open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Blog: New Player Experience
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 : last (16)

Author Topic

CyberGh0st
Minmatar
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2009.02.20 10:21:00 - [361]
 

Originally by: Avall
I just wanted to chime in with the fact that i LOVE the learning skills. I really like the idea that i can make the painful decision to train for them now, and later reap the benefits of that temporary sacrifice.

It doesn't mean I can't train other stuff in between. It definitely doesn't mean anyone should be encouraged to start with them right away. Maybe after a couple of months, when you've decided to commit to the game. It also doesn't mean you have to train them all in one go. THIS is where some effort should be put in, to have newbies relax about training the learning skills until they're ready.

They're also good from a pedagical point of view, since they are among the first skills that really force you to decide on training time versus usefulness of each level. That's a good experience for the rest of the game.

So, in short: please, keep them. I'd even like it if you put in MORE of them. Maybe coupled to implants. Or some other mechanic.




I agree, they are here now, se lets keep them.

As I said before, give the newbies 50k SP of regular skills and 750k SP of learning skills.
Nerfing the skillpoints is dumb, why widen the gap with the vets?
And again, I don't think that giving 750k SP worth of learning skills will overcomplicate the skillset for the rookies :p

On top of that, I think that 2 free respecs for the attributes is too much, 1 free respec + once a year should be more then enough, especially since in the new system the characters will already be more balanced stat wise at creation, so there is no need to "fix" a problem, only need a way to improve.

Greetz

CrazzyElk
Big Shadows
Initiative Mercenaries
Posted - 2009.02.20 11:14:00 - [362]
 

Originally by: Avall
I just wanted to chime in with the fact that i LOVE the learning skills. I really like the idea that i can make the painful decision to train for them now, and later reap the benefits of that temporary sacrifice.




I just wanted to say I TOTALY AGREE with this. Learning skills was one thing I thought was really fun in the beginign, seeing how mutch faster everything went was a real enjoyment Razz.

And that was back when you had to do lv 5 of the tier one learning skilsl to get anything of the tier two ones. Nowdays you can get 4+4 learning quite fast and any more then that reallly is more a longterm investment that people don't haveto do at once, or even ever if they don't feel like it.


Yoshite McLulzypants
Gallente
People called Romanes they go the house
Posted - 2009.02.20 12:54:00 - [363]
 

No I didn't read all 13 pages so if someone already brought these up deal with it.

Stat readjustments: Good idea but let the minimum be 3. Let the rest of us knock our cha to 3 or else force all achuras to go up to 5 cha at the expense of int/per imo.

Less sp more training time: Dumb. So basically a new player will be even more useless as they grind their way through learning skills. Or was it that CCP realized that the only "new players" entering the game these days are simply cyno/hauler alts and you want to milk a month of subscription out of them rather than having a character be able to drop a cyno after trial period?

Wen Illiad
Gallente
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.02.20 13:13:00 - [364]
 

Originally by: CCP Fear
But what do you think about the new Intro, and the movies in the character creation? More movies?
I liked the mini movies for character generation. Intro movie was kinda meh...

Tedric
Genco
Posted - 2009.02.20 13:19:00 - [365]
 

The more i think about this respeccing of attributes, the more i dislike it. Initially i though 'great', but now, after thinking how to use it, i'm drifting into how to munchkin it.

the more i use it, the less definition the character has (more like a fuzzy outline, than a clearly defined edge). It is like homogonizing (SP!) milk, it kills off a lot of the flavour (it also tastes bad).

Q: can we change our attributes in the realworld, or even in SF?
A: now, no. SF, possibly.

If we are to allow this, i would suggest allowing one respec after 6 months. That is it. By 6 months, you have realised what the weaknesses are of that character.

Q: How many of us realised in week 4 that we made a mistake?

A: I did, and that was 5 years ago (perception a little on the low side).

Any additional respecs feels wrong, feels like powergaming/abuse of the system.

what i have not gotten a handle on, is what kind of training time swing will happen if you move your 14 points in a min/max fashion? 15%? 20% anyone?

tedric.

lyspaera
Caldari
Posted - 2009.02.20 13:20:00 - [366]
 

Edited by: lyspaera on 20/02/2009 13:34:26
Originally by: CCP Fear

So... does everybody hate the learning skills?


yes, they are by far the most hated skills in eve, and should never have made it into the game in the first place.

removing them now would however be a fist in the face for everyone that has actually spent time training them.
most new players ive met consider leaving the game mostly cause of learning skills and how long it takes to train them.

