open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked Neural remaps for PLEX
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.08 10:59:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Ranka Mei on 13/07/2011 04:04:51

I like CCP to re-instate their idea to sell neural remaps for PLEX.

*Insert ****storm here*

Rationale A: Eve Online exists, what, 8 years now? Much as no one likes to hear it, chances that it will exist another 8 years are slim. CCP Zulu has recently stated again that selling remaps for PLEX makes sense; and I think he is right. We're not talking about a game-breaking mechanic here: just a way to train a little more efficiently, in deference to the realization that there are less years ahead of us than there are behind us (and that this will become increasingly more true with each following year).

Rationale B: 1x neural remap a year is too little. There are many learning tracks, like leadership skills, that you don't really can justify an entire yearly remap for. Now, ideally CCP would just give us 2 remaps a year, for free. Since they're into money these days, they're obviously not gonna do that. So, might as well pay them for it.

EDIT: This proposal now includes: no more than max 4 remaps a year, and no less than 2 (obviously).

Gallion
Amarr
Posted - 2011.07.08 12:40:00 - [2]
 

forever Decline!

Bo Tosh
Posted - 2011.07.08 15:19:00 - [3]
 

I thought this old chestnut was well dead and buried.

Not supported.

Pass the shovel.

Darryl Ward
Posted - 2011.07.08 15:37:00 - [4]
 

When I first heard this suggestion I liked it. I still do. Supported.

Can someone who is opposed explain the rationale in opposing? This wouldn't be abused too often. For myself, I'd like to do a quick remap to int / mem, work on some electronics / engineering / scanning skills and then get back to per / will. It's noy buying skill points, you still have to wait. It's not an extreme shortcut, it's like train 5 skills, get the 6th one at half price.

AMatay
Posted - 2011.07.08 23:14:00 - [5]
 

i dont think payign for remaps is the way to go but i would definatly like to see them more often, maybe once every 4 months, so thats 3 a year. that would make a lot of sense to me anyway.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.09 11:32:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: AMatay
i dont think payign for remaps is the way to go but i would definatly like to see them more often, maybe once every 4 months, so thats 3 a year. that would make a lot of sense to me anyway.

Well, the thing is, CCP isn't into freebies any more. So I don't think a proposal to simply give us more remaps a year will make it. Offer them a little money, however, and they might.

P.S. I do think the amount of remaps per year should be capped, though; to max 4, or max 2 even, if need be.

Abdiel Kavash
Caldari
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
Posted - 2011.07.09 13:44:00 - [7]
 

I like the idea (and did when it was first proposed). It should be limited to a remap every 2 or 3 months, so that you still have to make long-term decisions. Just not to the point when you nerf your character for half a year just so that you can train faster during the other half.

Sarrgon
Caldari
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.07.12 22:42:00 - [8]
 

We really need more then 1 remap per year, so I totally endorse this, either it be by plex or just waiting for a timer to run out.

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.07.12 23:25:00 - [9]
 

I actually agree with this and don't believe it's as game breaking as those against make out.

Sanphesta
Posted - 2011.07.13 00:44:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: Sanphesta on 13/07/2011 00:45:22
i support 2-4 remaps per year, either given for free as a shortened counter or as a plex (or aur amount of plex) for counter reset option.

It would consume plexes, would not be overly advantageous while still being useful.

edit to activate ze thumbs up assuming above limitations are used

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.13 04:01:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Sanphesta
Edited by: Sanphesta on 13/07/2011 00:45:22
i support 2-4 remaps per year, either given for free as a shortened counter or as a plex (or aur amount of plex) for counter reset option.

It would consume plexes, would not be overly advantageous while still being useful.

edit to activate ze thumbs up assuming above limitations are used

Yes. Even a limit of 2 neural remaps per year would probably do it for most folks. I will add the ceiling to the original proposal.

Puccia Freir
Posted - 2011.07.13 14:42:00 - [12]
 

A plex is one month. A plex should therefore cut a SINGLE MONTH off of your timer, that's it. I would support the proposal with this little change.

If you complain that it would cost too much, htfu and find ways to get rich Cool

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.13 14:52:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Ranka Mei on 13/07/2011 14:52:07
Originally by: Puccia Freir
A plex is one month. A plex should therefore cut a SINGLE MONTH off of your timer, that's it. I would support the proposal with this little change.

If you complain that it would cost too much, htfu and find ways to get rich Cool

Math, not your strong suit, is it? :) A neural remap doesn't make you train from 0% training speed to 100%, as you seem to suggest. Rather, absolute worst case scenario, you'd be training at 2700 sp/h from 1800 sp/h, or something extremely similarly low.

