those skills to be on my PvP character. So I abandoned the skillplan and focused purely on PvP.

    Fast forward a few years... I have near perfect subcapital PvP skills... but the mining skills remain... a remnant of a different stage in my evolution in EVE.
    Then mining barges were changed/buffed. I took a look at them... and I saw the Procurer.
    If ever there was a bait ship, that was it. Tanky, could fit full tackle, everyone underestimated it, and it also had the capacity to kill "small threats."
    I got 3.
    Now I sometimes sit in a low-sec belt... mining... using those same skills that I had abandoned because I hated them and found little use for (at that time).


    The point is... you never know when you will eventually you will find use for the skills that you trained before and find useless today. And since there is no cap on how many skills you can accumulate, sooner or later you may find yourself working on those skills you previously abandoned.
    In a larger sense... no time is "wasted" training any particular skill.


    Other things to consider:

    - It will make newbies think that more SP = more powerful (which is not exactly true as I have pointed out consistently in my usual "Skillpoint Spiel" (see the link in my sig below)).

    - Buying skillpoints deprives the newbie of the "process experience" of being new... which is necessary as it teaches newbies how to work with what they have rather than just throw money at a perceived "problem."

    - It makes the beginning experiences of newbies MORE painful as they will "throw money" to get more SP and expensive ships... and then wind up losing it due to lack of experience (which is more rage worthy than losing a couple of cheapo frigates and cruisers that one has only put in mild investment into).

    - Older players (especially rich ones with access to gobs of ISK) will be able to afford more PLEXes (and thus skillpoints) than any newbie will and still stay ahead in terms of total SP.

    - Yes, yes... the Character Bazaar is technically a way to bypass training and get more SP for ISK... but it is more of a grudging necessity than a desired mechanic.
    Players will always find ways to sell characters regardless of the legality of such a transaction (look at other games for good examples of this). So the best option for all parties is to "contain" and "regulate" the sales in-house so everyone is protected.
    If there was a way to reliably prevent players from selling accounts then I'm sure that would have been the method used by CCP. The reality is that there isn't.

    - Players did get concessions from CCP regarding micro-transactions during the Incarna fiasco. One of those concessions what that PLEX/Aurum would not be used in ways that would give a player a clear advantage over others just because they paid more money (see: gameplay advantages).
    Granted... creating multiple accounts is also a gameplay advantage... but CCP doesn't see the difference (mechanically speaking) between an alt account and another player playing. In their eyes, it is no different than teaming up with another (actual) player... except a player using two accounts has to split his/her time and attention between both accounts and is thus less effective than two actual players.


    I think this guy nailed it pretty much. EVE was never about the SP (or it never used to be) and should never be. As I've said often in threads about this issue as per this one:

    Use plex to Train Skills directly...
    Maximus Aerelius wrote:
    It's not about the amount of SP you have, it's what you have it in, what you do with it, who you fly with, who you fly for, what you do, who you do it to, who you do that with or for and with and the reaction to your actions...


    And that's all I've got to say apart from no to P2W\P2T.

    [b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
    Danica Dankness
    Imperial Academy
    Amarr Empire
    #555 - 2015-10-07 05:51:45 UTC
    I don't know if anyone cares about a newbies point of view on this, but I will speak anyway What? I may be new or newish to eve, but I have been a competitive gamer since 2000 or so.

    Purchasing SP in any way, shape, or form is a bad idea.

    If you trained the skills, they are yours and you should keep them, not trade them for others. This keeps all of us equal and our SP is due to our choices. Implementing a trade system will only complicated an already complicated game.

    I think implants should be left alone. If I train cybernetics to 5 and want to plug in +5 implants then its my loss if I get them blown up. If I choose to only train it to 2, then that's on me also.

