The Case for Removing Learning Implants

Avatar
If you say so.....
Avatar
learning implants are one of two reasons I don't pvp more. the other is skill clones costing so bloody much at higher levels
Avatar
I see the sense in your argument, regarding new players and the play style implants can inspire, I think its good that in highsec you can use a high value clone while in 0.0 its generally a bad idea.A better solution in my opinion would be to have the new player missions and tutorials reward new players with a set of 'meta' +3s or +4s that require a low cybernetics skill as part of explaining attributes and the training system.The fact its risky to have expensive implants in 0.0 is part of the risk/reward balance and why 1.5mil bounty battleships and isk-spewing moons sit in 0.0 and not in highsec, same applies to wormholes. I've never had more than +3 implants, in 0.0 I rolled with +2s.
Avatar
I agree, wholeheartedly. I'm also an extremist who thinks that learning attributes should be removed too, with all skills working from static time multipliers. The "charisma remap for leadership" situation is a miserable one for any pilot who wants to start leading fleets - you have to commit yourself to it wholeheartedly. If every skill kept its multipliers but a static time block was used, we'd see more uniformity between the skills and more people will to train into leadership. In my opinion, both learning implants and attributes and their remaps are simply arbitrary barriers that stop the game being enjoyed in its multifaceted way. Why should we accept being forced to train all drone skills or all leadership skills at once, else we should incur a two month penalty on training? Arbitrary barriers for fun.
Avatar
Anything that makes people risk averse is bad in a PVP game like EVE.The amount of times I hear 'oh I'll leave here then, I have +4's in' on comms when I announce I'm taking the fleet through nullsec is quite high. Considering we're a lowsec corp and we're not even averse to risk or PVP in general this really says all I need to know about why learning implants need to be removed. So +1.
Avatar
Don't forget, as you get better at the game, so your clone cost increases until by the time you're hitting the 50m SP point, each death is an implant in and of itself.
Avatar
So simply add a basic +3 increase to all attributes when the implants are removed. Not like new players can afford +4's or +5's anyway.
Avatar
That wouldn't stop the risk-adverse nature that they (noobies) assume as the 'real' implants cost quite a bit more. The better option would be to just remove them all together and adjust skill training to reflect that all pilots would have a certain set of implants at any given time. Which is what was done with the learning skills a few years ago.The best option would to just eliminate them and assume that each player in EVE would have access to a set of +3s all the time and adjust attributes/training times accordingly. It's fair, levels the playing field from noob to bitter-vet, and only has the down side of removing an isk sink. Adding an new isk-sink should be something that CCP excels at in this stage of the game.
Avatar
But then you take away the choice players have to make in terms of what implants they buy, the cost of them, how likely they are to loose them and so on. Taking pointless fluff out of the game is good, taking a meaningful choice about risk and reward out and forcing everyone to the middle ground is bad.Perhaps a better solution still would be to change implants to be more like very-long-term boosters (drugs). That way you could build in a system where a newbie character has 0 resistance to the drug, so topping that booster up every month or so is nice and cheap, then as a players SP increase they becoming more resistant to the booster, and so increasing the cost of the monthly top up.That way you not only level the playing field, you tip it in favor of new players being able to play without worry of loosing costly implants and you make it cheap for them to keep a high SP/time ratio.You still preserve the choice a player makes though, do they keep topping up expensive boosters in 0.0 when there is a high chance they'll loose it? It would give some ground though, in that you could top up the boosters for the skills you were training, and the others would naturally expire so you'd only stand to loose two if active booster doses if you were podded.
Avatar
"Anything that makes people risk averse is bad in a PVP game like EVE"That is risky logic.Ships costing isk makes people risk averseClones costing isk makes people risk averseSkill loss on loosing a T3 makes people risk averseBefore you know it you have Call of duty in space.Risk is there to make PVP meaningful. The same reason its fun is the reason people in your corp are wussing out of it, it matters and if you loose it can sting a bit. I hate to say it but I think the problem is the priorities of your corp mates not the game mechanics. I've always had +3s or bellow because I'm a PVP player, common sense.
Avatar
There are a few corps that let you join for the sole reason of creating jump clones. So anyone can make a jump clone easily.
Avatar
Clone costs are also a problem - there are plenty of 100m+ SP characters who are put off casual PvP because of the clone costs. The thing is that attribute modifiers and clone costs have no direct impact on PvP - they're a fixed penalty for when the inevitable loss occurs.The situation with ships and hardwiring implants is different. Bringing better/more expensive equipment to a fight increases your chance of winning, with the downside being that the loss is more expensive - that's feeding directly back into the risk/reward situation.
Avatar
Getting standings for jump clones, or joining a nullsec alliance is not supposed to be easy. The reward for the logistics trouble you go through is to be able to have jump clones. There are two ways to get there - the PVP road or the PVE road.Learning skills were removed because every character spent their first 11million SP on maxing them out. There was no point - every character had them maxed first thing and it was universal. No one chose not to learn those skills, so there was no need for them to delay the training for ships etc. They weren't removed to create an "even" character playing field.The rest of this argument is silly - risk averse players are going to be just as risk averse about losing a ship as they are losing implants. Removing implants just removes some player development choice and strategy and RISK from the game. Keep going down that road and we'll be playing an arcade game in no time.
Avatar
I roll with at least a 100mill implant everytime I fly, it's not the games fault people are such pussies.
Avatar
It's an arbitrary choice that does not improve the game in any way, but only serves to cause problems. Removing it would have absolutely no negative side-effects whatsoever; leaving it in provides another barrier for new players to have to deal with.
