open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] Learning skills solution
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... : last (25)

Author Topic

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2010.07.06 15:04:00 - [421]
 

Originally by: Jasdemi
I'm gonna send you a crate of beer if you pull this off.


Well, TBH, given that I don't drink, you are better off promising to send the beer to the devs who do the actual work...

...as a sop, of course. Twisted Evil

Kauschovar
Posted - 2010.07.06 16:49:00 - [422]
 

Edited by: Kauschovar on 06/07/2010 16:50:16
Let's do it!

Spades Slick
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.07.06 17:02:00 - [423]
 

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Much of the argument against removing learning skills boils down to this: "when I was a noob, I had to **** a lot of **** to get my crack, and the new b*****s should have to do the same thing."


You deem yourself a representative, and then you put out generalized garbage like this? You couldn't more clearly be cementing yourself on the anti-learning side, and have thrown objectivity out the window.

A small number of pro-learning people hold the above position, yes, but most support the skills because they add a strategy to the game. Cry all you want, but learning skills at 5/5 IS NOT NORMAL. Everyone anti-learning says "WELL IF YOU WANT TO PLAY THE GAME THEN THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH MANDATORY." That's where most of the problem lies; new players are told by all these bitter old vets (who are bitter because they also convinced themselves that they had to max learning skills, NOT because of the 'back in my day' syndrome you suggest) that the ONLY way to play EVE is to train learning skills right away; and then of course, the anti crowd exaggerates this and says "Yeah staring at a bar isn't my idea of fun." You know WHY tier 2 learning books are so expensive? Because they were only ever meant to be attained after a while of playing (you know, when you could make that kind of money), and added in to your training regimen to make all those rank 10+ skills go that much easier to reach. The net lost time from not doing tier 2 skills for, say, a month or so is within the realm of a few hours. Don't believe me? I put together a one-month plan for a Minmatar newbie, with basic and standard certs mixed and training up to Battlecruiser. Time before learning skills? 17 days. Time after learning skills? 12 days. Time after removing tier 2 learning skills EVEMon told me to put in? 12.5 days.

That's 12 hours' difference.

Now, while many people would min/max and say "THAT MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE!!!1!1", consider the fact that I haven't yet done neural remapping to see how I could make it better still, nor will most new players have learning skills tier 2 purchasable. And why should they? Nor are they required to sit in a station all day (detractors' claims to the contrary) -- takes all of one hour each to put some points into basic skills, and then the new players can go do tutorials while their skills level up, make enough to buy learning books, BUY learning books (tier 1), go get them, add them to the queue, and do it strategically -- "okay, I wanna grind my core competency first, so I'll do intelligence"; "I want to be able to shoot stuff, so I'll get my perception and will skills up; then I can jump right into ship skilling afterwards."; and yes, even "I want to make sure I have my learning skills, so I'll 2 days just letting them level up (note: how long the learning skills EVEMon recommended would take alone) and then start other stuff."

What the anti crowd always seems to neglect (or conveniently forget) is that there is a LOT of waiting for a new player. I know that, while to players who have been playing for a while it isn't a long time, the day and a half or two days or whatever that Frigate IV took when I trained it two months ago seemed to take forever. And you know what, looking back, I'm 100% okay with that, because that's a drop in the bucket compared to the rank 8s that I'm eying right now. The anti-learning people aren't; they simply want to minimize the wait, not because of any real concern for the new players (or if there is, it's in a small number of their population), but because they just want more, faster.

Trebor, while I appreciate you expressing your interest in serving your CSM duties, I ask that you take a good hard look at this and other threads where debate has arisen, and step back from any personal feelings you have. Consider the arguments coming from my, umm, colleagues and I. Think about whether you're serving the majority, or just the most vocal side.

Lisa Waen
Posted - 2010.07.06 19:04:00 - [424]
 

Dunno, I think that a +10attrib, +10% would be too much.

Rather a +7 attrib, +8% would be better (4+3 attrib skills and lvl 4 learning)

A full reimbursement of SP spent on learning skills would be good.

Here's where it gets more complicated:

A pro-rated SP pool is given to all players based on the +7,+8% training model, adjusted for cybernetic bonuses
.
In other words, the guy who never trained learning skills and has been training other skills will get a huge bonus in SP, bringing him up to the level of what a character who trained to +7,+8% would be at.

