These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Remove Attribute Implants..but replace them...

Author
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2012-04-20 18:33:34 UTC  |  Edited by: HELLBOUNDMAN
Bare with me on this... It'll make sense and I'm sure it's something that would work for all players.

So, remove attribute implants from the game, and instead, apply those +5s directly to the characters indefinitely, but still allow for the same neural remaps that currently exists.

Now, as far as what to do with those leftover implant slots.

My idea was to tie them to current implants. So it would look like this.

Implants for slots 1 and 6
slots 2 and 7
slots 3 and 8
4 and 9
5 and 10

So any implant that would fit in slot 6, will now also fit into slot 1.

The only limitation on this is that you wouldn't be able to fit 2 implants effecting the same attribute. So I wouldn't be able to fit 2 implants to effect tracking on large guns, but i would be able to fit one for large guns and one for small guns, or armor rep amount, etc. etc..
Basically, a mix and match.

Now, this helps the players tremedously.
It helps noobies because they will have faster training times to be able to get better ships and modules sooner.
It helps pvp and pve players with more combat implants.
It helps players involved in pvp that don't like risking implants because they would no longer lose out on training time.

Basically, the way the system currently sits, most players won't put +5 implants in their heads on a pvp clone because it's too much money to risk.
So essentially, players are being punished with longer training times because they prefer to pvp.

The only thing that should actually be effected in this manner is combat effectiveness. Now, the players willing to risk their implants will be able to pull out more combat effectiveness without having to risk training times, and more players can get involved in pvp without losing training times. So everyone still has the same training times, but those willing to risk more and spend the isk also get more combat effectiveness.

Training is not something that should be effected by combat apart from flying a ship that when destroyed can possibly cause skill loss, or not having an updated clone.
Tidurious
Blatant Alt Corp
#2 - 2012-04-20 18:48:30 UTC
You don't think being destroyed and implanted in a new clone should affect your ability to learn? Give me a break. Sounds like whining to me.

Also, learn to search. If you did, you would have seen that people LIKE attribute implants and this has been shot down several times before.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2012-04-20 18:58:08 UTC
Tidurious wrote:
You don't think being destroyed and implanted in a new clone should affect your ability to learn? Give me a break. Sounds like whining to me.

With the current system, sure it should effect your ability to learn.. However, with what I'm suggesting, it instead effects only your combat effectiveness

Quote:
Also, learn to search. If you did, you would have seen that people LIKE attribute implants and this has been shot down several times before.


Yes, players do like attribute implants, however, if they had the opportunity to retain the attribute buffs without having to worry about implants on clones and to also have the ability to apply more combat effectiveness instead of attribute buffs, i'm sure they would enjoy that much more.
mxzf
Shovel Bros
#4 - 2012-04-20 19:07:00 UTC
You're asking for the removal of an ISK sink and a major risk/reward factor in PvP. Risk/reward is important in Eve (specifically, in this case, the risk of losing your implants and the reward of increased training times). You're saying "Take away the risk and give me the max reward possible"; which would be very very bad for Eve.

tl;dr: No.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2012-04-20 19:22:57 UTC
mxzf wrote:
You're asking for the removal of an ISK sink and a major risk/reward factor in PvP. Risk/reward is important in Eve (specifically, in this case, the risk of losing your implants and the reward of increased training times). You're saying "Take away the risk and give me the max reward possible"; which would be very very bad for Eve.

tl;dr: No.


Apparently you guys didn't read what I posted, but instead just looked at the title and figured you understood.

No, i'm not saying remove risk vs. reward, I am instead saying, make that risk vs. reward applied towards combat effectiveness unless you're in a t3, or don't have an updated clone.

A player risking more will still receive more benefit, but instead through combat and not training times.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#6 - 2012-04-20 20:23:42 UTC
right, because there is only downsides to not flying with a full set of +5s in your head...

(aka, no, it's been suggested before and it doesn't make any sense).


... although I wouldn't mind being able to use another highwall ... the Michi implants are hilariously expensive...

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

mxzf
Shovel Bros
#7 - 2012-04-20 21:33:10 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
No, i'm not saying remove risk vs. reward


Yes, you are. You're asking to remove the risk of losing your +5s without removing the reward of having the +5s. Hence you're asking to remove a large chunk of the risk vs reward.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2012-04-21 00:07:14 UTC
mxzf wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
No, i'm not saying remove risk vs. reward


Yes, you are. You're asking to remove the risk of losing your +5s without removing the reward of having the +5s. Hence you're asking to remove a large chunk of the risk vs reward.


However, those implant slots can now be used for 5% combat implants, so i'm removing the risk of losing +5 attribute implants, and instead am giving the option for more effective combat skills.