Helin Fares
Posted - 2009.02.20 14:28:00 - [367]
 

I've just tested the new character creation on Sisi.

My thoughts about the new Videos:


New race videos are good. Kick intro of each race, basic information... all good and appealing. Nice start for a new player to see a polished creation step.

Now the new introduction movie. As said before, it should not be used as introduction movie. It's just a advertising video like all other expansion videos. But the introduction movie seen at the game launch has to explain the why and the how of EVE, explain the basic setting of the EVE universe. This movie just explains nothing. As a new player, all I know when I start the game is that I play a space opera MMO where I'm a demigod ???? WTF ?????

I know you guys want to develop the roleplaying side, but actually you're killing it with this.

Keep the same old intro movie, or at least the same speech, and make new video over it.


About the creation process (neutral attributes and skills)

While I really approve the idea of giving same attributes to any races and bloodlines, I think new players will get confused by the consequenceless of their choices. In every games and in every MMO, creation choices imply a character differienciation regarding its skills or attributes. Even in WoW, you choose a race with racial skills and sub-profession, and a class. Here you just have to choose between plain texts. You have to tell the player what skills he will earn by choosing this bloodiline and this race.
Show attributes and skills during creation, and inform that attributes can be respec twice as a noob, and every skills can be trained later.

Finally... I want the profession back (with their pictures)! Without them, I feel my character to be like many others. I want to make a starting choice, even if the profession doesn't give significant skills. I want to make choices for my character, and think about what would be his role in the universe. The profession IS part of the roleplay. Just emphasize that profession are just a very basic specialisation and every choices can be done later.



Kename Fin
Caldari
Wormhole Engineers
Posted - 2009.02.20 15:01:00 - [368]
 

Originally by: CCP Fear

So... does everybody hate the learning skills?


Not so much. I didn't train learning skills right away. I did know what they did, but figured I could hold off until I was ready to train for level 5 in another skill. When I did consider learning skills, I quickly realized one thing:
IF I train my learning skills, I will spend less time on skills that are effected by those raised attributes. I got into a ship I liked, with equipment I liked and then just PLAYED the game for awhile. My learning skills didn't keep anything from happening. My choices might have, but not the skills.

In the end, the only thing I don't like about the learning skills is that they had an end. As of 5,376,000 skill points and some +5 implants, I'm slightly disappointed that I've reached the terminal ability to learn faster.

p.s. How about a booster for skill training. 30 minutes at 2x? 4x?

p.p.s. I'm not opposed to giving everyone the attributed points that I decided to spend time training for, but would appreciate being given those sps to apply somewhere else. I made a risk/reward decision and don't like be penalised be cause someone can't be bothered with wasting that time.

p.p.p.s. I don't think a discussion about the NPE is the best forum for learning skills inclusion/exclusion. At this point in EVE, CCP is limited by the number of available option to revolutionise it [the NPE] and not completely alienate the players who have come before.

p.p.p.p.s. The movie was merely 'ok'. Could I have done better: probably not, but I'm a project manager by trade. Was there enough information in it: not really. In the interest of being a sandbox, EVE tries very hard to be all things to all people. The nature of the universe is that this will likely fail more than it succeeds. Kudos for making it work so well for so long.

Athos Zel'tar
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2009.02.20 16:43:00 - [369]
 

My .02 ISK

I agree with Groumindong on almost every point made, but implementation will be very difficult.

If we follow the logic that learning skills suck (kick in the balls is how I believe you put it), then we have two real choices for dealing with that:

1) Max all Learning skills at 5 and be done with it
This is the easiest way of dealing with the problem, but creates more problems afterward. New players will see ten skills at level 5 which do nothing, and ask for ten that do somethingugh. There will be much whining and crying and we have enough of that as it is.

2) Remove learning skills and give everyone a +10 to all attributes (or introduce boosters, whatever).
This also creates problems-brand new players will not know a difference, and people playing for a year or more will by and large not care, but people who have been playing for 3 months or so who have a lot of the total training time invested in learning skills will feel very ripped off. A possible solution would be to reinvest lost skillpoints elsewhere, but I have really no idea if this would be feasable.