The guy who skill trained all attributes from +7 to +10 and trained learning from +8% to +10% or only gets bonuses to skills trained before that time.
He would be reasonably close to what his skillpoints should be anyhow, if not more.

The current toons who are maxed out with learning skills will slow down some (-3attrib, -2%) post fix, but will not lose anything already trained.
The toons who are at +7attrib, +8% will stay pretty much even.
The toons who minimally trained learning gets a big catchup boost.

Everyone gets some "free" SP, except for brand new toons, who will never have to slog through learning skills(reward enough imo)

Overall effects: Base training times speed up for almost everyone, new players get to train useful skills outta the box, older players who trained learning skills get reimbursed for wasted time, older players who minimally trained learning get a big boost(really how many of these are out there?)

I think that overall the idea is great, just needs some changes to it>
Supported

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2010.07.06 19:15:00 - [425]
 

Originally by: Spades Slick
You deem yourself a representative, and then you put out generalized garbage like this? You couldn't more clearly be cementing yourself on the anti-learning side, and have thrown objectivity out the window.


Just because I'm a CSM doesn't mean I can't have strong opinions about the game -- and yes, I think that the learning skills are net-negative for EVE. However, please don't assume that I can't be objective. I have been a practicing skeptic for all of my adult life, so if you can come up with a decent argument that a position I hold is incorrect, I am honor-bound to accept your argument and revise my opinion.

Furthermore, don't let my tendency to leaven my arguments with humor give you the impression that I don't take things seriously.

With that in mind...
Quote:
A small number of pro-learning people hold the above position, yes, but most support the skills because they add a strategy to the game.

I understand and appreciate this position. I will go further -- I agree that it adds a strategy to the game.

The real question, however, is this: "Is what learning skills add to the game worth what it costs the game?"

In particular, do learning skills put off noobs, who we all want to become hopelessly addicted crack-w****s like ourselves? (after all, misery loves company!) If so, they are a huge negative for the game as a whole. I am of the opinion that there is significant evidence that this is the case -- and if I am wrong about this, then most of the argument for killing learning skills is blown out of the water.
Quote:
I put together a one-month plan for a Minmatar newbie, with basic and standard certs mixed and training up to Battlecruiser. Time before learning skills? 17 days. Time after learning skills? 12 days. Time after removing tier 2 learning skills EVEMon told me to put in? 12.5 days.

The counter-argument is that learning skills are cumulative; the earlier you get them boosted; yeah, you might only save a few hours getting to BC, but the deeper you intend to go in the game, the more you need them.

Furthermore, even without EVEmon, the reasonably optimal learning skills training plan is pretty obvious. The strategy aspect of learning skills is not "if" but "when" you will get everything but the charisma skills to V/III or V/IV.

The problem with if/when decisions is that for a noob, they present an opportunity to delay gratification. This is very bad. The key to noob retention is instant gratification. They are noobs, baby eve players; they want it right now. IMHO the double-rate training was CCP's first iteration on addressing this issue.
Quote:
...the day and a half or two days or whatever that Frigate IV took when I trained it two months ago seemed to take forever. And you know what, looking back, I'm 100% okay with that, because that's a drop in the bucket compared to the rank 8s that I'm eying right now.

I somewhat agree with you. However, keep in mind you and I are not representative of the typical noob. Most noobs stop playing; we are the atypical noobs who did not stop playing. So we have to be careful projecting our own feelings onto the typical noob.

Finally, from a purely tactical standpoint (in the CSM minigame I get to play), whether you believe the statements that "CCP wants to get rid of learning skills" or not, it makes sense to me to present them with a player-designed option.

If they don't think learning skills affect player retention, they'll stick it in the backlog to rot.

If on the other hand they do want to make a change, wouldn't you prefer them to implement something the players have debated? One that has some benefits for everyone?

Cifese
Posted - 2010.07.06 19:31:00 - [426]
 

I do not support this.

