open All Channels
seplocked Skill Discussions
blankseplocked Learning Skills Controversy--Solution?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Patri Andari
Caldari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
Posted - 2010.12.03 03:48:00 - [1]
 

CCP should do EXACTLY what they proposed in the Dev blog ie.

*remove the learning skils
*reimburse all SP in learning skills
*give each player 12 points in each attribute

but do one more thing: (hear me out please)

Create a system that allows a player to cash in unused SP for remaps at say 1mil SP per remap. (this can be changed)Idea

This would be similar to cashing in LP at an LP store and allows a player to decide whether to apply all or part of his SP pool to new skills (instant gratification) or use them to enhance future learning.

This solution not only continues the tradition of allowing players' choices to be made strategically, it also gives a modest potential reward to those who trained the skills higher and showed dedication to the game.

There would be no need to postpone the current schedule for the announced change. If the coding can not be done before then, simply announce to players that if they save their SP pool they can used them in a future update once the system for SP to remap has been written along with the conversion ratio.

I think this is a simple yet eloquent solution.





Anubis Xian
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.12.03 04:29:00 - [2]
 

Except it does absolutely nothing to solve any of the problems (new or old) associated with Learning skills.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2010.12.03 11:19:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari
CCP should do EXACTLY what they proposed in the Dev blog ie.

... but do one more thing: (hear me out please)

Create a system that allows a player to cash in unused SP for remaps at say 1mil SP per remap. (this can be changed)Idea

This would be similar to cashing in LP at an LP store and allows a player to decide whether to apply all or part of his SP pool to new skills (instant gratification) or use them to enhance future learning.

This solution not only continues the tradition of allowing players' choices to be made strategically, it also gives a modest potential reward to those who trained the skills higher and showed dedication to the game.



Buying a remap for 1 mil SP, while seemingly costly, is actually giving people 5 free remaps (if they so choose to spend their refunded SP). That sounds like a lot of remaps, suddenly. In all fairness, you did say the price was negotiable. :)

Personally I don't mind the idea of buying remaps for PLEX-es. I mean, why not? PLEX-es themselves already are micromanaged manipulations of the game (sure, you're helping out other pilots with it; but, as to the buyer of said PLEX-es himself, to him it's just buying in-game cash with external, real-life money). Seeing how micromanagment ideas like 'Remaps for PLEX-ex' appear to be engendering a lot of resistence, your idea, at least, is more equitable in that regard.

And, naturally, I'm a proponent of my own proposal.

RaTTuS
BIG
Gentlemen's Agreement
Posted - 2010.12.03 11:48:00 - [4]
 

why do you want another few remaps ?

Estel Arador
Posted - 2010.12.03 12:40:00 - [5]
 

"Learning Skills Controversy"

What controversy? The fact that you and a couple of others disagree does not make this a controversy. There is no controversy. This change is the most welcomed and most applauded change in the history of EVE. Never before has a reaction to a change been so uniformly positive.

Zyress
Posted - 2010.12.03 21:10:00 - [6]
 

Here is a better idea, let those of us who are looking forward to the sp reimbursement spend it as we wish and those who think its a nerf can cash their reimbursed skill points if they have them all maxed for a small buff that maintains their marginally higher learning rate in perpetuity. See how many of the whiners pass up 5 million plus sp's for a small buff to learning speed.

Jiao Zelig
Coffee Lovers Brewing Club
Posted - 2010.12.03 21:35:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Zyress
Here is a better idea, let those of us who are looking forward to the sp reimbursement spend it as we wish and those who think its a nerf can cash their reimbursed skill points if they have them all maxed for a small buff that maintains their marginally higher learning rate in perpetuity. See how many of the whiners pass up 5 million plus sp's for a small buff to learning speed.


I can think of a few ways to make this happen instead of giving SP refunds (give each person with 5 in advance learning skill a +6 implant, or a booster than will increase a stat by +1 for XXX days). But it's totally not worth creating a topic at this point, there is no controversy and CCP's solution is totally fair. The one thing I wish is that they would give +13 to base stats instead of +12 so that training isn't actually slowed down, but I don't expect to be playing the 8 years necessary for the change to actually cost me SP.