All in all, my stance is that Learning skills suck and should go the way of the Dodo, but I think that the situation should be looked at carefully to ensure no one gets kicked in the balls from your solution to being kicked in the balls.

P.S. Sorry for stealing your euphamism Groumindong, but it works so well, I just couldn't resistCool

Poluketes
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.02.20 18:00:00 - [370]
 

Originally by: Alezra
MWD Atron Tackler: 104,338 SP
...
To use that MWD Atron Tackler requires two days of training.


In the current system I could fly a tackling frig in 21 hours (rifter, 200mm autocannons, rocket launcher, mwd, point, web, nanofibers, cpr). At a bare minimum that's 122,304 SP. And that doesn't count the additional 414,004 SP that the Brutor special forces build gives that directly improved my ability to fly tacklers (evasive maneuvering 3 vs 0 in the bare minimum plan, Minmatar frigate 4 vs 3, signature analysis 3 vs 0, etc).

Using the existing starting builds, 21 hours into the game I had 536k SP directly usable for flying mwd tackling frigates. No mission running required.

I'm not saying a pvp newbie needs 500k SP of tackling skills off the bat to be useful. You can get by with 150k. But calling 50k + required missions an improvement for pvpers in the first critical 24-48 hours that a game has to convince someone it's worth playing is a joke.

Also you're assuming atrons are pvp ships. They're not. You'd probably be better off in a noob ship.

Originally by: Alezra
The only possible way that a new player can sate their thirst for pubbie blood is if they're instantly granted the ability to use a Goonswarm certified fitting upon account creation?


Don't be stupid. Waiting 21 hours for a useful pvp ship is reasonable. Waiting 36 is reasonable. But if the game actively prevents pvp newbies from getting out into 0.0 in a useful ship to experience its heavily advertised large-scale pvp battles for more than 48 hours, there's a problem. People have short attention spans and running solo pve missions isn't what Eve's supposed to be about.

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2009.02.20 18:58:00 - [371]
 

Why are people insisting that a new character should be able to fly a tackling frigate within 24 or 48 hours? Is there really something about flying tackling frigates that define everything that is good and proper for a person new to EVE.

Poluketes
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.02.20 19:09:00 - [372]
 

Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Why are people insisting that a new character should be able to fly a tackling frigate within 24 or 48 hours? Is there really something about flying tackling frigates that define everything that is good and proper for a person new to EVE.


Eve's pvp and user-conquerable space is its key, heavily advertised selling point and the fundamental thing that distinguishes it from WoW. Many newbies see those ads and come to Eve to pvp. If they're sentenced to run mandatory missions in empire and skill up for days before they can get out to 0.0, they're going to think the game is boring and quit.

I'm not saying that everyone should do pvp in their first 48 hours, just that it should stay an option for those who want it. This new system sounds great for newbies who want to run missions but it's a big step backwards for newbies who want to pvp. CCP should be able to tweak the new system so it's beneficial for both groups. It wouldn't be that hard.

Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.02.20 19:11:00 - [373]
 

Edited by: Haniblecter Teg on 20/02/2009 19:11:55
I've come to the conclusion that I like learning skills. Here's why:

EVE IS A MULTI-YEAR GAME

Its near 7 years old now and it has retained an insane amount of its original players. Learning skills represent that multi-year long-tern investment that is EVE; a game with no real correlation in gaming today.


With the elimination of the lvl 5 req for tier 2 learning skills, you've eliminated the REAL boundry that made learning skill tedious. Now, in order to get level 3 in the tier two skills, you just need to invest a little over a week in training.

If you think new EVE players can't make a week's worth investment into quickening their training times, then I think you sourly underestimate the kind of person that is interested in a game with THIS STEEP A LEARNING CURVE

In fact, take away learning while adding respecing and you risk cheapening THE ENTIRE GAMING EXPIRENCE. Because after that, what's really to differentiate one player from another?

delor
Posted - 2009.02.20 20:28:00 - [374]
 

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
If you think new EVE players can't make a week's worth investment into quickening their training times, then I think you sourly underestimate the kind of person that is interested in a game


Why should they have to make a week's worth of "investment" into something that isn't fun at all? This is a game and its purpose is to entertain. If it were some sort of meaningful risk/reward decision that would be one thing but it's just another few weeks you don't see any meaningful growth of your character instead. The only thing you "risk" is getting bored of the game entirely, and that's not something you'd want to design into a game.