Avatar
I can see your point, but when people who'd be happy to risk their ships otherwise (they're roaming with me in lowsec fully aware they might lose it), find entering 0.0 to be an issue because they only have one clone or happen to be in a clone with expensive learning implants I think that's an issue.These people aren't otherwise risk averse they're happy to loose their ships, it's really only the implanted clone holding them back.
Avatar
There is an even simpler and perhaps better way to avoid the "problem" you are talking about:Make implants work as a ship module - whenever you dock you can put in that set of +5s before you go to sleep. When you undock you remove the +5 set and store it for later and add in stuff that helps you in combat instead (crystal set, slave set, snake set, whatever).Yes, this will keep the "complexity" (but come on, making Eve less complex is lame, its already close to WOW levels as it is), but the risk aversion will go away.As a bonus it will also limit the usability of jump clones and make more different implant sets readily available for the new players without them having to scrap old ones.
Avatar
EVE IS A RISK ADVERSE GAME, stop trying to baby proof my game you asshole.
Avatar
Except that now you're adding complexity to the game instead of removing it and substituting a different skill enhancement system for the one some of us want to go away. The better, and simpler, solution is to just remove them like training skills were removed.Your way also means that new players would still be required to have to train skills to gain an increased SP/hour ratio and as some one that had to train learning and advanced learning skills on multiple accounts that is not something I want to wish upon new EVE players.
Avatar
Let me help you out with that logic...You buy the learning implants, you can not buy them...("but I'll save precious training time") Then what do you play the game for? Watching your SP increase while not participating?
Avatar
whoever has a 100m+ SP character shouldn't have a problem of making the proper isk to fund 'casual pvp', or else they're doing it horribly wrong
Avatar
Call of Duty in space? What?That's an awful slippery slope argument.
Avatar
And where do you fly? What ships do you usually fly? Do you normally fly in big fleets, small gangs?I mean sure, my Nyx alt has well over a billion ISK in its head but that's hardly relevant.
Avatar
Yes, I covered that in the article and the reasons why this is not a valid argument.
Avatar
Funny that this isn't about removing implants. Hardwirings and pirate sets aren't used for skill training.
Avatar
CCP has done enough to introduce high income potential activities in highsec (not just market trading) to safely say that they've tossed the "risk/reward" idea right out the window.
Avatar
Risk averse pilots are good victims.
Avatar
my primary ship flow is a sabre and my clone costs about 60 mil each time and i have no problem with that. when i die my pod die's 50% of the time that's eve.
Avatar
There are a lot of ppl that pvp with +4 set ... hell, almosteveryone in my corp is doing it! If you are afraid you are going to lose them(and you will at one point) then use 2 implants (with the attributes you aretraining), not a full set (Oh and my upgrade costs me 45 mio every fking time Ilose a POD, implants not included). I tend to lose a lot of them so I stock up.Removing these is just wrong. It will take a lot more time to train forsomething ... any thing ... Anything that can speed up the training time is allright in my book! Cost and perspective of losing things is irrelevant - this isEVE, don't fly anything you can't afford to lose.Some of the arguments in this article are a bit ... dumb ... for example:'Empire players tend to have a huge advantage in this regard - they can dovirtually everything with a full +5s and hardwirings since pods can warp outalmost instantly in the event that they lose a ship' - not EVERYTHING my friend... they can't pvp, they can't venture in 0.0, pods are killed in empire / lowsec too you know? It's not like they are INVINCIBLE. Why limit every one whenyou can't afford a pair (or a set) of implants? C'mon are you serious? What youare trying to do here is limit everyone's training speed to the same level – whichis not right … not everyone is equal in EVE or the RL for that matter. Once youplugged in an implant you have the probability of losing it, just like anyother item in EVE. Unless you just stay docked forever … but that is not ‘playingEVE’ right?
Avatar
If you’re going to be removing learning implants because it makes pilots more risk adverse then i propose you remove clone updates and the requirement to upgrade your clone to hold more skill points, as that makes pilots more risk adverse than the implants that they carry, since you need to do an upgrade wether you have imp. The implants adds extra importance to being risk adverse but not having any implants to loose won’t make the higher skill point pilot undock. If your and old enough pilot to be able to make the ISK quick enough for that clone upgrade cost then you’re just a skilled to make the ISK required to replace the implant. Bottom line if you're risk adverse and you believe you would not be able to recover what you’re loosing what you have when you undock, then you’re not going to undock. Let’s just take everything away that makes us risk adverse then everyone can PvP to our heart’s content and no-one will be moaning because they don’t have enough targets.
Avatar
I rarely lose a pod in lowsec, like almost never.
Avatar
Wholeheartedly agree.
Avatar
This isn't about clone costs.
Avatar
I lost a +5 POD in Empire a very long time ago (when they were VERY expensive) with no empire wars - suicide gank - shit happens what can I say; it was my bad for flying with Autopilot ON. POD's are lost every single day in low sec & Empire - check dotlan - you will be surprised. (SMARTbombs rig a bell?)
Avatar
One of the core features of EVE is player run economy. It's another form of PvP, like it or not, you can be scammed, your items bought up and re-listed by a monopolist or your monopolist game is broken by competitor. Being good in this form of gameplay rewards ISK, allowing you to buy luxury stuff for yourself, like +5 implants. Some can afford it, some cannot. Removing such luxury items would equalize these groups, making the economy meaningless like in WoW: you can have a million gold, still your character is equal to the broken guy.
Avatar
I'm not talking about idiots autopiloting pods and dying to smartbombs or destroyers. In almost all cases you can easily dodge a pod loss by warping out the moment you see the "your ship is out of control" message.
