open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Suggestion] Replace attribute implants
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

Author Topic

J Kunjeh
Gallente
Posted - 2011.07.09 12:17:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Apice
+0.5

I like the idea of player crafted boosters replacing the attribute implants, however I would like to see the effects destroyed upon death. Just make the resources/manufacturing for the higher level boosters +5 skills available only in null sec. So while the boosters would have to be applied more often, they would also be more accessible at a lower cost.


I support the original idea and think it deserves much discussion in the halls of CCP. But the above tweak has a ton of merit too and would make this idea that much better.

Sarrgon
Caldari
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.07.09 22:04:00 - [62]
 

I like this idea also, I know of many, including myself that while in our "good clones" will almost always shy away from pvp to avoid the possiblility of getting podded. Though I can see a few variations of this, upgraded clone insurance that includes implants, but still is very much affordable or like with the learning skills, remove them and apply them to everyone in the game.

Now of course I would keep the Skill hardwiring implants the same. But I think a change of the attribute implants would help more people pvp and less paranoid of losing the +5's.

Selinate
Amarr
Posted - 2011.07.10 02:07:00 - [63]
 

Edited by: Selinate on 10/07/2011 02:07:21
*ponder*

Meh, I wouldn't mind this. It is a bit of a pain to use a jump clone to not risk my implants...

*HOWEVER* I would like it if there were boosts that lasted an entire year so I didn't have to worry about it that often.

Darth Helmat
Posted - 2011.07.10 12:43:00 - [64]
 

Edited by: Darth Helmat on 10/07/2011 12:43:15
Edited by: Darth Helmat on 10/07/2011 12:42:56
I like this. I think the barriers the OP describes are real, so I'm giving it a +1. However there are alternative changes that would give the same effect. Including

  • reducing the price of attribute implants, so that say a +5 is the same price as a current +4

  • Removing just +5s from the game

  • Limiting the legality of implants by sec status

  • Allowing more flexible (balanced) clone jumping (presumably extra jumps per 24hrs for a fee or invalidating your medical clone)


Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.10 15:31:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Darth Helmat
Edited by: Darth Helmat on 10/07/2011 12:43:15
Edited by: Darth Helmat on 10/07/2011 12:42:56
I like this. I think the barriers the OP describes are real, so I'm giving it a +1. However there are alternative changes that would give the same effect. Including

  • reducing the price of attribute implants, so that say a +5 is the same price as a current +4

  • Removing just +5s from the game

  • Limiting the legality of implants by sec status

  • Allowing more flexible (balanced) clone jumping (presumably extra jumps per 24hrs for a fee or invalidating your medical clone)




Interesting... but how exactly would you 'reduce' the price on something in a completely market driven economy?
Either it was on oversight, or you misunderstood how prices of things are determined in eve.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.10 15:37:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Sarrgon
I like this idea also, I know of many, including myself that while in our "good clones" will almost always shy away from pvp to avoid the possiblility of getting podded. Though I can see a few variations of this, upgraded clone insurance that includes implants, but still is very much affordable or like with the learning skills, remove them and apply them to everyone in the game.

Now of course I would keep the Skill hardwiring implants the same. But I think a change of the attribute implants would help more people pvp and less paranoid of losing the +5's.


While I am very interested in where this discussion is going to end up, I am skeptical.
The unsaid 'con' of this proposal is that although people would PvP more, each PvP win/loss would be worth less, therefore dulling an otherwise exhilarating (or painful) experience, to something about the excitement level of a chess game. Nothing wagered, nothing won, means less of an experience in general. Personally, if I blow up an enemy, the experience is made sweet in me knowing that he lost a lot of isk in implants. Now if implants were cheap or free, or insured, then that takes a lot of the fun out of the kill.

How do you propose to mitigate that side effect?

Comy 1
Ore Mongers
Indecisive Certainty
Posted - 2011.07.10 15:43:00 - [67]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren
Originally by: Sarrgon
I like this idea also, I know of many, including myself that while in our "good clones" will almost always shy away from pvp to avoid the possiblility of getting podded. Though I can see a few variations of this, upgraded clone insurance that includes implants, but still is very much affordable or like with the learning skills, remove them and apply them to everyone in the game.

Now of course I would keep the Skill hardwiring implants the same. But I think a change of the attribute implants would help more people pvp and less paranoid of losing the +5's.


While I am very interested in where this discussion is going to end up, I am skeptical.
The unsaid 'con' of this proposal is that although people would PvP more, each PvP win/loss would be worth less, therefore dulling an otherwise exhilarating (or painful) experience, to something about the excitement level of a chess game. Nothing wagered, nothing won, means less of an experience in general. Personally, if I blow up an enemy, the experience is made sweet in me knowing that he lost a lot of isk in implants. Now if implants were cheap or free, or insured, then that takes a lot of the fun out of the kill.