Lost Greybeard
Gallente
Posted - 2010.12.03 22:51:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Estel Arador
"Learning Skills Controversy"

What controversy? The fact that you and a couple of others disagree does not make this a controversy. There is no controversy. This change is the most welcomed and most applauded change in the history of EVE. Never before has a reaction to a change been so uniformly positive.


This. The fact that like one hundred crazy guys in the US think the 1969 moon landing was a hoax doesn't make it a controversy. Being loud doesn't make your complaint widespread.

The existence of Learning skills was controversial, sure (everyone in EVE had an opinion one way or another, and almost everyone new to the game starts questioning their purpose fairly rapidly), but their _removal_ is 99.999% of people going "well, that's nice" and like one guy with alts trolling the forums to the opposite effect.

Patri Andari
Caldari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
Posted - 2010.12.04 00:55:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Estel Arador
"Learning Skills Controversy"

What controversy? The fact that you and a couple of others disagree does not make this a controversy. There is no controversy. This change is the most welcomed and most applauded change in the history of EVE. Never before has a reaction to a change been so uniformly positive.


The controversy it that those who trained max learning skills get only their SP back and nothing more while those who did not get a hand out. I like the change but I think it fails to fairly compensate many players. I am not alone and more than "a couple of players" agree.

Let me start by saying that there is a difference between those that have trained maxed learning skills recently and those who did so years ago. How? ROI.

I assume that you have better than average knowledge of this game and know that a newly max learning skilled player is not in the same boat as someone who trained them long ago and has racked up years of learning superiority. If my assumption is wrong as it relates to you then I am shocked and you are an idiot.

A newly established player who recently trained 5/5 skills has yet to receive a ROI. My proposal seeks to reward those players for their commitment to the game with a choice on how to spend those SP. Are you against choice?






Anubis Xian
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.12.04 00:55:00 - [10]
 

There isn't even any real opposition, it is just general concern over the loss of sp/hr. I mean come Dec 14th, everyone can train at 2700 sp/hr provided they map for it and have the implants. The previous max was 2772 sp/hr, and while that is only a reduction of 2.6%, it is still a loss overall and there is no compensation for it.

The vast majority of the contention about the change wasn't the change itself, just the reduction in training speed.

Patri Andari
Caldari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
Posted - 2010.12.04 03:04:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Anubis Xian
There isn't even any real opposition, it is just general concern over the loss of sp/hr. I mean come Dec 14th, everyone can train at 2700 sp/hr provided they map for it and have the implants. The previous max was 2772 sp/hr, and while that is only a reduction of 2.6%, it is still a loss overall and there is no compensation for it.

The vast majority of the contention about the change wasn't the change itself, just the reduction in training speed.


You are wrong

I and many others have voiced concern that a loss of advantage will be realized. This advantage came at a cost and some feel the compensation for that cost (investment) is not adequate.

If you did not train learning skills to 5/5 perhaps you should not comment in this thread?



RavenPaine
Posted - 2010.12.04 03:11:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: RavenPaine on 04/12/2010 03:16:40
Edited by: RavenPaine on 04/12/2010 03:14:17
@ Patri, who said.

"A newly established player who recently trained 5/5 skills has yet to receive a ROI. My proposal seeks to reward those players for their commitment to the game with a choice on how to spend those SP. Are you against choice?"

My Responce Is:

The new player did get a small ROI. 1 learning skill helped the next learning skill train faster, and so on, etc. etc. The fact that ROI is directly related to how long you payed/played the game is 100% fair, and is as it should be.

And, you now have a chance to further increase your ROI by choosing which skills you apply the trade in for. This choice for ROI is exactly the same for all players, not just the vets.

I don't know one new player who can realisticly train at 2772 for a full year. Not even most second or third year players can stick to it. This SP exchange can actually help you do just that if you manage it a bit.