    I understand why the skill training is there and fully accept it as being a necessary part of the game, but I think newbies like myself are at a huge disadvantage to older players when it comes to the current SP system. A 3 year old player has the luxury of maxing his attributes toward a certain map and only training those skills that fit the map. I have to mix Int/Mem skills with Per/Will and then throw in Mem/Per for drones and Int/Per for navigation skills so the end result is the older player getting anywhere from 2 to 5 million SP more per year. I also find the whole meta of skill planning to be confusing and is something else that I have to learn in a very complicated game. I would like to see all attributes evened across the board at somewhere between 23 and 25 (25 will give you equal to the current max not counting any implants) and eliminate the need to remap as all skills will train at the same pace. This will benefit newer players but will also benefit older players who have gaps to fill in that do not match their current attribute map. I am sure there would be bitter vets bitching about this, but what are they going to complain about, a newbie training skills at the same rate they are? Hush now bitter vet you will still have plenty of baby seals to club. Roll It would still take me a long long long long time to train into that Archon with T2 siege, I am not asking for anything to be given to me, just don't make it so confusing.

    One last thing I would like to add is that when I started playing Eve, it was done with 3 of my gaming buddies that I have played with for over 10 years. I am the only one that stuck with it. The other 3 simply hated the entire complication of the skill training, not the fact of having to train skills, but just how complicated CCP has made it, and many of the suggestions I have read in this thread would double or triple that complication. If new player retention is desired, then this is one area that could be simplified, but not eliminated. Your early hurdles and road blocks in Eve should be how to keep your first Rifter from getting blown up and deciding what projectile turret to put on it, not trying to figure out how to train SP.
    Maximus Aerelius
    PROPHET OF ENIGMA
    #556 - 2015-10-09 13:05:36 UTC
    Danica Dankness wrote:
    Purchasing SP in any way, shape, or form is a bad idea.

    If you trained the skills, they are yours and you should keep them, not trade them for others. This keeps all of us equal and our SP is due to our choices. Implementing a trade system will only complicated an already complicated game.


    Snipped for clarity but a great post (yes I'm one of those "Bitter Vets"). I fully agree that a flat rate of SP gain through training would remove some of the planning but then it's also apparent that EVE standsout from the crowd because of that complexity. It's been touted around as "the thinking persons game" and it takes some learning. After 12 years I don't know it all yet and things change pretty darn quickly these days.

    Quick sum-up: fully behind the above and no to buying SP. Yes to flat rate train but you'd still need to skill plan for goals\targets etc.

    [b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
    Teckos Pech
    Hogyoku
    Goonswarm Federation
    #557 - 2015-10-09 17:57:13 UTC
    Danica Dankness wrote:
    I don't know if anyone cares about a newbies point of view on this, but I will speak anyway What? I may be new or newish to eve, but I have been a competitive gamer since 2000 or so.

    Purchasing SP in any way, shape, or form is a bad idea.


    So you want to get rid of the character bazaar then? P

    "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

    8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
    Maximus Aerelius
    PROPHET OF ENIGMA
    #558 - 2015-10-12 15:22:38 UTC
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    Danica Dankness wrote:
    I don't know if anyone cares about a newbies point of view on this, but I will speak anyway What? I may be new or newish to eve, but I have been a competitive gamer since 2000 or so.

    Purchasing SP in any way, shape, or form is a bad idea.


    So you want to get rid of the character bazaar then? P


    That's a bit different as someone paid in subs and time to train that character up rather than just buying & applying SP to the FOTM fit\activity.

    The Bazaar is also limited by how many chars\accounts you have. You're limited to 3 chars per account without forking out extra for another account so that's another check in for decisions\price.

    [b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
    Teckos Pech
    Hogyoku
    Goonswarm Federation
    #559 - 2015-10-12 18:04:51 UTC
    Maximus Aerelius wrote:
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    Danica Dankness wrote:
    I don't know if anyone cares about a newbies point of view on this, but I will speak anyway What? I may be new or newish to eve, but I have been a competitive gamer since 2000 or so.

    Purchasing SP in any way, shape, or form is a bad idea.


    So you want to get rid of the character bazaar then? P


    That's a bit different as someone paid in subs and time to train that character up rather than just buying & applying SP to the FOTM fit\activity.

    The Bazaar is also limited by how many chars\accounts you have. You're limited to 3 chars per account without forking out extra for another account so that's another check in for decisions\price.


    I understand, having sold a few characters myself, but the point still remains, it is a form of buying SP.

    "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

    8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
    Julien Brellier
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #560 - 2015-10-15 18:39:51 UTC
    Pay to remove some of your own skills and return unallocated SP to your own character sheet or transferred to an alt on the same account?
    Cool.

    Pay to buy skills?
    Totally insane move that will kill this game stone dead.Evil