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
In fact, take away learning while adding respecing and you risk cheapening THE ENTIRE GAMING EXPIRENCE. Because after that, what's really to differentiate one player from another?


Learning skills are a horrible differentiating factor, because they're going to be the same for basically everybody after a month or two: 4/4 or 5/4. Plus, outside of "I'm new, do my attributes suck?" threads, when do you ever know or care- or have any ability to find out- about someone else's attributes? Both from an out-of-game and an in-game perspective, citing them as a differentiating factor is ludicrous.

And, seriously, what else differentiates one player from another? How about basically everything else about them? All their non-learning skills? Their corporation, their standings, their playstyles, their race- heck, their name and portrait provide a more meaningful differentiation between them and other players than learning skills will.

True Ace
Gallente
Fat Bastards
MACHI MISCHIEF
Posted - 2009.02.20 20:49:00 - [375]
 

Laughing its simple, if you want to train faster you train the skills. otherwise train your other skills. evemon you know the skill planner doesnt even recommend training those skills first.

btw 0.0 shouldnt even be the goal of most new guys lol i mean really how many of you alliances will accept a fresh char off the block.

anyways devs your new tutorial is heading in the right direction just add more backstory. that is what made eve.

races should mean something though i think its about time to include racial bonuses to flying your own races ship. Cool

Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.02.20 20:50:00 - [376]
 

Edited by: Haniblecter Teg on 20/02/2009 20:52:03
Originally by: delor


Why should they have to make a week's worth of "investment" into something that isn't fun at all? This is a game and its purpose is to entertain. If it were some sort of meaningful risk/reward decision that would be one thing but it's just another few weeks you don't see any meaningful growth of your character instead. The only thing you "risk" is getting bored of the game entirely, and that's not something you'd want to design into a game.



Whoa, training skills is fun? Its kinda tedious if anything. And yes, you can make an argument that training for a new weapon or ship is satisfying to some degree, you can also make the argument about increasing your only personal stat, attributes


Originally by: delor

Learning skills are a horrible differentiating factor, because they're going to be the same for basically everybody after a month or two: 4/4 or 5/4. Plus, outside of "I'm new, do my attributes suck?" threads, when do you ever know or care- or have any ability to find out- about someone else's attributes? Both from an out-of-game and an in-game perspective, citing them as a differentiating factor is ludicrous.



By that token we should remove implants too. A +5 is very affordable to me, and speeds up my training well beyond your new players. In fact, its VERY tedious for a new player to grind the ISK to get a +4 even...but is it just as tedious as it is to passively train a skill? Nope, I'd think more.


Originally by: belor

And, seriously, what else differentiates one player from another? How about basically everything else about them? All their non-learning skills? Their corporation, their standings, their playstyles, their race- heck, their name and portrait provide a more meaningful differentiation between them and other players than learning skills will.



I'll give ya this one. There's faar more player-created attributes that differentiate ourselves more than attributes. If anything, I've made a bit of an identity in the fact that I started with 14 base char and 4 base memory.

Besides that, I think what I was trying to articulate, but only really formed till right now, is that I have a great concern about attributes disappearance from teh game. If anything, they seem to be a hold over from faar in the past design doc, where attributes were supposed to have some silly effect on stats like damage or mining rate.

Its just my concern that if you go down a road of respecing, of removing learning skills, then you're bound to come to the conclusion that you just don't need them and we should just have a flat training time dependent on rank.

I think THAT would have a serious effect on the game, in terms of losing some identity and dumbing down the game. Hell, if there was no attribute enhancing implants, how painful would it be to lose a clone?

Athos Zel'tar
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2009.02.20 21:48:00 - [377]
 

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg

Whoa, training skills is fun? Its kinda tedious if anything. And yes, you can make an argument that training for a new weapon or ship is satisfying to some degree, you can also make the argument about increasing your only personal stat, attributes



I suppose you can make that argument, but attributes mean only one thing in this game - skill training times. Training skills to train skills faster seems droll to me. Other players that I have spoken to, nubs and vets alike, have agreed with me (and yes, I realize that in the grand scheme of things I have spoken to a very small portion of the player base, but you go on the information that you have on hand).

It has been said before, but it's worth repeating: Learning skills are a useless time sink - especially at the beginning of your Eve life.