Anubis Xian
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.12.04 04:10:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari
Originally by: Anubis Xian
There isn't even any real opposition, it is just general concern over the loss of sp/hr. I mean come Dec 14th, everyone can train at 2700 sp/hr provided they map for it and have the implants. The previous max was 2772 sp/hr, and while that is only a reduction of 2.6%, it is still a loss overall and there is no compensation for it.

The vast majority of the contention about the change wasn't the change itself, just the reduction in training speed.


You are wrong


That's never happened before. Tell me what I'm supposed to do next.

Quote:
I and many others have voiced concern that a loss of advantage will be realized. This advantage came at a cost and some feel the compensation for that cost (investment) is not adequate.


Vets get screwed, that is a fact of life in eve. Your advantage now is to stay that far ahead.

Quote:
If you did not train learning skills to 5/5 perhaps you should not comment in this thread?


Who says I didn't?

Ildryn
Posted - 2010.12.04 07:38:00 - [14]
 

Why stop at learning skills.

All players need cap skills and armor skills are nice.
Don't forget shield skills.
And it would be nice to use all the best weapons as soon as i am in a ship that can use them.
Would be nice to have all ships too.

Do away with skills and just give everything.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2010.12.04 12:11:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari

If you did not train learning skills to 5/5 perhaps you should not comment in this thread?


You are wrong.

Contrary to popular belief, it's not just those with 5/5 affected. Even a min/max-er with a minimal of 5/2 already feels the pinch: if he only had his main and secondary attribute trained to Lv 5, then he will already feel the loss of 72 sp/h. I'm in (kinda) the same boat. While I have the remainder at Lv 5, I only trained Charisma to Lv 4 (I mean, c'mon, it's Charisma!); and, in accordance with my current remap, I had a near two-year plan laid out, involving Perc + Will (with some Will + Perc) which I would have been able to train at 2772 sp/h for the most part. Now I won't get to.

So what if my Charisma gets bumped to +1? It does me no good. Not now, not ever, as I cannot foresee a time in which I can find proper justification for ever remapping a whole year towards Charisma anyway.

At the end of the day, I'll just come out training slower for the next two years, and every year thereafter.

Mikkaras
Amarr
Wreckage Reclamation Enforcement Consortium
Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
Posted - 2010.12.04 12:38:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: RavenPaine
The new player did get a small ROI. 1 learning skill helped the next learning skill train faster, and so on, etc. etc. The fact that ROI is directly related to how long you payed/played the game is 100% fair, and is as it should be.

And, you now have a chance to further increase your ROI by choosing which skills you apply the trade in for. This choice for ROI is exactly the same for all players, not just the vets.

I don't know one new player who can realisticly train at 2772 for a full year. Not even most second or third year players can stick to it. This SP exchange can actually help you do just that if you manage it a bit.

Emphasis added.

You got faster training and now you get to cache in on that investment without losing the faster training - except in a small number of cases where the old maximum possible training speed would have been 2.6% faster if and only if you have both stats associated with certain skills completely maxed, and planned to train only those skills 365 days a year, with not a single other skill trained, until you could remap again to put your points into attributes suitable for a different set of skills, then rinse and repeat. (That's one heck of a long wash cycle!Laughing)

What CCP should do is make the attribute modifier +10 instead of +12, and change the SP/hour rate to mimic the effect of the vanishing Learning skill, increasing it 10% across the board. Then everyone would train as if they had 5/5 in everything, and training speed based on any given attribute remap would map 1:1 to what it is now for those with 5/5.

Then nobody would be whining. But for some reason they chose not to do that. I don't know why. If anyone has confirmed information from an official source regarding this, I'd love to know the answer.


As for those claiming that it'll be 8 years before you would have less SP than you otherwise would have due to the SP refunded from learning skills, that's a completely bogus argument. Time spent training the learning skills is/was time not spent training other skills. Counting the refund as a future gain is incorrect because that assumes not receiving a refund would leave you in no worse a state. In fact, not receiving a refund would effectively cost everyone the amount of time they've spent training them, as if they'd been training nothing at all during that time. Obviously this would result in far more complaints than the current solution, and rightly so. ;)

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2010.12.04 12:46:00 - [17]
 

You want me to be able to lose SP, in order to gain a remap. Which I don't need, as the change doesn't affect it.