I'm sure CCP can come up with some sort of price that's reasonable; that's details, though.

Greniard
Posted - 2011.07.13 16:46:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Greniard on 13/07/2011 16:49:27
Originally by: Ranka Mei
Edited by: Ranka Mei on 13/07/2011 14:52:07
Originally by: Puccia Freir
A plex is one month. A plex should therefore cut a SINGLE MONTH off of your timer, that's it. I would support the proposal with this little change.

If you complain that it would cost too much, htfu and find ways to get rich Cool

Math, not your strong suit, is it? :) A neural remap doesn't make you train from 0% training speed to 100%, as you seem to suggest. Rather, absolute worst case scenario, you'd be training at 2700 sp/h from 1800 sp/h, or something extremely similarly low.

I'm sure CCP can come up with some sort of price that's reasonable; that's details, though.

You speak of math and then go on to say a 50% increase is "extremely similarly low". Well done. Rolling Eyes

And this is for all intents and purposes buying SP. Not receiving it on the spot doesn't make a difference. It's now given to you during the x extra months that you gained from the remap.

EDIT: incase of severe ****: Not supported.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:10:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Greniard
Edited by: Greniard on 13/07/2011 16:49:27
Originally by: Ranka Mei
Edited by: Ranka Mei on 13/07/2011 14:52:07
Originally by: Puccia Freir
A plex is one month. A plex should therefore cut a SINGLE MONTH off of your timer, that's it. I would support the proposal with this little change.

If you complain that it would cost too much, htfu and find ways to get rich Cool

Math, not your strong suit, is it? :) A neural remap doesn't make you train from 0% training speed to 100%, as you seem to suggest. Rather, absolute worst case scenario, you'd be training at 2700 sp/h from 1800 sp/h, or something extremely similarly low.

I'm sure CCP can come up with some sort of price that's reasonable; that's details, though.

You speak of math and then go on to say a 50% increase is "extremely similarly low". Well done. Rolling Eyes

I gave training at 1800 sp/h as an example of training extremly slowly.

And his math is still way off. By 50%, to be precise. :) Because what you win is only a 50% increase, instead of training time for a whole month. And that is in the absolute worst case scenario of needing to remap to your now lowest attributes. And you don't always need that, of course. For example, I'm currenty training perc/will at 2700 sp/h. I have a 225 days will/perc plan, that I would be training at 2520 sp/h. Not horrible, per se; I'd still pay to get that done more efficiently.

Also, 'increase' in training speed is an awkward term, because 'remap for PLEX' does not speed up training beyond what the current game mechanics allow; you'd still be training at 2700 sp/h -- the game's max. The only difference being that you can remap once or twice more a year.

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:31:00 - [16]
 

Sorry will not happen, there was already a huge community outrage over this and was brought to a hault.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:36:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Obsidian Hawk
Sorry will not happen, there was already a huge community outrage over this and was brought to a hault.

Until CCP Zulu recently brought it up again. :)

Seamus Donohue
Gallente
Posted - 2011.07.13 18:07:00 - [18]
 

Supported with reservations. Remaps should be more frequent than once a year, but I'd prefer that this be done by reducing the cooldown. Under no circumstances should the cooldown be less than 3 months. I think it should be 4 months or 6 months.

Llambda
Space Llama Industries
Posted - 2011.07.13 19:07:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Llambda on 13/07/2011 21:15:44
Jesus ****in' christ. No matter how much you're given, you always want more.

They've already given you remaps AND removed learning skills and now you want... more remaps? Really?

Why not just ask to have all stats pegged at 30? Hell, why even stop there?

Eizon Amarr
Posted - 2011.07.13 21:02:00 - [20]
 

No thankyou. Was a big no thankyou then, still a big no thankyou now, will always be, you guessed it, a big no thankyou.

Darryl Ward
Posted - 2011.07.14 01:06:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Greniard
Edited by: Greniard on 13/07/2011 16:49:27
Originally by: Ranka Mei
Edited by: Ranka Mei on 13/07/2011 14:52:07
Originally by: Puccia Freir
A plex is one month. A plex should therefore cut a SINGLE MONTH off of your timer, that's it. I would support the proposal with this little change.

If you complain that it would cost too much, htfu and find ways to get rich Cool

Math, not your strong suit, is it? :) A neural remap doesn't make you train from 0% training speed to 100%, as you seem to suggest. Rather, absolute worst case scenario, you'd be training at 2700 sp/h from 1800 sp/h, or something extremely similarly low.

I'm sure CCP can come up with some sort of price that's reasonable; that's details, though.

You speak of math and then go on to say a 50% increase is "extremely similarly low". Well done. Rolling Eyes

And this is for all intents and purposes buying SP. Not receiving it on the spot doesn't make a difference. It's now given to you during the x extra months that you gained from the remap.