Until CCP decides to make attributes more meaningful, the learning skills need to be removed and some other method of increasing training times needs to be instituted.

Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.02.20 21:56:00 - [378]
 

Edited by: Haniblecter Teg on 20/02/2009 21:57:18
Originally by: Athos Zel'tar
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg

Whoa, training skills is fun? Its kinda tedious if anything. And yes, you can make an argument that training for a new weapon or ship is satisfying to some degree, you can also make the argument about increasing your only personal stat, attributes



I suppose you can make that argument, but attributes mean only one thing in this game - skill training times. Training skills to train skills faster seems droll to me. Other players that I have spoken to, nubs and vets alike, have agreed with me (and yes, I realize that in the grand scheme of things I have spoken to a very small portion of the player base, but you go on the information that you have on hand).

It has been said before, but it's worth repeating: Learning skills are a useless time sink - especially at the beginning of your Eve life.

Until CCP decides to make attributes more meaningful, the learning skills need to be removed and some other method of increasing training times needs to be instituted.



How about you explain to me why we should keep attributes at all?

Athos Zel'tar
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2009.02.20 22:13:00 - [379]
 

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg


How about you explain to me why we should keep attributes at all?



Maybe we shouldn't

Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.02.20 22:22:00 - [380]
 

Originally by: Athos Zel'tar
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg


How about you explain to me why we should keep attributes at all?



Maybe we shouldn't



Any cons, oh so articulate one?

place1
Amarr
Orion Ore Industries
Posted - 2009.02.20 22:28:00 - [381]
 

Originally by: CCP Fear
So, to summarize what has been said about the learning skills;

Learning skills are bad
Learning skills should not be trained by rookies
Rookies are encouraged to train learning skills
Rookies should get learning skills at high levels from character creation
Learning skills should be removed
Learning skills should not be removed.
Learning skills are a long term investment

Ok, I can agree that they are a long term investment. I don't agree they should get them from character creation or that rookies should train them. I already gave a similar answer in another thread (which now I can't find).

In my view, learning skills (in what they do) are not bad. They make you faster at training skills.

But could the same thing be achieved (faster training times) through some other mechanic? Could this be decoupled from skills? Could it be an implant, ISK based etc. What I mean is, is the way it is now good enough to keep, or should it be looked into to find a way where this can be beneficial to all, without sacrificing time for players which could be spent on training useful skills?




As a player that has maxed out all but one of the learning skills (Presence lvl4) I would have to say I like learning skills it gives me a long term edge over the people that have not maxed them out.
yes sure it maybe over a year or two before I make up that time I spent training them but I do plan on playing until the servers get shut down so to me it was a very well worth it investment into my future.

As for people saying just max them out for everyone that would leave me with a very unhappy situation as I have put months into training them to get my edge and now everyone has just been given that edge free.
If it is decided that they must go I would say that anyone that has learning skills should get the total amount of SP they have into them to distribute to other skills. If that was done I could deal with the removal of learning skills.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2009.02.20 22:34:00 - [382]
 

or make attributes DO SOMETHING.

like other than training time.

hell cut all training time in eve down by 20-30% for everyone for all I care.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2009.02.20 22:59:00 - [383]
 

Originally by: Alezra


So you're saying that the baseline requirement to do pvp in EVE is a Microwarpdrive Rifter?

The only possible way that a new player can sate their thirst for pubbie blood is if they're instantly granted the ability to use a Goonswarm certified fitting upon account creation?

Oh and about the WoW bit, I just threw that out there since some people seem to give a ****. In all honestly I hate WoW, but I think some people would get angry at you for saying it isn't a pvp game Surprised


No, i am saying that the comparisons are not equal. (and 21 hours is still 21 hours more than it should be)

What i am saying is that players should be able to partake in the basic part of the game(PvP) from the get go, without any pointless wait time.

Originally by: Gamer4liff


If the only way to improve skillpoint gain was through implants, would that be benefiting the rich too much?


No. Currently we have a system like such

Benefit to Rich
Kick in the nuts at some point to newbies.

Removing the kick in the nuts to newbies does nothing to increase the benefit to the rich.

Quote:
And again, I ask you, what about removing and reassigning all learning skillpoints and doing this:

Quote:

What would you think of a system where the more skills you train in a field, the faster the skills train in that field? I dare say in the real world knowledge isn't confined to exact skills with no spillovers. How different could explosive armor compensation be from kinetic armor compensation?