How does this help me in any way?

Chakarr
Minmatar
Native Freshfood
Posted - 2010.12.04 12:52:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: Chakarr on 04/12/2010 12:53:18
What Controversy? Shocked

Improving the NPE - check.
Getting rid of an essentially broken game mechanic - check.
Giving most Vets around 5 million SPs to dump into skills instantly - check.

I am not seeing any controversy...

Jennifer Starling
Amarr
Posted - 2010.12.04 12:56:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Ranka Mei
Originally by: Patri Andari

If you did not train learning skills to 5/5 perhaps you should not comment in this thread?

in accordance with my current remap, I had a near two-year plan laid out, involving Perc + Will (with some Will + Perc) which I would have been able to train at 2772 sp/h for the most part. Now I won't get to.

At the end of the day, I'll just come out training slower for the next two years, and every year thereafter.

- You are forgetting one thing: you may be training slower (72 sp per hour is 0.63 million SP a year) but - in your case - you are getting 4.7 million SP reimbursed.
So while your skillspeed slows down a little you are jumping 4.7 million SP = worth 2.5 months of skilltraining ahead of your schedule.

- Next to that you can now save a bit more time as you can use the reimbursed skillpoints in skillgroups you'll never remap for but are still rather mandatory if you want to fly a variety of ships: drones (mem/per), navigation (int/per), leadership (cha/wil) to name a few.

Estel Arador
Posted - 2010.12.04 12:59:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari
Originally by: Estel Arador
"Learning Skills Controversy"

What controversy? The fact that you and a couple of others disagree does not make this a controversy. There is no controversy. This change is the most welcomed and most applauded change in the history of EVE. Never before has a reaction to a change been so uniformly positive.


The controversy it that those who trained max learning skills get only their SP back and nothing more while those who did not get a hand out. I like the change but I think it fails to fairly compensate many players. I am not alone and more than "a couple of players" agree.

Let me start by saying that there is a difference between those that have trained maxed learning skills recently and those who did so years ago. How? ROI.

I assume that you have better than average knowledge of this game and know that a newly max learning skilled player is not in the same boat as someone who trained them long ago and has racked up years of learning superiority. If my assumption is wrong as it relates to you then I am shocked and you are an idiot.

A newly established player who recently trained 5/5 skills has yet to receive a ROI. My proposal seeks to reward those players for their commitment to the game with a choice on how to spend those SP. Are you against choice?


Thanks for not replying to what I said. I understand your point, but I don't think it's that big a deal. My point was that the simple fact that you disagree with a design decision does not mean that there is a controversy.

Here is an example of a genuine controversy:
The Great Carrier Nerf of 2007 - 110 pages of replies in 4 days (and that's just in the official thread, the entire forums at the time exploded). After 4 days CCP issued a new dev blog retracting the proposed changes.
The Learning skills dev blog only had half as many replies in 4 days, and if you'd do a sentiment analysis of the replies I believe you will find a significant difference between the threads, with the carrier nerf one being mostly negative, and the the learning one mostly positive.

Patri Andari
Caldari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
Posted - 2010.12.05 08:04:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Estel Arador
Originally by: Patri Andari
Originally by: Estel Arador
"Learning Skills Controversy"

What controversy? The fact that you and a couple of others disagree does not make this a controversy. There is no controversy. This change is the most welcomed and most applauded change in the history of EVE. Never before has a reaction to a change been so uniformly positive.


The controversy it that those who trained max learning skills get only their SP back and nothing more while those who did not get a hand out. I like the change but I think it fails to fairly compensate many players. I am not alone and more than "a couple of players" agree.

Let me start by saying that there is a difference between those that have trained maxed learning skills recently and those who did so years ago. How? ROI.