In the interests of arguing the point, the only "fair" thing to do if the learning skills (and the points they granted) are removed is to grant back the players the actual skill points applied to learning skills. No additional attribute points, no speed to training boosts - just raw skill points (much like the downtime gift) to be redistributed as the player wishes. Sure, this doesn't provide anything to those who haven't trained learning skills, or new players - but it levels the field and removes the learning skills but not the time spent on them.

For those who are all about the fear that new pilots don't like training learning skills, this resolves that issue. No learning skills = no "delay" in training other skills.

For those who did not choose to train learning skills, it does nothing for them. They did not spend the time or skillpoints or ISK, therefore they would have no argument for reimbursement.

For those who trained learning skills, the bonuses they provided are history (as attributes would revert to non-learning skill levels), but the actual skillpoints are returned to a general pool so the ISK and time spent on those skills maintains some value.

All this proposal should do is reduce the advantage provided by learning skills going forward.

I still don't support it.

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2010.07.06 22:09:00 - [427]
 

Originally by: Takseen
Originally by: Obsidian Hawk

NOT supported

Everyone must suffer through the learning skills.




So many masochists playing Eve it seems.


Well yeah, I started back in 2006. After the tutorial I had, 100k isk, a +1 implant and an atron. That was it! I didnt have this bull**** 2x training time up to 1.6 million sp. I never got all this free stuff for starting the game. I just got that and a good luck dont die from ccp and fellow players.

So I dont see what the real problem is. Using this 2x training time to in the begining to train learning skills is more than enough compensation. Instead fo 25 days to train all the basic learnings from lvl 4 to lvl 5 it is now 13. (Assumption 4 days per level 5 skill.)

Now CCP's goal is payer retention right? well why not up the 2x training time to 2 million sp, or adjust char creation to have more learning skills. say all the basics to lvl 2?


But no, removing learnign skills is bad.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.06 22:38:00 - [428]
 

Edited by: stoicfaux on 06/07/2010 22:39:29

Originally by: Spades Slick
Cry all you want, but learning skills at 5/5 IS NOT NORMAL. Everyone anti-learning says "WELL IF YOU WANT TO PLAY THE GAME THEN THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH MANDATORY." That's where most of the problem lies; new players are told by all these bitter old vets (who are bitter because they also convinced themselves that they had to max learning skills, NOT because of the 'back in my day' syndrome you suggest) that the ONLY way to play EVE is to train learning skills right away



It's "mandatory" to train them up front because of the accelerated training. 5/4 learning skills can pay for themselves in just three months...

Example:

Alice and Bob are new characters. Both remap their attributes to perception 12 and intelligence 12 (for flying and fitting skills.) Alice uses her accelerated training bonus to train flying/fitting skills immediately. Bob decides to train the learning skills up first.

If Bob takes 14 days to train the learning skills to 4/4/4 (basic to IV, advanced to IV, and learning to IV,) he will catch up to Alice in less two months. Meaning that in two months, Bob will have all the skills that Alice has, plus 4/4/4 in learning skills.

If Bob takes 42 days to train the learning skills to 5/4/5, then in just three months he have all the skills that Alice has, plus 5/4/5 in learning skills. (If Bob had used both remaps, he could have gotten the 42 days down to 33.5 days and then remapped to 12/12 in perc/int.)


Three months for 5/4/5 to pay for itself? You would have to be crazy not to train the damn learning skills for the first month.

It's not the learning skills that are the problem, it's the accelerated training bonus and two free remaps that forces/encourages newbies to front load the learning skills.


If you really want to torpedo the 'give everyone +10 attributes' proposal then petition to have the learning skills unaffected by the accelerated training bonus and only provide one remap to newbies.


Kendra Coldera
The Ankou
Raiden.
Posted - 2010.07.06 23:00:00 - [429]
 

I would approve of this changes. Though it would not necessarily have to be done by a learning speed boost but by the new system they implemented.

Zverofaust
Gallente
Ascetic Virtues
Posted - 2010.07.06 23:24:00 - [430]
 

The strategic aspect of Learning skills many pro-learners support is already duplicated by the prospect of neural remapping and implants. Both have tangible risks and rewards; in the first, the reward is increased training time for certain skills while the risk is slower training time should you train any non-spec'd skills -- in the second, implants give an increase in training time but at a hefty ISK cost.

