And via the ESI thus you could write to the API and do whatever training strategy you wish, and I would imagine EveMon would consume that API too.
You could knock up a strategy in Powershell in minutes to hours. You could knock up one in a spreadsheet and have it calculate one for you then post it into the ESI API. You could have it analyse your kills and losses and determine how to improve your training and then apply that.
Also no login rewards for that approach which I am fine with, only reward those that log in and play the game not by using an app.
Thing that gets me is in a game of âspreadsheetsâ that this is sounding like a tearing up of a spreadsheet and throwing it out.
Maybe a minor tweak to the system such as in the remaps department would be warranted. Anything more is just a bit risky at this stage of the game. Skill plans and que management has been one of the parts of the game that has kept me invested long term.
I hope theres sand left in the sandbox at the end of the day.
yup! I stayed subbed for 2 years when I was on an eve break to keep skills training. I forgot to redo my queue every now and then and a gm gave each of my characters close to 7m sp! It was great.
Letâs be honest here though - CCP has clearly been going down the âmanipulationâ route for years now, and has virtually given up entirely on trying to make the game a truly better gaming experience.
Whether they should or not, CCP has stepped forward clearly in favor of âwe want more accounts logging in more oftenâ. I think given the trend of daily logins (noticeably downward) itâs clear why they feel the need to do this.
Gerard is arguing âbut I like it the AFK wayâ and Etch is proposing âbut this way makes more sense for the playersâ but all CCP cares about is âwhich cheap, easy method can we use to push players towards more logins, more often, and engaging in the activities we set out for them?â.
If you guessed âletâs dumb down the system, provide more instant gratification, add some FOMO if you donât log in every day, and toss some pay-to-progress in on topâ, then ding-ding-ding! Give the man a refreshing Quafe soda!
If people hope to steer this design decision (likely already made 3 months ago), then theyâd best give up entirely on âwhat works best for me/for players/for newbiesâ and plan on âCCP is going to do whatâs best for their metrics and/or their curious ideas on player retention and monetization. How can I take their most likely approach and tweak it so itâs at least slightly more palatable to the player base?â.
CCP will happily introduce a system we hate, and then say âHey if you donât like it, maybe EVE just isnât for youâ. (Please see player trends over the past 10 years and wonder why CCP clings to this approach.)
Our choices are to either jump aboard their bandwagon and hope to steer it a tiny bit in our preferred direction, or wait until they announce another horrible snafu and join the mass protest to slam in some rushed âfixesâ after pissing off half the player base (again).
Because i understand WHY you want it. You want AND the increased learning speed AND not run the risk, low effort everything easy, no choice required, donât have to think about it.
And i disagree with that âmake everything easyâ train of thought, in fact to me itâs at the basis of most of EVEâs issues. Catering to the lazy, the unwilling.
I think youâve misunderstood again, in your rush to claim everyone but you is a lazy idiot who just wants brain-free gameplay.
From the replies Orika Saken made, I expect they mean they would like learning implants removed, because then they wonât have to use learning implants in a clone to keep their SP gain rate competitive with other players who do use learning implants.
Since thereâs no competitive disadvantage if theyâre removed entirely, a player could focus on using clones with practical implants that affect their active gameplay, rather than their passive SP gain.
You, of course, will come down on the side that says âevery clumsy, awkward game mechanism that impedes actual gameplay but forces players to make a choice about what level of inconvenience theyâre willing to face in order to minimize negative consequences is good for the gameâ.
Youâve got CCPâs attitude that forcing players to choose between a variety of inconvenient, slow, clumsy options represents âsmart and thought-provokingâ gameplay. That takes âeffortâ and âskillâ to manage so that only the strongest and smartest remain.
Thatâs not the case though. All it means is the game retains mostly the slower, pedantic, detail-obsessers and continually loses more action-oriented players. As can clearly be seen.
Game choices that are awkward, intrusive, and continually get between you and active gameplay arenât âinterestingâ choices that encourage âsmartâ gameplay. Theyâre simply reasons to go play something else.
I still havenât seen any actual description of what is changing or what it is changing to. So I still donât know whether to be annoyed or notâŚbut given how much CCP have moved the goal posts even within the 8 months I have been in Eve, I suspect I will be.
This particular noob is not impressed by all the changes supposedly designed to help noobs.
So like I said, AND easy AND all the gains. Because then you donât have to think about it and you can be as risk averse as you want to be while still getting the full gains. Thank you for agreeing with me.
Also:
Youâre not competing with other players for SP. Youâre trying to find an equilibrium between oneâs Fear Of Missing Out and the risk one runs. And as with all carebears they canât handle missing out but they are also risk averse and lazy so instead of running a risk or at the very least make their own choices on it they want the game to make that choice for them so they donât have to think about it, while at the same time not missing out.
Learning implants use slot 1-5, the normal gameplay affecting ones use 6-10 so there is almost no overlap and the skill hardwiring use 1-6 but they also give attribute bonuses. Your statement makes no sense unless you mean +5 but then âimplants that affect their active gameplayâ wouldnât apply.
Yeah, choice. It kinda matters. You can always choose to not use them if you donât lik⌠Ooooh wait, fomo and risk averse. Riiiiight.
Itâs not awkward at all, you use implants or you donât and IF you use them you kinda want to balance gains vs risk, kinda like⌠I dunno, risk vs reward? Isnât that what EVE kinda is, why yes it is!
Why not leave as is and just give new players the core fitting skills?
I know the issue of expensive implants preventing people partaking in PvP, been there myself. Which is why I trained up my alts so it does not impact me, currently have Dracvlad in +5âs to train two very long skills both 40 day plus trains on base character training speed, and if I had to rely on this character to do stuff I would be frustrated, but Lucas did the business.
It is this issue that puts a block in newer players decision whether to fight or not, and often people say nah, wonât risk it. You can jump up and down, scream in their faces that they are nasty carebears that donât get Eve, but still they decide not to partake so, there you go. Removing the road blocks to participation in PvP is a good thing imo.
But yeah it dumbs down Eve a bit. I am on the fence with thisâŚ
NB. Seems to have triggered someone. Let me correct something, core fitting skills to level 4 and not fully trained. But really I would just leave it as is. Still it funny to see certain people get so emotional about it.