Avatar
People that live in lowsec generally know which gates tend to have smart bombing camps, and thus avoid them. And being afk auto-piloting hardly counts wouldn't you agree? But like I said I haven't lost a pod in a lowsec combat situation in a long time.
Avatar
Its the logical conclusion of making game mechanic changes based on the idea"Anything that makes people risk averse is bad in a PVP game like EVE."If you want to get rid of attribute implants based on other logic, its a different matter, I think the point about new players having to buy them and then worry about losing them is a very good one, but then your underlying reason for the change is something like:"new players should not be hit with unnecessary barriers to doing what they find fun"Which if you followed through and apply to the game as a whole, wouldn't end up removing risk from PVP.I think the bottom line is i LIKE the fact I have to make a choice, do I want slightly faster training times or do I want more affordable POD losses, its something I've sat and thought about a few times. I only fly with implants that benefit the skills i'm training, which match the remap as much as possible. I can do that because the mechanics have forced me to think about what I want the character to do and how I can get to that point efficiently.That doesn't mean I wont train a few levels of some skill that uses other attributes if its useful, just that I wont do battleships 5 with my int/mem implants and remaps.When my gameplay style changes, I have to try and adapt my rough plans to fit in the new skills I need. MY character is eking out the best existence he can in a hostile universe.Thats cool and I enjoy that.That said in my current wormhole life I loose pods very rarely, when I was out in 0.0 I lost them a lot more often and only had +2s in, but I never really felt aggrieved about that, I was roughing it up in lawless space, if that meant some mission runner got some more SPs than I did over the same time, I wasn't loosing sleep over it.The point about balancing risk/reward only on things that increase your chance to win rather than something like an attribute implant that doesn't sway the fight itself is a good point to, I can see the sense in that.
Avatar
If learning implants are risk averse then why not make them ... indestructible? You plug an implant on a clone / jump clone and it stays there ... forever. You loose your POD, pay the clone upgrade and voila! Same logic; less training time, everyone wins.
Avatar
Yeah but those hisec grinders will still be able to use implants risk-free. I would rather see implants become player-manufacturable
Avatar
They can't be much of a victim as they live in a magical fairyland of highsec and you don't have many ways of killing them. Even less when crimewatch is put into place this winter.
Avatar
I wouldn't mind if CCP did get rid of learning implants. I personally don't find them all that important anymore. They were a good source of income back when I sold +3 implants in the Solitude region but I do agree that they are a relic of the 'good' old days.
Avatar
The question is how much money do you have?
Avatar
I agree, it does makeme want to stay in high sec, but I feel the implants are just a symptom of agreater problem, the time training system. Let’s face it, if you check theforums for recruitment into 'good' corps, the sp mostly asked for ranges from10m to even 30m sp on some cases. For a new player that wants to experience thisas soon as possible, the implants are a necessary evil, at the same timeworking as a pitfall. So before we 'fix' this implant problem, let’s try andtackle the bigger monster, a community that praises sp count and not gameplay knowledge. (Felt like slappingmyself while writing this.)
Avatar
"However, jump clones are largely inaccessible to players who do not have the faction standings required for them, are not in a corporation with the necessary standings, or lack an office in a conquerable station"This is only partially true. Jump clones can be created by Clone Vat Bays and are readily available to those who do not qualify for the list above. Clone Vat Bay can be fit to a Rorqual."since pods can warp out almost instantly in the event that they lose a ship"With CCP reducing the align/warp speed of the pod earlier this year (albeit only a small amount), escape with your pod in empire is not 100% guaranteed. Lag on the server, on the client, or human delay can create the 1/2 second of time where a player's pod may be locked before it warps."This “expensive” set of implants contributes to a risk-averse attitude where the new player is afraid of ever leaving the supposed safety of highsec and finds himself leaving the game when this presumption of safety turns out to be untrue"This is certainly true, but you can use the same point to argue that faction and DED space modules should be removed from the game. Fitting expensive modules to a ship can generate the same effect as the one you quote, contributing to the same problem you outline in the article. Additionally, expensive modules are usually more expensive than +5 learning implants which contribute to a larger loss felt by the player who learns that EVE is dangerous, even in high sec.
Avatar
"This is only partially true. Jump clones can be created by Clone Vat Bays and are readily available to those who do not qualify for the list above. Clone Vat Bay can be fit to a Rorqual."So your solution is to get a 2bil isk ship to solve this problem?"With CCP reducing the align/warp speed of the pod earlier this year (albeit only a small amount), escape with your pod in empire is not 100% guaranteed. Lag on the server, on the client, or human delay can create the 1/2 second of time where a player's pod may be locked before it warps."Too bad a tick is a full second long so even a double sensor boosted Stiletto still can't tackle a pod. Especially so if the person is mashing warp as their ship dies which all but guarantees that their ship gets out.Seriously, you're defending something that adds meaningless fluff to the game. Did you defend learning skills, too?
Avatar
You started posting but missed my point entirely ... 'almost all cases' being the right choice of words ... meaning a POD is not invincible ...Using same logic, you can dodge a pod loss 'almost all cases' in 0.0 / lowsec once you see "your ship is out of control" message ... unless ... oh yea ... you are in a hostile buble with reds/neutrals on grid so what exactly is your point again?
Avatar
Oracle Fleets in AAA
Avatar
That is actually a good stuff you have pointed. A player driven manufactured business - probably using t2 nano transistors and some PI materials like computers and chiral structures.
Avatar
Uh, what? If the entirety of your argument is "well idiots lose pods by autopiloting them through hisec, therefore hisec is risky too!" I don't know what to say.