The only tangible risk for learning skills is of new players deciding they don't want to have to spend the first month of the game training learning skills and not playing, particularly when the free trial time lasts for a shorter period than it would actually take to train these skills.

Point being there are already other gameplay features in place that players can manipulate to get faster or shorter training times, none of which are nearly as frustrating or new player-impeding as Learning skills.

Dina Wells
Posted - 2010.07.07 07:23:00 - [431]
 

I have all learning skills fully trained, and would be totally satisfied with this solution.

Jasdemi
Interstellar Whine Brewery
Monocle Overlords
Posted - 2010.07.07 10:38:00 - [432]
 

Learnings, strategic? WTF is strategic about not leaving the station for 2+ months.

Hinkledolph
Minmatar
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.07.07 11:30:00 - [433]
 

Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri
Originally by: Black Dranzer
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri

You can make the same analogy with two graduates given money – one puts it into savings/investments and one spends it on stuff.



Yes, but when the second graduate runs out of money, he doesn't usually kill himself.

You can not reliably compare advancement in real life to advancement in MMOs. Believe me, I've tried; By god have I tried. The fact of the matter is that people are far more willing to leave MMOs than they're willing to leave real life.

When made to choose between the lesser of two evils, an MMO player will leave.

Removing depth can be bad. But it is not unconditionally bad.

Learning skills are not worth the damage the cause.


I suppose that's true if your cause is to increase the number of players at a faster rate than Eve has been growing.

Bearing in mind that Eve is one of the most stable success stories in the MMO world and still grows, I'm not sure that should be our concern.

My "cause" would be keeping it true to the complicated, pain-in-the-ass, game that got us all hooked in the first place. Learning skills are part of that picture - and removing them damages the cause.


100 % Correct. Everyone has a choice.

Guttripper
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2010.07.07 13:00:00 - [434]
 

I have been playing for over four years now. When I first started, the Learning skill were already in the game. As history has presented, the number of players and subscriptions has risen as the game became more popular. Yet for some unknown reason, the new players today just can not cope with the Learning skills and want them removed with the stipulation that the bonuses offered from the skills are freely granted. How did this game survive, much less expand when these same daunting skills have been in the game for so long, ~inflicting~ their ills upon the player base?

CCP has gotten softer over the years in my opinion. Before the probing changes, exploration was a dedicated profession with high risks and potentially grand rewards. The probes were broken into specific areas of expertise with distinct sets of continuously smaller range, but stronger signal probes required to lock down a target. The probes were like ammo - once launched, the probes were consumed. CCP changed the whole profession into a simpler task to allow everyone to go exploring. All the probes were converted into a singular type that was also a reusable probe. Those that had blueprints researched for the older style of probes were told tough luck - no compensation. Those luckless players were not greater than the new majority pushed into finding wormholes.

Other skills over the years had their requirements lowered to allow more people to gain those skills faster, including the first tier Learning skills. The skill queue was a debated topic for a while before CCP implemented that program. The pro-queue players rallied that it was unfair that extended or unannounced downtime took away from them changing skills. So many years later, CCP has an extended downtime and gives away skill points. Going soft again...

With the release of Dominion, the lag in null security space went off the charts. While I do not have actually numbers, I would harbor a good guess that a majority of players in those regions of space are older veterans. And I would guess that their overall numbers are less than those that hang out in Empire space (author included Embarassed). Another expansion was released with the intent that brand new players can start messing up planets. The lag continued, and again in my opinion, CCP not worried about the older veterans since they been with the game for quite some time - we're not liable to throw it all away. But has anyone looked into the character bazaar forum lately and noticed a good number of null sec pilots offered for sale?

CCP is expanding to create Dust 514 for the console, which is usually stereotyped as the younger crowd with the twitch reflexes. Console shelf life is measured in months, not years. Long ago CCP stated to have a ten year plan for Eve and with the eighth alliance tournament behind us... you can do the math.

So will CCP remove the Learning skills and grant new players everything on a silver platter to gain those subscription numbers and profits? Of course they will since we crusty old veterans are probably more a hindrance while we've already profited them greatly. Instead of CCP worrying about how to entice the veterans with new goals to parallel our expanded skill point totals, CCP can sit back and the new players "work" their way up to where we are today. By then, the ten year plan will be completed and CCP can then concentrate upon their new release - probably the World of Darkness game with White Wolf as backing materials. And since CCP gained the goodwill of all the new players granted life on a silver platter, their new game will have a solid starting base.