Would this fit your criteria?


Absolutely not, but for a reason that isn't "its a kick in the nuts". This is a bad mechanic because it continually advances the ability of old players to train faster than newer players. The advantage of time is sufficient for old players(I am really not too worried about losing my 40 million skillpoint advantage over a new player) and we don't need to make them train faster(which is what will happen as skills are by necessity pretty diversified except for a few hot spots) for no good reasons.

I understand the desire for "faster training" but it doesn't make the game any better, and in this instance with these mechanical implementations, can make the game worse.

delor
Posted - 2009.02.20 23:32:00 - [384]
 

Edited by: delor on 20/02/2009 23:33:46
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Whoa, training skills is fun? Its kinda tedious if anything. And yes, you can make an argument that training for a new weapon or ship is satisfying to some degree, you can also make the argument about increasing your only personal stat, attributes


Exactly, training skills is tedious. Watching your avatar get stronger is fun, however, and the core of most MMO's addictiveness. (and part of the reason skill trees will alway play a major part of EVE; it improves customer retention) The problem is learning skills don't grant this reward. You have the choice of training them now, or not/delaying training them in which case you ultimately end up waiting even longer waiting for your skills to pop. It's not an interesting decision. It's just deciding if you'd rather have tedium up front versus a larger amount of tedium spread out over a longer period of time.

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
By that token we should remove implants too. A +5 is very affordable to me, and speeds up my training well beyond your new players. In fact, its VERY tedious for a new player to grind the ISK to get a +4 even...but is it just as tedious as it is to passively train a skill? Nope, I'd think more.


No. Implants are a better system. They're an exchange of dissimilar resources (ISK vs. time) and they have gameplay ramifications (increased loss when dying and for high end implants a choice of extra attributes versus other bonuses), and can make for an interesting decision. (buy implants now, versus spend the money on your ship and get more ISK by completing missions more rapidly)

Personally, I'd love to see implants done away with and replaced with some sort of temporary learning boost you could buy with ISK. I think implants as implemented discourage PvP in a game that already has too many reasons not to PvP. However, that's something of a secondary topic; my arguments against the learning skills do not hold against implants.

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Besides that, I think what I was trying to articulate, but only really formed till right now, is that I have a great concern about attributes disappearance from teh game. If anything, they seem to be a hold over from faar in the past design doc, where attributes were supposed to have some silly effect on stats like damage or mining rate.


I'd love to see them disappear. They don't meaningfully contribute to the game environment in a positive fashion at present.

On the other hand, making them have an actual impact on your character's performance like you suggest would address my complaint that they're largely an uninteresting system right now. So, in that sense we're on the same page.

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Its just my concern that if you go down a road of respecing, of removing learning skills, then you're bound to come to the conclusion that you just don't need them and we should just have a flat training time dependent on rank.

I think THAT would have a serious effect on the game, in terms of losing some identity and dumbing down the game.


As I don't feel they have any worthwhile contribution to the game already, I don't really think I'd miss their absence. But, see above comment; make them an interesting part of the game and that particular argument goes away.

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Hell, if there was no attribute enhancing implants, how painful would it be to lose a clone?


You mean, it might be easier to find a fight because you only lose an hour or so of ISK grinding to replace your fittings instead of multiple hours to replace the implants as well? That sounds like an improvement to me.

But, again, I'm focusing on the learning skills not the implants. I think the implants could be better implemented but unlike the learning skills they at least have some virtues to recommend them.

SmokeyJones
Posted - 2009.02.21 00:17:00 - [385]
 

Edited by: SmokeyJones on 21/02/2009 00:23:48
Why use implants?

It's expensive.... and rookies will avoid pvp if they get podded and had to buy a new set of implants every time.

I spend more time in empire to gain more SP and i abolish pvp because of this. Pay 28M for a new clone + implants for someone that can only play 1-2 hours a day is a pain.

edit: updated price

Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.02.21 00:23:00 - [386]
 

Originally by: delor

Exactly, training skills is tedious. Watching your avatar get stronger is fun, however, and the core of most MMO's addictiveness. (and part of the reason skill trees will alway play a major part of EVE; it improves customer retention) The problem is learning skills don't grant this reward. You have the choice of training them now, or not/delaying training them in which case you ultimately end up waiting even longer waiting for your skills to pop. It's not an interesting decision. It's just deciding if you'd rather have tedium up front versus a larger amount of tedium spread out over a longer period of time.