Avatar
Bubbles in lowsec? Since when?
Avatar
I live in wspace with a bunch of mostly-carebears. If you're attentive scout properly you pretty much never have to PVP. When you do fight it's easy to make sure that it's completely one sided. and as a result I've been rocking a full set of +5s in the same clone for nearly 3 years. I think It'd be good if CCP got rid of learning implants, but for the sake of my skillplan I very much hope they give us 25 more points to distribute to compensate (like what they did when they removed the skills.
Avatar
The problem is that it simply doesn't scale like you imply beyond around 30mil skill points. Like most things in EVE your income is largely dictated by how much you grind the system in one form or another. 100mil+ SP characters are in essence just getting punished for having played the game a lot longer.When you first start, your climb to 20mil. skill point's gives you a drastic increase in the amount of isk you can earn whether it be trading, ratting, mining, scanning, etc. Couple this with clone costs not rising that much, a couple of mil. at best maybe?After this, you can earn another 20-30mil. SP's and you wont actually earn that much more for the same activities...but for some reason clone costs then start ramping up in greater amounts. It makes no sense, offers nothing to the game other than unnecessary risk aversion for longer subscribing players, and should be dumped just like learning skills were dumped.
Avatar
Same goes for the ones living in null-sec. There are intel channels / alliance or corporation chat / comms. Except 'za buble' what exactly is stopping you from warping off your pod in null-sec?Living in null-sec / low-sec comes with a lot of advantages and disadvantages ... loosing a pod hardly counts as a big disability for 0.0 wouldn't you agree?
Avatar
If CCP took the route of removing them, they'd probably just add +5 base points to every attribute. Just speculation, though.
Avatar
i fail to see the difference between attribute enhancers and combat implants. Both confer advantages and are priced accordingly.
Avatar
What about those of us who WANT to pvp?
Avatar
One gives a temporary bonus to a skill, the other speed up training
Avatar
Don't play stupid, you may end up staying like that, you know what I mean.
Avatar
I wouldn't agree, indeed. I regularly loose pods in 0.0, in lowsec I only ever loose pods due to a bad connection or being a bad. In 0.0 oh hai Hicor/Lictor! *pop*
Avatar
I see 3 key points here:1) For anyone comparing learning implants to hardwirings in terms of loss, there is a key difference. Learning implants are basically essential for players to keep unlocking new skills, items and ships that open up new areas of the game in a timely manner. Hardwirings are just a bonus that make you slightly more effective, but don't really confer a huge tangible benefit compared to shaving days off your next skill. Hardwirings are certainly not an essential item for newbies and can be considered akin to the upgrade from t1 > t2 > faction > officer. You buy what you can afford to lose.Hardwirings are also more likely to be purchased for the ship you're flying at the time, and if that ship isn't performing so well you might want to move onto something else with other implants. It's less of a big deal to lose the pod alongside the ship in this case.Learning implants on the other hand have universal utility and hurt you equally everytime they're lost.2) Learning implants act as a bigger barrier to play for new players than older ones. My characters are all 80m+ SP and the skills they're training aren't really important or exciting anymore. I can also afford to replace any implants immediately without thinking about it. Therefore I'm more likely to throw ships into a fight without a second thought. Conversely you have newbies worried about commiting to a fight with a 500k frigate because they might lose a +3 set worth more than their wallet balance. They're also the ones really keen to see their next skill finish as they have a much larger portion of the game still to 'unlock' than older players.It's nothing but bad game design when you basically encourage new players to not play or try new aspects of it.3) This is particularly a null-sec drawback, although also applies to low-sec smart-bomb gangs. If a not-so-rich player takes part in a fight and loses his ship but not his pod, he has a annoying decision ahead of him. How to get home. He can choose to self-destruct and give up his implants, allowing him to return to playing eve properly very soon.Or he's forced to take a time-consuming journey, avoiding gate camps and traps to try and preserve his learning clone. This is time in which most players really aren't enjoying themselves playing the game, when they could instead be diving into another fight or making the isk to replace that ship.Again the game is forcing players to play it in a certain way, restricting certain aspects for periods of time because the player can't afford to do otherwise.
Avatar
Much better worded then my own response, but yeah this pretty much! +1
Avatar
My argument being that pods are not safe in empire, gave an example, you must be aware that autopilot is not the only factor to kill a pod in empire, right? Not using the autopilot in empire increases you chances of survival, sure, but it's still far from immunity.
Avatar
An alternative option to removing implants could be to better scale them to player experience / wealth. It could work like this:All learning implants confer a +5 attribute bonus. However characters are restricted on what type of implants they can install based on their current SP total. For example, players under 10m SP can plug in any learning implant type, but obviously would be smart to choose the cheapest. Then players over 10m SP can only plug in 'Beta' implants or better. Once characters reach ~25m SP they can only plug in new sets of Basic implants. Then Standard and Advanced sets similarly scaled to ~40m and ~60m SP respectively.This means that more experienced players who are likely to be richer will need to spend more to retain that speed of training, while newbies retain the same benefit for a cost proportional to the kind of ships they'd be flying.
Avatar
I would vote against this. One of the best things in eve is that we CAN be equal to a guy with 100mil more SP by specializing. Making a game mechanics that limits what implants you can insert based on SP totals - is like making anyone with less than 10mil sp fly frigates.
Avatar
At least it's not Tengu fleets eh, would be a different matter of clones and implants then.
Avatar
This was my question all along ... still haven't answered ... except that 'Hicor/Lictor' with what exactly is 0.0 more different than low-sec in this perspective?