And we crusty old bitter veterans - our total numbers would not dent the bottom line if we played or not.

My humble opinion, of course,
- Guttripper...

Takseen
Posted - 2010.07.07 14:41:00 - [435]
 

Originally by: Guttripper
I have been playing for over four years now. When I first started, the Learning skill were already in the game. As history has presented, the number of players and subscriptions has risen as the game became more popular. Yet for some unknown reason, the new players today just can not cope with the Learning skills and want them removed with the stipulation that the bonuses offered from the skills are freely granted. How did this game survive, much less expand when these same daunting skills have been in the game for so long, ~inflicting~ their ills upon the player base?

CCP has gotten softer over the years in my opinion.
<snip examples of such>




The game has had an atrocious UI all those years as well, I guess we should leave that unchanged also since subscriptions still grew during that period? What you've said in your post is true, but its hardly a good way to argue to keep an old system in place.

Any decision CCP makes will likely be based on their estimates of how many potential players are sufficiently put off by the learning skill system that they don't subscribe, vs the number of players that would quit if it was removed.

Guttripper
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2010.07.07 15:15:00 - [436]
 

Originally by: Takseen
The game has had an atrocious UI all those years as well, I guess we should leave that unchanged also since subscriptions still grew during that period? What you've said in your post is true, but its hardly a good way to argue to keep an old system in place.

Any decision CCP makes will likely be based on their estimates of how many potential players are sufficiently put off by the learning skill system that they don't subscribe, vs the number of players that would quit if it was removed.


Oh, I agree the interface needs work. But based upon Ankhesentapemkah's blog, CCP has (supposedly) stated:

"Unfortunately, Nathan, CCPs producer, became very defensive and attempted to justify CCPs development process. He also said that CCP cannot commit to big issues right now, as a lot of their developers are tied down building Incarna and Dust."

(skip.)

"The CSM met with the team responsible for the User Interface during this afternoon. The CSM stated that the UI is the first impression players get of EVE, and that many players are overwhelmed by it, or annoyed by the poor usability. Overhauling the UI would help retaining a lot of the new players, so the CSM claimed. Disappointingly enough, CCP does not want to commit to a UI overhaul. The CSM proceeded to list smaller problems in the current UI, which were noted by the dev team."

(skip.)

"Unfortunately, the CSM heard time and again that CCP simply does not have any resources to commit to anything. This frustrated the CSM, which said that some of the issues have been brought up by every CSM to date (Corp Roles review, Alliances in FW), and were not closer to being addressed than they were two years ago. CCP developers said that many of their own issues have not made it in-game either and called the CSM to be realistic. The CSM openly questioned their purpose at this point, as they said there was little point in raising player issues if they were never going to get addressed, no matter how small they were or how highly they prioritized them, as CCP would just run off doing its own thing."

-----

So Takseen, as much as you and I can debate points back and forth (even though you are *cough* Gallente *cough*) Surprised, until CCP has a commitment to address players' points, it does seem they will have their own agenda to follow. And that agenda seems to be to snag the potentially new players gained from Dust and Incarna. I doubt these two new platforms of players are going to worry whether the Learning skills remain or not since I would think Dust will be like any other shooter (no stats) and Incarna will not be affected by attributes according to CCP.

So ummm, been watching the World Cup? Germany looks pretty strong this year... Razz

MNagy
Posted - 2010.07.07 15:29:00 - [437]
 

If everyone is so worried about 'new players' just skilling up in learning and not playing the game.

Why not just put a skill pre-requisite for any learning skills.
Something like 5million skill points required to do any of them.

Problem solved. They play the game. Its a bonus to get after you are commited to a game as extra skills.

I do not support the original change. I like learning skills - its part of the sandbox. Do them, or do not do them.

Turelus
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
Posted - 2010.07.07 15:43:00 - [438]
 

Supported lets have newbies play for their first few months instead of just "playing counterstrike for a month" as Soundwave said at fanfest :P

Algathas
Minmatar
The Revenge of Auntie Freeze
Posted - 2010.07.07 20:30:00 - [439]
 

not supported.