EDIT: incase of severe ****: Not supported.


This is the only serious attempt to providing an argument against it. Everyone else is just whining against it.

This is not buying skill points. Buying skillpoints is, I give CCP my credit card and tomorrow I fly an Avatar. Neural remaps already exist. People do use them to train faster. You probably do too. No one wants them removed, only a few vocal people oppose a way to obtain more. I would support as few as 1, with a cooldown of 6 months. I see the failure in buying skillpoints outright, people could become a titan pilot in a day. That's just stupid. With remaps, you cannot become a titan pilot in a day. It will still take a very long time.

Sabre Tek
Posted - 2011.07.14 03:33:00 - [22]
 

I like most of the SHEEP here oppose this idea entirely along with any "CHANGE" that might happen good or bad.

Taking years for training is GOOD and we should not try to give new players ways to help fast track their enjoyment with more options for remaps.
Playing other games while avoiding Eve entirely while your character trains itself in real time is EXCELLENT and preferable.

Totally do not support anything that helps speed up skill training and increases player enjoyment/freedom and would preferably limit remaps to once every 5 years. If the players are impatient they need to learn to be more patient.


Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.14 04:07:00 - [23]
 

Fellow capsuleers,

It's easy to make all these grandstanding nay-saying posts -- I know, I've been in plenty myself. But can you honestly say to yourself you're sure EVE still has another 8 years? Well, I can't. That's the problem. The EVE training system works great, but it doesn't scale well. Schematically, the issue is as follows:

'For every X year in the past, the chance of EVE existing yet another X years becomes smaller when X gets larger.'

To give you a few example:

'EVE existed 2 years; EVE will exist another 2 years' = very likely.

'EVE existed 4 years; EVE will exist another 4 years' = probably.

'EVE existed 8 years; EVE will exist another 8 years' = not so likely.

'EVE existed 16 years; EVE will exist another 16 years' = almost certainly not.

So, the issue is, that ahead-time 'condenses,' as it were, with each year passing. That means, in simple terms, that whatever others have done before you, will become a less attainable goal. So, for 8 year old vets to say new people should just wait as long as they did, is a linear logic which simply doesn't apply here. Heck, even, say, a full 3-year carrier plan is on shaky grounds at the moment.

Also, please understand that this 'condensation' of ahead-time, as already outlined in the start-post, becomes more pronounced with each new year passing.

Hence this proposal. It's not even adding a new game mechanic; it's merely applying an existing one a bit more frequently, to compensate slightly for the increasingly-less-time-ahead matter.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.07.14 06:46:00 - [24]
 

Whilst the total impact of PLEX-for-remaps would be small, it crosses the line, however slightly, of paying for something that can't be obtained in-game.

CCP have a LOT of trust rebuilding to do before I'd consider accepting the risk of letting them do "just one small" power MT. Starting down that road would do more to shorten EVE's remaining lifespan than almost anything I can think of.

Greniard
Posted - 2011.07.14 08:30:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Greniard on 14/07/2011 11:32:12
Edited by: Greniard on 14/07/2011 11:31:06

Not the same as buying SP huh...

Situation 1:
"Hey, think I'll train per/will for the next 6 months to get into those nice t2 ships and getting some proper gunnery skills"
*remap to per/will, training them at 2790 SP/h*

6 months in:
"Ok, time for my fitting skills! Too bad i'm only training them only at 2070 SP/h... Oh well. Got my gunnery fast"
*continues training int/mem for 6 months until next remap*

Result: 20,995,200 SP from that year



Situation 2:
"Hey, think I'll train per/will for the next 6 months to get into those nice t2 ships and getting some proper gunnery skills"
*remap to per/will, training them at 2790 SP/h*

6 months in:
"Ok, time for my fitting skills! Too bad i'm only training them only at 2070 SP/h... Screw this, I have isk to spare!"
*buys a remap, now training int/mem at 2790 SP/h and continues training int/mem for 6 months until next remap*

Result: 24,105,600 SP that year

Now please tell me how the person in situation 2 didn't buy a bit over 3M SP, given to him over 6 months. Yea the rate is bad, but that's not the point is it?
(Think it's worth noting I could've made the post-remap time 11.9 months for lulz, but trying to be fair here. And it could also be that the time required for per/will is only 6 months and the player is switching over on purpose so it's not about him/her making a mistake)

Maybe this is not game breaking in itself, but it does cross a line.

This proposal does not help new players what so ever unless they are RL-rich, because they can't afford to buy PLEX in-game anyway. And the RL-rich can already just buy a character with their $$$. So basically this is all in an effort to train new alts and old mains faster, which is not needed.