Learning skills add to your character just as well as a skill does. If anything, more so, because the increase in ability is both immedeatly observable and has a REAL effect on near everything you do. At just over a week for all skills (but char) to tier 2 level 3, I HONESTLY can't see what the ***** is about.

Talk about tedium, there's TONS of silly skills that do nothing but add to training times like jury rigging or cybernetics. In addition, there's all the level 5 requirements for guns and ships that some of us scratch our heads at. A week for faster training times is no big deal. ESPECIALLY since it rewards those with teh forsight to train them.

Originally by: delor

No. Implants are a better system. They're an exchange of dissimilar resources (ISK vs. time) and they have gameplay ramifications (increased loss when dying and for high end implants a choice of extra attributes versus other bonuses), and can make for an interesting decision. (buy implants now, versus spend the money on your ship and get more ISK by completing missions more rapidly)



"Train learning skills now, or try to get my first hac?"
"Max my perception skills and go for my first Battleship or stick with teh ecm skills since I have alot of intelligence"
"Train some leadership skills since I roleld alot of charisma early, or train some percep skills and go for some t2 guns"

Implants a better system? If anything, it lends itself more to grinding. Instead of vets telling nubs to train a few levels of xyz learning skill before tackling some big train, they're going to tell them to grind out a +2 or 3 implant or else "you'll train slower"


Originally by: delor


On the other hand, making them have an actual impact on your character's performance like you suggest would address my complaint that they're largely an uninteresting system right now. So, in that sense we're on the same page.



Yea, I never said or mentioned that. That'd be an abortion for the game, tending to force people into a particular role because they have more of one skill than another. It'd also remove something that makes EVE different, its complete lack of attribute influence combat.


Originally by: delor

As I don't feel they have any worthwhile contribution to the game already, I don't really think I'd miss their absence. But, see above comment; make them an interesting part of the game and that particular argument goes away.



They've never been an interesting part of the game, but they're a part of it. Implants, respecing, learning skills recomending builds...there's substance to the system. Get rid of them, adn you lose a bit of EVE...and for what? What will you gain if you remove this aspect of the game? Complexity? 'Tedium' as some have said. Well this game is about complexity and tedium. From the POS system to sovriegnity, gains in EVE are measured in MONTHS and YEARS.



Originally by: delor

You mean, it might be easier to find a fight because you only lose an hour or so of ISK grinding to replace your fittings instead of multiple hours to replace the implants as well? That sounds like an improvement to me.



Lollers, an hour to grind out a new ship? Dude, between that, another statement, adn your lack of corp/alliance tags, I'm suspecting you're fairly young....and probably havent trained learnign skills yet

El Huapo
Gallente
Class V
Posted - 2009.02.21 00:24:00 - [387]
 

Stalemate on the learning skills issue. Just make a permanent implant that gives 2x training speed for a limited time, like 90 days. Every player can only use it once. Make it easy to get so a starting player can use it early in their career.

Give new players each of the major category skills and put them in their character sheet. Give them their racial frigate skill.

And keep learning skills in the game. Sacrifice should be rewarded.


delor
Posted - 2009.02.21 00:47:00 - [388]
 

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Learning skills add to your character just as well as a skill does. If anything, more so, because the increase in ability is both immedeatly observable and has a REAL effect on near everything you do.


Yes, it adds to your character. However, for the reasons I have described it is poorly designed and unrewarding.

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Talk about tedium, there's TONS of silly skills that do nothing but add to training times like jury rigging or cybernetics. In addition, there's all the level 5 requirements for guns and ships that some of us scratch our heads at.


Being able to fit new equipment certainly sounds like accomplishing something to me.

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
A week for faster training times is no big deal. ESPECIALLY since it rewards those with teh forsight to train them.


Of course they're worth training. That's not what is being discussed.

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
"Train learning skills now, or try to get my first hac?"


Yes, exactly. Train skills that will let you do something interesting at the cost of having to spend more time later on training stuff, or train them first and have a longer time before you can fly a new ship.