How do you propose to mitigate that side effect?


The side effect will be mitigated by the fact that alot more people will see the use of pirate implants in slot 1-5, especially the low grade ones that are very cost effective for their bonus. What stops alot of people from using them today is the weak +2 attribute bonus.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.10 21:04:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: Comy 1


The side effect will be mitigated by the fact that alot more people will see the use of pirate implants in slot 1-5, especially the low grade ones that are very cost effective for their bonus. What stops alot of people from using them today is the weak +2 attribute bonus.


If these are so cost effective (I read as meaning cheap) then how exactly does that give me the satisfaction that I just wasted $$$ of my enemies isk?

Comy 1
Ore Mongers
Indecisive Certainty
Posted - 2011.07.10 23:37:00 - [69]
 

Edited by: Comy 1 on 10/07/2011 23:38:20

Originally by: Kaelie Onren
Originally by: Comy 1


The side effect will be mitigated by the fact that alot more people will see the use of pirate implants in slot 1-5, especially the low grade ones that are very cost effective for their bonus. What stops alot of people from using them today is the weak +2 attribute bonus.


If these are so cost effective (I read as meaning cheap) then how exactly does that give me the satisfaction that I just wasted $$$ of my enemies isk?


Cost effective != cheap. It means that they give a good bonus to your ships considering their price. If you want to feel satisfaction about podding someone you will probably do that more believing someone had pirate implants.

This idea is not perfect since I'm not a person working with game balance but as you can see in the thread people like what the idea stands for. Character progression is the core of any MMORPG, and the fact that the people experiencing combat and/or explore the world should be penalized is in my oppinion wrong. IN EVE IT'S CONTRAPRODUCTIVE TO DO THINGS THAT WOULD YEILD YOU MORE EXPERIENCE IN ANY OTHER GAME.

It seems like you have made it your personal crusade to keep talking down this thread. I'm all open for suggestions on how to improve the concept, but when you just keep trying to grasp at straws to talk it down, please just keep out.


Lakuma
Posted - 2011.07.11 01:58:00 - [70]
 

I like the idea BUT...

The boosters should not persist through death - they should instead come in one hour, 6 hour, 12 hour, one day, one week, and one month increments. This allows PvP players to utilize such a gift, but at the same time lose the bonus if not careful.

Even then, would a one month booster user then not PvP for a month? The fact is these items would be most effecient with the long-use ones: i.e. four 6 hour boosters cost more in materials (and thus price) than a single day-long booster.

The idea is sound, but needs work which OP already acknowledged. However a persistent through death is imo not good - because that renders short term boosters worthless anyways.

Darth Helmat
Posted - 2011.07.11 12:11:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren

Interesting... but how exactly would you 'reduce' the price on something in a completely market driven economy?
Either it was on oversight, or you misunderstood how prices of things are determined in eve.



No its not an oversight - you misunderstand where implants come from - the LP store and agent rewards. Unlike internet spaceships, implants are manufactured by CCP who control the supply rate, and hence the price.


Darth Helmat
Posted - 2011.07.11 12:16:00 - [72]
 

Originally by: Lakuma
I like the idea BUT...

The boosters should not persist through death - they should instead come in one hour, 6 hour, 12 hour, one day, one week, and one month increments. This allows PvP players to utilize such a gift, but at the same time lose the bonus if not careful.

Even then, would a one month booster user then not PvP for a month? The fact is these items would be most effecient with the long-use ones: i.e. four 6 hour boosters cost more in materials (and thus price) than a single day-long booster.



Isn't that exactly the sort of resistance that the OP is trying to remove? The idea that PVP should be cheaper, and more immediately available. Your amendment works well for existing PVP players who can juggle cost/benefit/risk, but maintains the same barrier to primarily highsec players wanting occasional PVP.

foksieloy
Minmatar
Rockets ponies and rainbows

Posted - 2011.07.11 12:36:00 - [73]
 

I like the general flavor of the idea, even though the details should be fleshed out more.

A cautious support.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.11 13:57:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: Darth Helmat
Isn't that exactly the sort of resistance that the OP is trying to remove? The idea that PVP should be cheaper, and more immediately available. Your amendment works well for existing PVP players who can juggle cost/benefit/risk, but maintains the same barrier to primarily highsec players wanting occasional PVP.

Exactly. I think CCP is continually thinking the wrong way about this. Their rationale is, "Not enough peeps in 0.0? Nerf highsec, and buff lowsec." Like recent plans to move all ice-mining (!) to lowsec only. Sigh.