I may have removed one risk, but it was replaced with another risk, but yet, having more combat effectiveness would also give more reward
Veronica Kerrigan
Surgically Constructed L Feminist
#9 - 2012-04-21 05:29:27 UTC
That also means there is absolutely no drawback to the HG pirate implants. as it stands, you can either max learning, or max something like armor HP, not both.
LT Alter
The Terrifying League Of Dog Fort
Deepwater Hooligans
#10 - 2012-04-21 09:17:43 UTC
The current system works fine, dieing and losing something very important is part of eve.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2012-04-21 10:37:31 UTC
mxzf wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
No, i'm not saying remove risk vs. reward


Yes, you are. You're asking to remove the risk of losing your +5s without removing the reward of having the +5s. Hence you're asking to remove a large chunk of the risk vs reward.


That's your take on it. Mine runs differently.

I see him asking to remove training benefits from avoiding PvP vs getting into it.
I see him asking to keep the implant slots but make them usable only with hardwires vs training implants.

No where in there do I see any removal of risk vs rewards, what I do see is disabling PvE benefits of "safe training" vs PvP players losing out on it because of learning implants that cost too much to use when you're going to lose that pod.

If you think the rare pop of a highsec pod with +5's does more than annoy them, you're wrong. That player will replace the implants and keep using +5's.

Who won't? The lowsec and nullsec and wormhole folks that daily face risks of PvP. THEY don't use high-end training implants so they don't keep up with the 22+ million SP a year "living safe in highsec" players and he's asking for that to be removed so it is no longer a "hidden" penalty of PvP in this game -- you won't train as fast as someone who sits "safe".

I kind of like the idea that PvP types can and will train as fast as any Jita 4-4 trader can. A PvP player may lose their pod but they won't fall behind on training simply to avoid "flying what they can't afford to lose" via training implants (which is all "attribute implants" are -- for training).

So swap out learning implant slots for hardwires? That could work. You'd have 5 more slots you could spend on to improve your performance -- but not train faster nor slower simply to avoid/afford losses to training.
kongking wang
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2012-04-21 11:30:24 UTC
Mocam wrote:
mxzf wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
No, i'm not saying remove risk vs. reward


Yes, you are. You're asking to remove the risk of losing your +5s without removing the reward of having the +5s. Hence you're asking to remove a large chunk of the risk vs reward.


That's your take on it. Mine runs differently.

I see him asking to remove training benefits from avoiding PvP vs getting into it.
I see him asking to keep the implant slots but make them usable only with hardwires vs training implants.

No where in there do I see any removal of risk vs rewards, what I do see is disabling PvE benefits of "safe training" vs PvP players losing out on it because of learning implants that cost too much to use when you're going to lose that pod.

If you think the rare pop of a highsec pod with +5's does more than annoy them, you're wrong. That player will replace the implants and keep using +5's.

Who won't? The lowsec and nullsec and wormhole folks that daily face risks of PvP. THEY don't use high-end training implants so they don't keep up with the 22+ million SP a year "living safe in highsec" players and he's asking for that to be removed so it is no longer a "hidden" penalty of PvP in this game -- you won't train as fast as someone who sits "safe".

I kind of like the idea that PvP types can and will train as fast as any Jita 4-4 trader can. A PvP player may lose their pod but they won't fall behind on training simply to avoid "flying what they can't afford to lose" via training implants (which is all "attribute implants" are -- for training).

So swap out learning implant slots for hardwires? That could work. You'd have 5 more slots you could spend on to improve your performance -- but not train faster nor slower simply to avoid/afford losses to training.


i agree.

the way i see it is if you pvp, yes its risk/reward but if you dont then its just reward/reward. there is no harm in ballancing it out so everyone in eve is on an equal footing when it comes to training.

another thing to think about is the current over supply of hardwires making them cheap and throw away. once that supply dwindles (if the idea got implemented) these would go up in price and thus create that isk sink someone mentioned earlyer. also creates more risk.

high sec pve looses their god like training powers and pvp gains more.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2012-04-21 18:53:22 UTC
kongking wang wrote:
Mocam wrote:
mxzf wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
No, i'm not saying remove risk vs. reward


Yes, you are. You're asking to remove the risk of losing your +5s without removing the reward of having the +5s. Hence you're asking to remove a large chunk of the risk vs reward.


That's your take on it. Mine runs differently.

I see him asking to remove training benefits from avoiding PvP vs getting into it.
I see him asking to keep the implant slots but make them usable only with hardwires vs training implants.

No where in there do I see any removal of risk vs rewards, what I do see is disabling PvE benefits of "safe training" vs PvP players losing out on it because of learning implants that cost too much to use when you're going to lose that pod.

If you think the rare pop of a highsec pod with +5's does more than annoy them, you're wrong. That player will replace the implants and keep using +5's.

Who won't? The lowsec and nullsec and wormhole folks that daily face risks of PvP. THEY don't use high-end training implants so they don't keep up with the 22+ million SP a year "living safe in highsec" players and he's asking for that to be removed so it is no longer a "hidden" penalty of PvP in this game -- you won't train as fast as someone who sits "safe".

I kind of like the idea that PvP types can and will train as fast as any Jita 4-4 trader can. A PvP player may lose their pod but they won't fall behind on training simply to avoid "flying what they can't afford to lose" via training implants (which is all "attribute implants" are -- for training).