No-one needs to train the learning skills to 5/5 right off the bat. It is their choice to be bored. When I started, I balanced learning skills with the training of my normal skills as well. I had fun and did not care that I lost a couple of hours here and there to not having the leet learning skills right from the start, instead I was killing things and mining rocks.

Currently I have them at 4/4 and guess what? I have some plans in evemon right now that show almost no gain in training them to level V even with a year of training planned in advance!

So the complainers must be the ones that thought it would be good to train them to level V to save a couple minutes of training out of a year, and now want their SP back for their bad decision.

What really needs to happen, is new players should be taught to balance their training rather than sitting in the station training things to level V. The game is what you make of it, if you want to sit in station and spin out of boredom you will, if you want to have fun you will, learning skills do not change that.

Amarok Tonrar
5ER3NITY INC
Posted - 2010.07.07 20:41:00 - [440]
 

I'm not going to read through this rather lengthy thread so my apology in advance if this was covered already.

Personally, I support the removal of the learning skills. I wouldn't be surprised in fact if the method CCP used recently to reimburse us for the extended downtime was a program created specifically to do away with them. Although that's just hopeful theory crafting. Very Happy Better that than they just making them go poof. “sorry guys!” Evil or Very Mad

Personally, I say give those who trained the learning skills the SP they've invested in that category to do with as they please, just as they did with the gifted SP recently. From there on, base the attributes off of whatever that player has their attributes mapped to. Whether everyone gets the points you'd gained from having all the learning skills at 5, or those points disappear entirely, is completely irrelevant imo and I really don’t see the point of arguing it. Either way, every one is equal across the board. Your attributes and how fast you learn are then solely based on how they are mapped as well as the implants you have injected.

The “older” players complain it’s not fair. That they invested all that time in learning those skills. That it’s another good level of separation between players or whatever your argument may be. At first, that may sound all well and good and a solid argument…..but nit and grit is that it’s total BS and nothing but pure tears. You’ve played for so many odd years. You’ve stuck with it through hundreds of other changes. You’re still here even with the game crushing lag. I too have trained those skills. I too have seen the benefits of doing so. And I too have seen the complete and utter uselessness of having to sit for those some odd days training skills that nearly everyone, even CCP, agree was a horrible idea.

The thing many of you seem to forget is that CCP is a company. And as a company, like the ones you all work for or own, they’re in the business to make money, to turn a profit and to continue to grow and develop. If a market test was done to see if the learning skills had any effect on new players sticking with the game and discovered it did, then you can bet your butt they’re going to do away with them, whether you like it or not. Because frankly, money speaks louder than you. If that’s a problem with you….well HTFU. Personally, anything that helps to increase the interest and popularity of Eve is, imo, a good thing!

Frankly though, I don’t see the problem. With this idea, you get your SP and in essence your time back that you spent training them. You’re also still ahead of the newer players and will continue to be so because we’d all be on a level playing field in terms of training time. If a newer player passes you in gunnery because your attributes are mapped elsewhere and that bothers you, well then that’s your own fault because YOU mapped your attributes the way you did.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.07 21:14:00 - [441]
 

Edited by: stoicfaux on 07/07/2010 21:36:57
Originally by: Algathas
So the complainers must be the ones that thought it would be good to train them to level V to save a couple minutes of training out of a year, and now want their SP back for their bad decision.



A couple of minutes? Try two months knocked off the first year (or 16 months of training in the first year.)

Assuming that I haven't borked the math, a newbie who burns a remap can pay off the 5/5/5 skills in up to eight months (not counting implants.) According to Evemon it takes 113 days (3.8 months) to train to 5/5/5.) With 5/5/5 skills you'll have a 194% learning rate (not considering implants,) which means that for the last four months of the year, you'll get in nearly eight months of training.


The Math:
Max Base Rate: 15 + 5/2 = 19.5 skill points per minute. This is the max rate you can train with no learning skills.