Avatar
That's nonsense. There is absolutely no reason why my 60m SP character should have more ISK than a 20m SP character. Only because I have played the game for a longer time does not mean I have more spare time to waste on grinding.
Avatar
#2 Edit - "Shield Buffer BC"
Avatar
When I started out, implants gave me a strange sense of progression but at some point you really stop bothering with them. It probably should also be noted that most HS players don't know how to get away with their pod (deer in the headlights effect).Lack of Implants in null sec is not really a drawback because it opens you up to the wonderful world of pod expressing, pod scouting and pod trolling ('oh no Mr Gatecamper don't destroy my snake set!')Jumpclones are alright in general too, what I would like to see is clone jumps being something that slowly collects over time to let's say 3 jumps (maybe even with stacking penalty) so you can visit your carebear friends twice a week without fear of missing a strat op because you are stuck in your shiny clone
Avatar
I failed to cover an approach for addressing the "slower training times" since that's beyond the scope of the article, but these changes would probably just leave everyone with +4/+5 added to their base attributes.
Avatar
If the end goal is to increase null activity, especially among new players then a valid argument could be made on the following grounds:Current "learning" implants serve to encourage new players to remain in high sec as long as possible in order to take advantage of enhanced training speeds that would be unavailable if they were to choose to make their primary residence in Null. Removing this incentive would provide newer players a wider variety of choices for game play without adversely affecting their skill progression speed.I could get behind something like that.
Avatar
Shit, I just lost a debate to myself...
Avatar
With that addition, your proposal is sound, but it really should be included in the main article. It really is essential to the strength of your argument.
Avatar
Andski: You are preaching to non-pvp types, that fail to realize having learning implants removed would essentially cause CCP to institute a +5 increase to all attributes while increasing necessary slots for hardwires.Anyone that doesn't see the inherent gain of having ten 5% Skill Increasing Hardwires is literally pants on head retarded.
Avatar
People have different reasons to play EVE. Not everyone starts EVE to go PvPing the first thing they do. I agree that those that DO want PvP day one are in for a big, boring surprise.Nevertheless, even if a newbie comes out in null to enjoy the hardships out here I still consider the attribute implants an option they have, not a mandatory thing that they have to have. And if they can survive in null they should be able to afford at least +2 very quickly in every pod they run. Yes, grinding has to be done to get that ISK, but that is how ISK is made for most people, even the bittervets.I want my EVE to be segregated, damnit! Noobs to the back of the bus, please!
Avatar
Introducing hardwiring for slots 1-5 can be done without removing attribute implants from EVE, and is in fact an excellent idea. That would force SP-whores like me to make yet another choice; hardwiring to boost my pvp or attribute implants to boost my SP/h.So I do not consider "freeing up slots 1-5 for hardwiring" a good argument for removing attribute implants.
Avatar
Wow, a ton of comments. My view is learning implants have their uses. Speaking personally, although I normally run in a clean clone, I have jump clone in empire with a head full of learning implants for when I'm AFG for more than a day.
Avatar
I disagree. While implants are useful, the risk of losing them adds to the flavor of the game. "Don't fly what you can't afford to lose" and all that. I agree that the jump clone issue is messed up, but you *can* join Estel Arador corporation for a few days to set up jump clones in a huge number of stations in high sec. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/w...
Avatar
I deliberately chose not to turn this into an F&I-style proposal because, really, that's not the intent of this article.
Avatar
1. How are having implants that speed up the training for newer players, who benefit far more from the increased speed than older players (as increases in effectiveness come faster at lower SP tiers), a barrier to entry in EVE? You mention later on in the comments that you would support or hope that CCP would flatly increase the attribute points, but with this not present in your article it actually constitutes a nerf to the new player experience. They would train all skills slower, with no valid way of "catching up", so to speak, to the years of implant-benefitted time of older players. The removal of the learning skills is not an equivalent task, as they required a new player to actually not train anything useful while they were training those skills, which is not the case with the learning implants.2. This also removes choice from the equation. While you cite in the comments the risk vs reward equation being broken in high-sec, do you believe that this allows one to extrapolate the removal of risk from other avenues in the game? It's strange that you seem to be promoting making the cold darkness of space a little nicer. I do wholeheartedly agree that this can act as a deterrent to pvp - but jump clones solve that problem for those that are severely risk adverse. They are not that hard to acquire, and in the span of things in EVE, the "luxury" of having them still needs to be earned - albeit in a fairly rapid manner if one uses the existing jump clone corps or a little longer if one grinds up standing. Effort = benefit in this case.3. "While losses should matter, learning implants are only a superficial loss that ultimately contribute nothing to gameplay." - Which losses DO contribute to gameplay? Does the ability to train a skill faster have no real worth in the scope of the game? I would think that training to fit and fly a ship well in a shorter span of time would be worth just as much if not more than 10% faster warp time or 5% more to a gunnery skill.Overall an article with promise, and as a newer player I think I agree with the premise implied by your article but just not explicitly stated - that they would be replaced and fixed by adding skill points to pilot's base attributes thus improving the new player experience. Unfortunately the article as it stands does little to back up its own points, makes jumps to conclusions that are not supported, and feels like an attempt to free up space to put in more hardwiring to improve the combat skills further of higher-SP pilots.