I don't think it works that way, though. You only help to make richer super 0.0 Alliances even richer. Instead, if you want folks to go to lowsec/nullsec, make it easier for them to do so. Like allowing 2x clone jumps per day, for instance, or the above proposal.

Darth Helmat
Posted - 2011.07.11 14:10:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Ranka Mei
Originally by: Darth Helmat
Isn't that exactly the sort of resistance that the OP is trying to remove? The idea that PVP should be cheaper, and more immediately available. Your amendment works well for existing PVP players who can juggle cost/benefit/risk, but maintains the same barrier to primarily highsec players wanting occasional PVP.

Exactly. I think CCP is continually thinking the wrong way about this. Their rationale is, "Not enough peeps in 0.0? Nerf highsec, and buff lowsec." Like recent plans to move all ice-mining (!) to lowsec only. Sigh.

I don't think it works that way, though. You only help to make richer super 0.0 Alliances even richer. Instead, if you want folks to go to lowsec/nullsec, make it easier for them to do so. Like allowing 2x clone jumps per day, for instance, or the above proposal.


Fundamental problem is the risk transition, not the reward transition. CCP only seem to have one shaped peg to try to batter into numerous shapes of hole. Rolling Eyes

Portmanteau
Gallente
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2011.07.11 14:33:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Darth Helmat
CCP only seem to have one shaped peg to try to batter into numerous shapes of hole. Rolling Eyes


Don't we all have that problem ? Laughing

Tekashi Kovacs
Posted - 2011.07.11 18:08:00 - [77]
 

Edited by: Tekashi Kovacs on 11/07/2011 18:08:29

The only part I disagree is leaving 1-5 for pirate implant purpose only.

Much better solution would be switching pirate implants into 6-10 slots (and eventually boosting their effect to compensate?)

Because otherwise, having 5 slots just so 1% of population can use them, doesnt make sense to me.

Omira Tan
Posted - 2011.07.11 20:59:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: Tekashi Kovacs
Edited by: Tekashi Kovacs on 11/07/2011 18:08:29

The only part I disagree is leaving 1-5 for pirate implant purpose only.

Much better solution would be switching pirate implants into 6-10 slots (and eventually boosting their effect to compensate?)

Because otherwise, having 5 slots just so 1% of population can use them, doesnt make sense to me.


Um. no; kinda using 6-10 for other purposes.

Icke Himal
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:20:00 - [79]
 

-1

This is the ballance:

Originally by: SomeoneStrange
You can't force all the empire carebears out to null sec. Quite a few of them simply avoid it on principle.
At the same time, I quite like the fact that when destroying someone's pod, I could potentially be wiping out billions of ISK.
Yes, carebears may have their skills train faster than 0.0 pilots - however null sec ratting and null sec mining pull in ISK vastly faster than running Level 4 Missions in empire space, and mining in empire space.
Because of this, most empire carebears never will actually get a full set of +5's, because the cost is simply out of the question.

Llambda
Space Llama Industries
Posted - 2011.07.12 16:12:00 - [80]
 

"Dear CCP, I want all of the benefits and none of the risks, please implement k thx."

Rolling Eyes

This is clearly a have/eat cake suggestion.

If you care about your training speed so much, odds are you're optimizing to two spiked stats, which means you don't need a full rack of attribute implants - you only need two, at which point even +5s become a reasonable expense, and +4s become downright trivial.

Diaz Rezal
Amarr
DON'T DO IT DAD

Posted - 2011.07.12 16:58:00 - [81]
 

I like the negativity of the people that don't see the point, or maybe they do unsterstand it, but refuse to see why it's needed because it MIGHT be that THEY lose their faulty advantage.

Screw the haters, I want this.

Ralack
RalJin Industries

Posted - 2011.07.12 20:22:00 - [82]
 

Great idea. Hi-sec'ers aren't screwed around, PVP'ers get a more sustainable method for skill boosting, and a new high volume market opportunity is created out of the deal. There is probably a downside but I'm not seeing it.


Karash Amerius
Sutoka
Posted - 2011.07.12 21:51:00 - [83]
 

If you actually think about it, it makes sense.

promotes more "interaction", etc...

Darryl Ward
Posted - 2011.07.13 01:20:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren
Originally by: Sarrgon
I like this idea also, I know of many, including myself that while in our "good clones" will almost always shy away from pvp to avoid the possiblility of getting podded. Though I can see a few variations of this, upgraded clone insurance that includes implants, but still is very much affordable or like with the learning skills, remove them and apply them to everyone in the game.

Now of course I would keep the Skill hardwiring implants the same. But I think a change of the attribute implants would help more people pvp and less paranoid of losing the +5's.