According to Evemon, it takes 113 days (3.8 months) to get to 5/5/5 (remap + 1.6M training speed bonus)

5/5/5 Rate: ((15+10) + (9+10)/2 ) * 1.1 = 37.95 skill points/min

37.95 / 19.5 = 1.946. The 5/5/5 Rate produces 194.6% of the skill points per time unit versus the Max Base Rate.

How long will it take for the 5/5/5 Rate to catch up to the Max Base Rate?

a) 1.946x - 113 = 1.0x + 1.0 * 113
"1.946x - 113": This is the 5/5/5 side of the equation. x is days. 1.946 is the training rate. -113 is because we spent 113 days training 5/5/5.

"1.0x + 1.0 * 113": This is the no learning skills side. x is days. We have a 113 day head start training at 1.0 base rate.

b) 1.946x - x = 226
c) .946x = 226
d) x = 226 / .946
e) x = 238.9 days

So about eight months for 5/5/5 to pay off in the worst case, not considering implants.


If you're outside of the accelerated training bonus you're looking at 130 days to get to 5/5/5 with a remap. Payoff is in: 260 / .946 = 274.8 days or a little over 9 months, worst case and no implants.


edit: Yes, I'm aware that going from IV to V can result in a years long payback (diminishing returns and non-linear curve.) The point is that even if you spend 3.8 months getting to V you'll still see a relatively quick payback. Lies, damn lies, and statistics. =)


yani dumyat
Minmatar
Pixie Cats

Posted - 2010.07.07 21:59:00 - [442]
 

Edited by: yani dumyat on 07/07/2010 21:59:32
Supported, partially because I don't believe training skills add much in the way of strategy or depth to the game but mainly because I'm looking after number one. 2 million SP to spend and more noobs to kill sounds like win win to me.

Jason W0rthing
Posted - 2010.07.08 04:35:00 - [443]
 

Absolutely supported. My friend wasn't very happy when I told him he had to train learning skills to at least 4/4 to even be competitive. He htfued and is still playing but it was a boring 45 days for him.

Nele'B
Posted - 2010.07.08 11:09:00 - [444]
 

supported

marinko26210
Gallente
4S Corporation
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.08 11:37:00 - [445]
 

Not supported.

1. All attributes to 30.
2. Amount of SP's in learning skills should be redistributed by pilots them selfs.

For me this is only acceptable solution to this problem.

Jasdemi
Interstellar Whine Brewery
Monocle Overlords
Posted - 2010.07.08 13:53:00 - [446]
 

Originally by: marinko26210
Not supported.

1. All attributes to 30.
2. Amount of SP's in learning skills should be redistributed by pilots them selfs.

For me this is only acceptable solution to this problem.


Either a troll or a person with a very low IQ. I hope it's the first option.

R053
U-208
Blade.
Posted - 2010.07.08 14:17:00 - [447]
 

I do not want to see the learning skills removed, definitely not, I like their role and I've invested a lot of time and SP in it (all maxxed) and now to see some1 who hasn't bothered training learning skills at all to have the same atributes as I do is ridiculous (no offence).

There is a point to these skills, don't remove them.

However, if you do, yes, Kaya Divine's suggestion is good.

Jasdemi
Interstellar Whine Brewery
Monocle Overlords
Posted - 2010.07.08 14:51:00 - [448]
 

Originally by: R053
I do not want to see the learning skills removed, definitely not, I like their role and I've invested a lot of time and SP in it (all maxxed) and now to see some1 who hasn't bothered training learning skills at all to have the same atributes as I do is ridiculous (no offence).

There is a point to these skills, don't remove them.

However, if you do, yes, Kaya Divine's suggestion is good.

What point? Driving new players away who got a brain and don't want to waste their 3 months sub time just to sit in a station and train learnings? Good point, truly good point.

R053
U-208
Blade.
Posted - 2010.07.08 15:10:00 - [449]
 

Originally by: Jasdemi

What point? Driving new players away who got a brain and don't want to waste their 3 months sub time just to sit in a station and train learnings? Good point, truly good point.


Who ever said u have to sit in the station doing nothing while training learning?

Wikis
Posted - 2010.07.08 15:26:00 - [450]
 

most idiotic stupid ******ed solution ive ever seen.#

NOT supported


Pages: first : previous : ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... : last (25)

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