I assume that you have better than average knowledge of this game and know that a newly max learning skilled player is not in the same boat as someone who trained them long ago and has racked up years of learning superiority. If my assumption is wrong as it relates to you then I am shocked and you are an idiot.

A newly established player who recently trained 5/5 skills has yet to receive a ROI. My proposal seeks to reward those players for their commitment to the game with a choice on how to spend those SP. Are you against choice?


Thanks for not replying to what I said. I understand your point, but I don't think it's that big a deal. My point was that the simple fact that you disagree with a design decision does not mean that there is a controversy.

Here is an example of a genuine controversy:
The Great Carrier Nerf of 2007 - 110 pages of replies in 4 days (and that's just in the official thread, the entire forums at the time exploded). After 4 days CCP issued a new dev blog retracting the proposed changes.
The Learning skills dev blog only had half as many replies in 4 days, and if you'd do a sentiment analysis of the replies I believe you will find a significant difference between the threads, with the carrier nerf one being mostly negative, and the the learning one mostly positive.


I FULLY understand what you are saying and you are still wrong.

The fact that some decisions might be more controversial than others does not negate the fact that a decision is In Fact controversial.

For the sake of argument, I will agree that your example is more controversial, but then again it had to be. There were no winners. The current decision by CCP to eliminate learning skills and at the same time hand out free attributes has met with support in large numbers when compared to the carrier nerf... because there are winners. Those who get more than they bargained or sacrificed for.

Some folks are getting something for nothing and they are in the majority of players. Do you really expect there to be as much outcry in such a situation?Rolling Eyes

That's like comparing a decision by a government to give free meat to all its citizens while dictating the price it will pay ranchers or reimburse speculators to a decision to limit the salaries of the executives of large corporations.

In the latter, average folk will likely not voice an opinion because it does not affect them directly, while those who are or hope to be said executives (or those who benefit from said executives' salaries) will ***** and moan loudly. Their complaints will drown out all other opinions and it should. They are the ones primarily affected.

In the former, the only people who will complain are those who produce or speculate on meat as those who can not afford meat dance merrily and offer praises to their new meat gods for sharing their blessings. Who looses? Meat producers? Meat speculators? That minority? Let them eat cake!

Does that make it a less controversial decision?

Cesar Menage
MenageTech
Posted - 2010.12.05 08:32:00 - [22]
 

I am VERY happy my 2 main char both at max learnings. so I can train a new char and know I can still dump SP on them while I train a fast noob :)
now can fast train this noob toon remap max int and mem with booster +3 and implants +3 plus 100% bonus to get all basic to lvl5 b4 the 14
just to work on learnings ofcourse so once it comes around I have SP i can save for a reason to dump in something nice

To bad Advance skills were to much so basics are good enough lol


So my point taking learnings away is a good thing :)

Patri Andari
Caldari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
Posted - 2010.12.05 08:39:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Cesar Menage
I am VERY happy my 2 main char both at max learnings. so I can train a new char and know I can still dump SP on them while I train a fast noob :)
now can fast train this noob toon remap max int and mem with booster +3 and implants +3 plus 100% bonus to get all basic to lvl5 b4 the 14
just to work on learnings ofcourse so once it comes around I have SP i can save for a reason to dump in something nice

To bad Advance skills were to much so basics are good enough lol


So my point taking learnings away is a good thing :)


Dude...pass the bong already!





Cesar Menage
MenageTech
Posted - 2010.12.05 17:51:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari
Originally by: Cesar Menage
I am VERY happy my 2 main char both at max learnings. so I can train a new char and know I can still dump SP on them while I train a fast noob :)
now can fast train this noob toon remap max int and mem with booster +3 and implants +3 plus 100% bonus to get all basic to lvl5 b4 the 14
just to work on learnings ofcourse so once it comes around I have SP i can save for a reason to dump in something nice

To bad Advance skills were to much so basics are good enough lol


So my point taking learnings away is a good thing :)


Dude...pass the bong already!







PASSED Shockeddamn that some goood stuff


 

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