Avatar
First of all, jump clones are much easier to come by than you think. The rorqual has a clone vat bay that can give clones without even having to join the corporation. all you need to have is 20 million and an oz of gray matter.Second, comparing the implants to the learning skills is erroneous. The learning skills had very little opportunity cost, you couldnt lose them (if you had a clone that was up to date) and they had no drawback so there was no reason not to get them; neither of these cases apply to implants.Implants prevent you from putting in "sets" of implants. This is a drawback because the sets only provide a +3 bonus instead of the +4 that most people have and fly around with.Third, implants incentivize people to fly in low sec where they dont have to worry about losing their pod so they can use their expensive implants.Lastly, implants are not nearly as required or unfriendly to noobs as you would have people believe. With a good remap, +3 implants provide a 12% increase in training speed. That seems like a drastic difference until you realize that +2 implants are less than a million isk each and provide an 8% increase.Eve is all about risk - reward, and just how much risk you are willing to take,
Avatar
Incidentally, the longer a skill takes to train the more benefit one stands to gain from implants reducing that time.
Avatar
1. This is an opinion piece, not a proposal. Yes, if learning implants were removed, base attributes would need a bump.2. Jump clone corps work off of an (imo) broken mechanic that allows you to benefit from derived standings only by virtue of being in a corporation without affecting its standings by leaving before a week has passed.3. Indirectly penalizing/discouraging a core playstyle with slowed character progression is bad design. However, I'm not totally dead-set on the whole "add more combat hardwirings" thing considering that existing faction sets would still fill the use of the first 5 implant slots. More faction implant sets would be great - say, a faction set that increases capacitor amount. Not a fan of "shield slaves," though.
Avatar
<3I thoroughly agree that there is definitely a good reason to keep learning implants in the game. Without them catching pods would rarely be meaningful, new players would have much less to work towards and much less of a feel for how important it can actually be to train skills quickly... in short, I think that there are plenty of solid arguments to counter everything that was said in the article (and said by Andski here!) and I do not expect CCP to remove learning implants any time... yeah, any time.
Avatar
Veterans training alts are the ones who "benefit" the most from learning implants, they can put a full set of +5s into an alt and leave it sitting in a station for months skilling up on an optimized training plan. Learning implants are a bad thing for newbies that provide a huge amount of pressure to stay in high sec and PVE while skills training up....basically stagnating instead of trying new things like going out to null sec or PVP. Learning implants should be replaced with higher attributes or faster SP training for newbies.I think most veterans have forgotten what it's like to be a newbie who doesn't have fitting, capacitor and other support skills trained up. Every skill point matters, it's not a question of "enjoying what you can fly while waiting for the next ship" - due to lack of support skills newbies aren't really good at flying anything. The big training speed boosts available from an optimized plan and attribute remapping aren't relevant to newbies for some time because they need to switch training focus so often.Removing learning implants and replacing them with an across the board attribute boost (+4 or 5) or 3 months of doubled sp gain would be a huge boost. Newbies would be able to try out "high risk" play options without reducing their skill progression speed.
Avatar
I believe the learning implants should go away.All stats increased by 4.have a new set of implants for slot 1-5let +5 implants be +1 and +6 ne +2Let the high-grades give +2 and low-grades +1Make mindlink implants slot 1-2-3-4-5 so you can put in a whole bundle of them.This will boost the game for new players and that is a good thing.It will make the game less complex, and take nothing away that is of value
Avatar
Right now, implants fit that description, so cheap that everyone can use and replace them all the time, rendering them pointless as a tool in the first place. The only players put off by the cost are newbies wishing to take part in potentially dangerous activities who sit and spin their ship instead because the 'must use' implants are beyond their ability to replace.Temporary stat boosters mitigate this greatly.
Avatar
fewer people take the risk due to the implants.Remove Learning Implants.Make PVP implants for slot 1-5It is also beginner friendly as the new players will train faster for usable ships
Avatar
Certainly the more benefit from overall SP gain - but I think we can agree that the marginal gains to character utility are much lower at higher SP levels?
Avatar
Would you be willing to update the main article for clarity then? I think the premise is good - and deserves good representation in the main body of work, not in the comments. Either way, thanks for putting your .02 out there. See you in game!
Avatar
A full set of +3's is 45mil. A pair of +3's is 16mil. What newbee has that much isk his first two months? Ours get a free set of +3's, and are generally gifted some isk because we don't want them to have to worry about it. We have no trouble retaining newbees, much to the dismay of nullsec. We are talking in general about newbees who don't have assumed privilege.
Avatar
+3's are cost prohibitive for new players. They are about 45mil a set.
Avatar
I didn't argue that as a primary point or even a secondary. I strongly implied that I agree with andski. Learning Implants are systemically bad for the overall game. Learn to read intent in writing instead of injecting your own suppositions...
Avatar
This is not the commenting we want in this site.
Avatar
newer players can buy +1and+2s with out killing there wallets they dont need +3s.... and yes people in high sec can safely fly around in+5s implants but that also same about there 50bil nightmares.... so they should take there 50bil fail fitted nightmares cause its not "fair".... but yes its out dated mechanic and would love to see navy implants over just the pirate ones and the other odd ones... but is it worth the devs to do the work when corp roles and other things could be so much better thing to see finished
Avatar
Have to say this is such an unimportant subject to argue over.Getting rid of implants would certainly make me more happy to lose my pod (is that a good thing?).But the number one rule in EVE is dont fly what you cant afford to lose.Neither arguement is wrong its just that neither side really matters that much. Noobs shouldnt be flying round with +3 and greater implants if they want to pvp, but most noobs start off in pve anyway to learn. But equally requiring those implants is adding little to the game in comparison to +5 being standard none implant training level.The simple answer and the one CCP would sensibly follow is implants are a choise, therefore you can choose which way you prefer yourself, they dont have to divert dev work towards something thats not broken.