While I am very interested in where this discussion is going to end up, I am skeptical.
The unsaid 'con' of this proposal is that although people would PvP more, each PvP win/loss would be worth less, therefore dulling an otherwise exhilarating (or painful) experience, to something about the excitement level of a chess game. Nothing wagered, nothing won, means less of an experience in general. Personally, if I blow up an enemy, the experience is made sweet in me knowing that he lost a lot of isk in implants. Now if implants were cheap or free, or insured, then that takes a lot of the fun out of the kill.

How do you propose to mitigate that side effect?


You still blow up their ship. Possibly catch the pod. Unless they convo you and cry about lost implants, you don't know that you got anything else. That is, unless you always imagine that you're podding people with a full rack of +5's everytime.

You seem to like PvP, why don't you want moar?

Reaver Glitterstim
Legio Geminatus
Posted - 2011.07.29 10:35:00 - [85]
 

I don't know how you got so much support, but I think your proposal is absurd. Firstly, your point that someone with implants wouldn't want to jump clone out to do nullsec roams has debunked itself. People with implants CAN and DO go outside of highsec...by using jump clones. I do it all the time. Having implants in most of the time is great, but taking a few hours (weeks even) in nullsec can totally be worth it.

It's all choosing how best you use what you have. Removing the implants removes that choice. You may as well force players to fly the race of ship that matches their character, that'll make everything a lot simpler.

Elder Ozzian
Posted - 2011.07.29 18:31:00 - [86]
 

I dont only like this, i love this!

More money-circulation, more things to craft and possible more null-sec visits from alot of players. But please, make those ladar-cites spawn in lowsec more often.

+1

Lady Spank
Amarr
In Praise Of Shadows

Posted - 2011.07.29 18:49:00 - [87]
 


Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.29 20:09:00 - [88]
 

Originally by: Comy 1
Edited by: Comy 1 on 10/07/2011 23:38:20

Originally by: Kaelie Onren
Originally by: Comy 1


The side effect will be mitigated by the fact that alot more people will see the use of pirate implants in slot 1-5, especially the low grade ones that are very cost effective for their bonus. What stops alot of people from using them today is the weak +2 attribute bonus.


If these are so cost effective (I read as meaning cheap) then how exactly does that give me the satisfaction that I just wasted $$$ of my enemies isk?


Cost effective != cheap. It means that they give a good bonus to your ships considering their price. If you want to feel satisfaction about podding someone you will probably do that more believing someone had pirate implants.

This idea is not perfect since I'm not a person working with game balance but as you can see in the thread people like what the idea stands for. Character progression is the core of any MMORPG, and the fact that the people experiencing combat and/or explore the world should be penalized is in my oppinion wrong. IN EVE IT'S CONTRAPRODUCTIVE TO DO THINGS THAT WOULD YEILD YOU MORE EXPERIENCE IN ANY OTHER GAME.

It seems like you have made it your personal crusade to keep talking down this thread. I'm all open for suggestions on how to improve the concept, but when you just keep trying to grasp at straws to talk it down, please just keep out.




I'm curious to know where you got that impression. I was just doing my due diligence in questioning oversights I see in the proposal. I'm a little confused though, at how you have gone from your original plan of

Quote:
- REMOVE ATTRIBUTE ENHANCING IMPLANTS COMPLETELY! -


to remove just the basic non pirate ones.

Okay, if we are to work with your new proposal (just remove the non pirate ones) then how does this solve your original problem of highsec people not wanting to go to null for fear of losing them? Especially when they are orders of magnitude more than the regular 1-5 implants? If I'm missing something, do let me know, but it seems a little in-congruent.

To more directly answer your perceived problem though, and forgive me if someone said it already, is to use jumpclones. They are easy to get, and any highsec person will get one for null sec playtime. I therefore counter propose that any perceived problem of highsec'ers afraid of nullsec, or nullsec'ers not training fast enough is not a real problem with jumpclones.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.29 20:15:00 - [89]
 

Originally by: Darryl Ward


You seem to like PvP, why don't you want moar?


Yea! I've been presumed by many on the forums to be many things, but never PvP until now! Razz I'll add that to my collection of baseless accusations I have gotten. Truth is, I argue on the side of reason and balance, whichever it may be.

Photon Ceray
Posted - 2011.07.29 21:24:00 - [90]
 

Edited by: Photon Ceray on 29/07/2011 21:24:44
+1

As a player who spent most of his time PVPing in null sec I have mostly used +3 and +4 implants only. the difference this makes over the 4 years I played could be well over 6 million skill points.

Carebears have all the advantages of safety in high sec, why should they also have an unfair advantage in training skills?

This will also be an additional reason for people to use pirate implants. I almost never use them because I don't want to downgrade from a +4 to a +2 due to the training time I will lose.

+10 if I could.

edit: also please fix implants, they desperately need it!


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

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