EDIT: Changed situations a bit because people are ******ed.

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.07.14 08:37:00 - [26]
 

Edited by: Mag''s on 14/07/2011 08:40:19
Originally by: Greniard
Edited by: Greniard on 14/07/2011 08:35:54
Not the same as buying SP huh...

Situation 1:
"Hey, think I'll train per/will for the next year to get into those nice t2 ships and getting some proper gunnery skills"
*remap to per/will, training them at 2790 SP/h*

6 months in:
"Damn, I really need to get my fitting skills sorted and I'm training them only at 2070 SP/h... Guess I'll have to live with my choices *sadpanda*"
*continues training int/mem for 6 months until next remap*

Result: 20,995,200 SP from that year

Situation 2:
"Hey, think I'll train per/will for the next year to get into those nice t2 ships and getting some proper gunnery skills"
*remap to per/will, training them at 2790 SP/h*

6 months in:
"Damn, I really need to get my fitting skills sorted and I'm training them only at 2070 SP/h... Screw this, I have isk to spare!"
*buys a remap, now training int/mem at 2790 SP/h and continues training int/mem for 6 months until next remap*

Result: 24,105,600 SP that year

Now please tell me how the person in situation 2 didn't buy a bit over 3M SP, given to him over 6 months. Yea the rate is bad, but that's not the point is it?
(Think it's worth noting I could've made the post-remap time 11.9 months for lulz, but trying to be fair here. And it could also be that the time required for per/will is only 6 months and the player is switching over on purpose so it's not about him/her making a mistake)

Maybe this is not game breaking in itself, but it does cross a line.

This proposal does not help new players what so ever unless they are RL-rich, because they can't afford to buy PLEX in-game anyway. And the RL-rich can already just buy a character with their $$$. So basically this is all in an effort to train new alts and old mains faster, which is not needed.
WTB training at 2790 sp/h

Lack of game mechanics knowledge aside, both people in both situations have the same choices open to them. Either buy a remap, or don't.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.07.14 10:23:00 - [27]
 

This example may be the purest incarnation of Malcanis' Law yet.

Sabre Tek
Posted - 2011.07.14 10:38:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Greniard
Edited by: Greniard on 14/07/2011 08:35:54
Not the same as buying SP huh...

Situation 1:
"Hey, think I'll train per/will for the next year to get into those nice t2 ships and getting some proper gunnery skills"
*remap to per/will, training them at 2790 SP/h*

6 months in:
"Damn, I really need to get my fitting skills sorted and I'm training them only at 2070 SP/h... Guess I'll have to live with my choices *sadpanda*"
*continues training int/mem for 6 months until next remap*

Result: 20,995,200 SP from that year

Situation 2:
"Hey, think I'll train per/will for the next year to get into those nice t2 ships and getting some proper gunnery skills"
*remap to per/will, training them at 2790 SP/h*

6 months in:
"Damn, I really need to get my fitting skills sorted and I'm training them only at 2070 SP/h... Screw this, I have isk to spare!"
*buys a remap, now training int/mem at 2790 SP/h and continues training int/mem for 6 months until next remap*

Result: 24,105,600 SP that year

Now please tell me how the person in situation 2 didn't buy a bit over 3M SP, given to him over 6 months. Yea the rate is bad, but that's not the point is it?
(Think it's worth noting I could've made the post-remap time 11.9 months for lulz, but trying to be fair here. And it could also be that the time required for per/will is only 6 months and the player is switching over on purpose so it's not about him/her making a mistake)

Maybe this is not game breaking in itself, but it does cross a line.

This proposal does not help new players what so ever unless they are RL-rich, because they can't afford to buy PLEX in-game anyway. And the RL-rich can already just buy a character with their $$$. So basically this is all in an effort to train new alts and old mains faster, which is not needed.



EXACTLY we don't want more enjoyment or progressing for players, its better to punish them and get them stuck with bad training times for 6+ months when they decide to change game play styles, which is totally their own fault and they have to live with it or QUIT Eve.

Greniard
Posted - 2011.07.14 11:28:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Greniard on 14/07/2011 11:34:53
Originally by: Sabre Tek
Originally by: Greniard
snip



EXACTLY we don't want more enjoyment or progressing for players, its better to punish them and get them stuck with bad training times for 6+ months when they decide to change game play styles, which is totally their own fault and they have to live with it or QUIT Eve.

Knew someone would herp so hard they derp... well. *edit on my example situations*

And EVE is all about living with your choices. Only trained amarr while minmatar are FOTM? Live with it. And so on.

Wreckar
Posted - 2011.07.14 12:46:00 - [30]
 

+1


Pages: [1] 2

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