Avatar
exactly my thought. If learning implants are removed the next "risk averse inducing" thing can be removed aswell, faction mods, ships? Just leave it and let people have the choice. nullseccers made a choice to go there and risk their learning implants. Find a way to deal with your self-inflicted handicap - don't propose to nerf it for everybody else who didn't make that choice.PS And threatening to ban people becaues they have different opinions is very immature.peace.
Avatar
So get rid of learning implants. Keep the faction implants with ship bonuses minus the attribute bonuses.Add learning boosting programs: -Purchased for LP and isk. -Give +1 to +5 bonus to some or all attributes -Only work for a month or so. -Keep working after being podded.This woul keep or improve the isk sink, and removes the penalty for certain kinds of PvP. Rich people who play more can afford better ones but that's how it should be.I would also implement this with a change to clone costs that are dramatically reduced and with the option upon being podded to auto buy the clone you need to cover your current skill points.
Avatar
Ok. Here goes. First post on here. Flatly speaking, I have been paying attention to this site for a week or two, and it essentially comes to one thing. Null Seccers want less carebears and more pvpers to fuel their war machines and their fun. I have no problem with that. However, there is the fact that for all of the crying and bitching that they do, the Null Seccers are the instruments of their own frustration. The main problem, I agree, is game mechanics. Eve is a tough game, often boring. There are points where risk and reward to not mesh (clone costs and the like). I would even go so far to say that there are times when 'learning implants' could be a crutch. Especially to the new player.However, just as with several groups in Eve, the ones who are doing the bellyaching, are again, not looking at their own contribution. Firstly, Super Coalitions. Alliances that are extremely huge with 10 allied Alliances helping them to maintain a stranglehold on a single very important resource breeds stagnation. How can this be you ask? Simple. Even though it can cause a group of alliances to rise up and fight, thus breeding conflict, it becomes less a game of risk vs. reward, and a battle of wallets. I would say that if I controlled several regions of space, that I would put my most skilled persons on the borders, effectively securing the internal space. As I get further in toward my central base, The pilot skill would decrease, until I have newbs I am training at home. Which, is essentially the very design that eve has within the game for newbies and npc corps (to a degree) within empire space.I will admit that My ventures into pvp have been forced with a need to defend what is mine, and have been purely retaliatory. I would not classify myself as a care bear, though some might. That being said, there is very little incentive for me to leave hi-sec until I am 'ready'. There are people who will prolong 'ready' indefinitely, as is their choice. These are true care bears. There are those who actually do the research, set a goal, and in a blaze of gunfire and missiles that lasts for a week, have made it big in the PvP world. To the detriment of their standings. Thus, they are now stuck. They have to start a trading alt. Now they have two accounts to support. They are only a month old.Next, you have the elitism. 'We won't let you join our gang, because even though you can do decent, you can't do uber. We want you to have all tech two/faction/pirate'. Ok. So, to qualify you need:Weapons Skills to 5Engineering Skills to 4 or 5Mechanics Skills to 4 or 5Science Skills to 4 or 5Piloting skills to 5Navigation skills to 4 or 5 (depending)And many more. We are talking at least 2 to 3 months. Of course, that may just be my personal experience, and of course that is fully dependent upon which role you attempt to fill. All things considered, I would say that the attitude and thinking patterns of the elitist bittervet maybe needs to change, along with some serious overhaul in game mechanics.Until such a time as these two things occur, then maybe you all should deal with the ramifications of your whole power consolidation moves and market engineering practices, and leave the care bears alone. After all, I highly doubt CCP would have instituted the mining barge changes if GS hadn't forced their hand in the matter. Because Hulkageddon made it completely apparent that mining barges and the like were just too squishy, and that the risk did not meet the reward.Maybe null sec could be reignited once again by everyone abandoning their stable power blocs, and starting fights with their neighbors.
Avatar
I believe that taking out learning implants is a bad idea. Learning implants are a great mechanic in this game adding yet another large risk/reward option. I wont lie, I do believe that for this game to sustain itself there needs to be a mechanic that gives young players the ability to compete. Learning implants effect every player in the same way. WE all know that living in high sec/low sec is a safer game style then living in 0.0. A high sec player may skill faster then us because he is safe enough to fly in his all +5 implant clone. However, that same high sec player does not get the option to fly in large Alliance scale SOV battles. Also, for the most part, the isk that a high sec/low sec player gets is lower then that of a 0.0 player. In fact this entire article is based off a risk free, instant gratification play style. You seem to think that complexity in a game is a bad thing, and you insult the people that enjoy the challenges of living in 0.0. As a pvp game, being able to decide if I want to gain XP at a slower rate, spend more isk when I die, or learn to not die as much, is a huge choice. I love it. These types of risk/reward situations is what drive many of us pvpers to continue in this game. Advancing to the point where we are skilled as a pilot enough to roam and terrorize 0.0 in expensive ships and pods is an awesome accomplishment. In this game that takes time, a lot of time, but we shouldn't Nerf the game so you can continue to be a horrible pilot and continue to lose ships/pods all the time.Also, after reading this article and the comments by the author as he responded to other readers. I find this site quickly becoming EVEnews24/Kugu. Not only does he insult anyone in the article who disagrees with his thoughts, he continues his ti raid on the cementers. "Don't use them if you don't like them" isn't a good argument. Do a little better and I won't ban you!I recant my threat and I'll just leave him be to make all these comments about an idea that apparently removes all risk from the game and makes losses irrelevant, just so that better minds can laugh~ "Who are you to decide what a good argument is? " While losses should matter, learning implants are only a superficial loss that ultimately contribute nothing to gameplay."Who deemed the superficial? Would you consider skills to be superficial, or optional? Everything in this game takes skills, these implants can take a few hours to even days off a skill Que. I dont find that to be "superficial" at any XP level. As for the second line there, your article is about doing exactly that, removing a part of the risk/reward from the game, therefore making your loss/my kill less important.