So swap out learning implant slots for hardwires? That could work. You'd have 5 more slots you could spend on to improve your performance -- but not train faster nor slower simply to avoid/afford losses to training.


i agree.

the way i see it is if you pvp, yes its risk/reward but if you dont then its just reward/reward. there is no harm in ballancing it out so everyone in eve is on an equal footing when it comes to training.

another thing to think about is the current over supply of hardwires making them cheap and throw away. once that supply dwindles (if the idea got implemented) these would go up in price and thus create that isk sink someone mentioned earlyer. also creates more risk.

high sec pve looses their god like training powers and pvp gains more.


Finally, two people that understand what I'm saying.

One thing those haters of this idea aren't realizing is that with the introduction of the PLEX program, attribute implants are essentially allowing those players with real world cash to buy SP, which so many people are against. All they have to do is buy a plex, sell it for isk, then buy a crap tons of +5s and boom, they've just bought at least a month's worth of SP for the year. If they get podded, then rinse and repeat. Daddy's wallet isn't gonna be empty any time soon.

So, would you rather these players purchase SP, or would you rather them buy limited combat effectiveness that is worthless if they don't know how to fly or fit a ship?

Don't know about you, but i'm going to go with option B.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2012-04-22 04:11:28 UTC
Up
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#15 - 2012-04-22 04:45:12 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
The only limitation on this is that you wouldn't be able to fit 2 implants effecting the same attribute. So I wouldn't be able to fit 2 implants to effect tracking on large guns, but i would be able to fit one for large guns and one for small guns, or armor rep amount, etc. etc..


But I would be able to fit a 6% CPU and 6% PG implant at the same time. Part of the deal with implants is that there are benefits and consequences. If you fit the 6% CPU implant, you can't fit the 6% PG implant.

We have jump clones to address the risk of losing implants. If you head out to PvP, switch to your +3 clone. When you're done for the weekend, switch to your +5 clone. Note that +5 implants do not cost as much as high grade Snakes or Slaves, yet people still PvP with those implant sets.

It is not fear of losing +5 implants that keeps people out of PvP, it's fear of loss, and fear of failure. Switch to +3 implants for PvP, and you will not lose as many SP as going out in a naked clone.

There is nothing to fear but fear itself.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2012-04-22 05:58:41 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:

But I would be able to fit a 6% CPU and 6% PG implant at the same time. Part of the deal with implants is that there are benefits and consequences. If you fit the 6% CPU implant, you can't fit the 6% PG implant.


And??? Besides, this doesn't really help anyone to have both a CPU and a PG implant. I've never been in a boat where one module would go over the top on both CPU and Power. It's been one or the other. Hints the co-processors and reactors which swap some of one for some of another. However, even if you were in the situation where you needed a little of both, well, you spent that isk on those implants and you're willing to risk them, so you get that bonus.

Quote:
We have jump clones to address the risk of losing implants. If you head out to PvP, switch to your +3 clone. When you're done for the weekend, switch to your +5 clone. Note that +5 implants do not cost as much as high grade Snakes or Slaves, yet people still PvP with those implant sets.

It's not a matter of risking those +5 implants. It's a matter of losing out on that training time just because you decided to take more risk than other players.
Sure, there are players that can afford those +5's and those slave implants, but again, I don't care if they have better combat effectiveness through implants, but better training times is something that shouldn't be a factor determined by the amount of isk or real world cash a player has

Quote:
It is not fear of losing +5 implants that keeps people out of PvP, it's fear of loss, and fear of failure. Switch to +3 implants for PvP, and you will not lose as many SP as going out in a naked clone.

There is nothing to fear but fear itself.


Sure, there are players that are just afraid reguardless, but there are also those players that don't pvp because they don't wanna have to jump into another clone and lose training time, or, they can't use jump clones.

Again, training times are something that shouldn't be allowed to be determined by a player's stature or wallet in or out of game. A noob should come into Eve and be able to train just as fast as a player who's been in eve since day one.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#17 - 2012-04-22 14:41:27 UTC
Actually id like to see attribute implants replaced with attribute boosters.

Exactly the same, except the effect is not permanent. So the boosters must constantly be replenished, although perhaps they would have insanely long timers.

Their effects should also persist beyond death, the current system unnecessarily penalizes null sec players. I see no reason to link learning speed with the security status of the systems in which you live.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#18 - 2012-04-22 14:42:03 UTC
Id also like more pirate implants.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2012-04-22 18:51:11 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:


the current system unnecessarily penalizes null sec players. I see no reason to link learning speed with the security status of the systems in which you live.


Well, at least we agree on that part.

I do feel if you're going to have something in those slots then it should be something you have to risk, however, I don't feel it should be effectinge our attributes.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#20 - 2012-04-22 19:03:55 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:


the current system unnecessarily penalizes null sec players. I see no reason to link learning speed with the security status of the systems in which you live.


Well, at least we agree on that part.

I do feel if you're going to have something in those slots then it should be something you have to risk, however, I don't feel it should be effectinge our attributes.

Heh yeah, that's why id like more pirate implants :)

The only reason I like attribute boosters is because I think it would make a nice isk sink if they had to be renewed periodically.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

123Next page