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
"Max my perception skills and go for my first Battleship or stick with teh ecm skills since I have alot of intelligence"
"Train some leadership skills since I roleld alot of charisma early, or train some percep skills and go for some t2 guns"


Your point being? As pertains to discussion if training skills are worthwhile to the game, all you're illustrating is that if you want to train a skill you want to have trained the learning skills that govern it. We already knew that.

Quote:
Yea, I never said or mentioned that. That'd be an abortion for the game, tending to force people into a particular role because they have more of one skill than another. It'd also remove something that makes EVE different, its complete lack of attribute influence combat.


I agree. I prefer the system without it. Obviously, I misunderstood your reference to "past design docs". Could you go into greater detail as to why you'd miss the presence of attributes then? What do they add that you would miss?

Quote:
They've never been an interesting part of the game, but they're a part of it. Implants, respecing, learning skills recomending builds...there's substance to the system. Get rid of them, adn you lose a bit of EVE...and for what? What will you gain if you remove this aspect of the game? Complexity? 'Tedium' as some have said. Well this game is about complexity and tedium. From the POS system to sovriegnity, gains in EVE are measured in MONTHS and YEARS.


Can't say I'd want to play a "game about tedium" and "keep them because they're already there" is a rubbish argument, but fine. That was just a response to your comment about removing attributes. I don't really care enough about them to mind if they stick around.

Quote:
Lollers, an hour to grind out a new ship? Dude, between that, another statement, adn your lack of corp/alliance tags, I'm suspecting you're fairly young....and probably havent trained learnign skills yet.


Ad hominum attacks are a waste of both our time. But, for the reference, this particular character has been around for almost as long as there has been an EVE and my learning skills are trained to 5/4. (since I trained them before they lowered the skill requirements for advanced learning skills)

Gamer4liff
Caldari
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2009.02.21 02:15:00 - [389]
 

Edited by: Gamer4liff on 21/02/2009 02:52:49
Quote:

No. Currently we have a system like such

Benefit to Rich
Kick in the nuts at some point to newbies.

Removing the kick in the nuts to newbies does nothing to increase the benefit to the rich.


I'd rather have a kicks everybody in the nuts than a system that purely benefits the rich, which is what making character skill learning solely dependent on implants does. In what way is making something totally dependent on another thing decrease the relative impact of that one thing? It's like taking all the chocolate out of a milkshake and saying "That drink is not dependent on milk". 100% of the skill speeding ability would be dependent on wealth and wealth alone.

Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.02.21 04:36:00 - [390]
 

Edited by: Haniblecter Teg on 21/02/2009 04:39:48
Quote:

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
"Train learning skills now, or try to get my first hac?"


Yes, exactly. Train skills that will let you do something interesting at the cost of having to spend more time later on training stuff, or train them first and have a longer time before you can fly a new ship.

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
"Max my perception skills and go for my first Battleship or stick with teh ecm skills since I have alot of intelligence"
"Train some leadership skills since I roleld alot of charisma early, or train some percep skills and go for some t2 guns"


Your point being? As pertains to discussion if training skills are worthwhile to the game, all you're illustrating is that if you want to train a skill you want to have trained the learning skills that govern it. We already knew that.



I meant those three lines to be in reference to this:

Originally by: delor

(buy implants now, versus spend the money on your ship and get more ISK by completing missions more rapidly)



Its part of the decisions of this game. Didn't have enough 'characters left' to properly flesh out the point.

Originally by: delor

Of course they're worth training. That's not what is being discussed.



Yes it is. People call them a hurdle, an unnecessary grind that unduly burdens new players in the pursuit of 'catching up' to older players. If 10 days of training--and by no means does it have to be done all at once--is overly burdensome in a game where level 4 sov can take months, where skilling up to flying the largest ship takes years, and paying for said ship can take the coordinated effort of hundreds-of-pilots weeks....yea, that's my point.

Originally by: delor

Ad hominum attacks are a waste of both our time. But, for the reference, this particular character has been around for almost as long as there has been an EVE and my learning skills are trained to 5/4. (since I trained them before they lowered the skill requirements for advanced learning skills



Oh no they don't. Sides on this argument and motives for choosing those sides are important. To know exactly where someone is coming from is critical in knowing their beef with the system. If you're as old as you say you are, then you've survived the burden that is 5/4 training. You have to appreciate the level 5 req. change and realize how much easier it made things.


Originally by: delor
I don't really care enough about them to mind if they stick around.



Well cool beans. If it ain't broke...


Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 : last (16)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only