Avatar
+1 100% agree
Avatar
I have a 120m SP clone and it's really not that expensive.
Avatar
My character just hit the 2-month milestone. Crested 2B isk prior to purchasing a CNR and outfitting earlier this week. In my opinion ISK is not hard to obtain even for newer players - please stop using us as a crutch for this argument. I would love to see an opinion from an actual new player who found the mechanic difficult or troublesome, instead of all of these older players who are trying to look out for what they think is in our best interests.
Avatar
If people really want complexity, just allow us the option to buy permanent implants that can't be destroyed, but are expensive, so we don't lose them each time we die on a nullsec fleet.but hey, I would prefer them removed totally honestly.
Avatar
It's a noble sentiment, but that's all it is.The main trouble with this approach to "helping" others, is that it treats other players as a means to an ends, rather than as an ends in themselves. That's fine for meta conflict, but bad for design policy.
Avatar
A thread about risk averse goons complaining why their implants aren't covered by srp!Just a bounch of freeloaders! Stop making the game easy!
Avatar
Please consign unconsctructive and valueless posts to other sites.
Avatar
Many of you have missed the true idea. And the true reality that is eve. People don't care about losing ships...but they care about losing pods. Everyone has heard, "I'm not joining this op because I have +4's" is very common. It's hurting newer people playing eve because it will take them longer to be able to do more fun things in eve. I wonder what would happen to all you elitest "Noobs need to stay in HS" mentalities if you had to start eve over with a new character and no money...if you'd continue to play the game. I highly doubt it. Most people do not "risk averse" ships at all. The issue is, as a veteran player with a good salary base, I can have a much better alt than a newbie because I can afford better implants.Remember one thing...people subscribe and unsubscribe every day. Eventually everyone retires from the game. If you continue to make it harder for new players, then eventually the game dies, forcing everyone into early retirement.Personally, I would LOVE to have 10 slots for skill hardwiring. In fact, you guys complaining about pod kills not being worth it anymore, it would actually probably end up being the opposite as more people would probably hardwire since they didn't have to waste their money on a +5 jc in HS. You fail to see the bigger picture just because you want to keep your advantage over noobies. You should always take a step back in any argument and look at it from a different perspective. The author is correct...this would invigorate the economy as more people would be out there fighting and losing ships. It amazes me how many people fail to understand the link between human psychology and economics. I person with 10 million will never spend as much as 10 people with 1 million each

Learning implants have been a fixture in EVE since the release of the game. Known in-game as “attribute enhancers,” they are purchased and plugged in by a player in order to enhance the speed of skill training. While attributes encourage specialization - a good thing - implants only discourage gameplay. They are superfluous in a game where specializing in a certain ship for a certain role takes months on its own.

Essentially, learning implants are a relic. When learning skills existed, learning implants allowed players to increase those attributes in order to train skills faster. The elimination of that skill group was long overdue - eliminating learning implants should be the logical next step. While many players would oppose such a change because they want every bit of superficial complexity in the game - perhaps due to some need for meaning which demands they pat themselves on the back for playing a spreadsheet game they deem "complex" - it only makes sense that they should be eliminated and replaced by more combat hardwirings.

Some players may have a jump clone with +5 learning implants in an NPC station where skillbooks are sold through NPC sell orders. However, jump clones are largely inaccessible to players who do not have the faction standings required for them, are not in a corporation with the necessary standings, or lack an office in a conquerable station. While it is possible to join corporations that exist for the express purpose of giving players access to jump clones, such a task is largely onerous solely for the sake of keeping an implanted clone “safe.”

One could argue that jump clones should be made more accessible, perhaps with reduced timers. However, this would open a can of worms: allowing the strategic placement of jump clones which would enable an alliance to run multiple campaigns at once while being able to respond more quickly to attacks on allies. While the jump clone timer should be slightly reduced to prevent schedule creep, it should not be reduced so much that the commitment aspect of clone jumping is removed. Making jump clones more accessible would be a step in the right direction, but it only addresses a symptom of the greater problem.

Newbies are generally encouraged to buy sets of +3 implants to speed up their skill training. Without a support network of older players, even the paltry cost of such a set is substantial to the new player who is surprised when his wallet reaches nine digits after mining or running missions for weeks on end. This “expensive” set of implants contributes to a risk-averse attitude where the new player is afraid of ever leaving the supposed safety of highsec and finds himself leaving the game when this presumption of safety turns out to be untrue. While losses should matter, learning implants are only a superficial loss that ultimately contribute nothing to gameplay.

Empire players tend to have a huge advantage in this regard - they can do virtually everything with a full +5s and hardwirings since pods can warp out almost instantly in the event that they lose a ship, and NPCs never shoot pods in any case. Players in nullsec generally find themselves with implants that speed up the skills they may be training at that time and inexpensive hardwirings, simply because losing a pod is nearly inevitable after losing a ship when bubbled.

For these reasons, learning implants should be eliminated from the game.  This would simultaneously constitute one of the most significant improvements to the new player experience, and a necessary step towards removing outdated and unnecessary cruft from the game. While it would also constitute the removal of a significant “isk sink,” as they are sourced from LP stores, that alone does not justify staying in the game. 

[name_1]
I write and proofread for TM.com. My focus is largely on EVE's new player experience and nullsec-related topics. If you wish to contact me, my Twitter account is @EVEAndski.