Ok So Its plain and simple really, Higher SP characters can extract their own SP at the normal rate but when you inject it again to use on something else you take a massive hit. My idea would be one that can be used to extract SP from level 5 skills and then re-inject at the same rate as what was removed. To keep it balanced it would have the following restrictions:
Only 1 per day - Keeps someone from rapidly reskilling to a specific scenario then skilling back.
Can only be injected into the same character they originated from. - Prevents abuse
Available from PLEX store. - To allow players in restricted locations such as WH space and NullSec to have access.
Plain and simply put I understand the penalty for using a skill injector on a high SP character, but if you are simply reallocating your own skill points that you have already paid the time to earn you shouldn’t have to loose half of them to do so.
Uses existing extractors/injectors to fulfill your need. Skill extractors are still very expensive so it’s not as if this would break metas or make it ‘too easy’ for people to switch to the ‘meta of the month’.
If something like this were to happen, I’d say instead of creating something to inject back into the character like a skill injector, it just takes the extracted SPs and dumps them directly into the character’s unallocated SP pool. Prevents abuse, and easier in terms of mechanics (i.e. no need to permanently link an item to a particular character).
I could maybe get behind this idea if it also included a penalty for high SP characters like skill injectors get. Not quite as high perhaps, maybe only 75% of the penalty for injectors, but there should definitely be some penalty for remapping your skills, and it should get worse the higher your SP total.
Overall, I give this a “meh” rating. Not really needed, and once you balance it properly it’s not really all that different from skill injectors.
That is a good point. Perhaps a compromise could be a reduced penalty for re-injection rather than no penalty at all. So for example right now the efficiency for injecting at the 150k tier is 30%, but if you were re-injecting it could be (as an example) 60% - so the penalty drops from 70% to 40% but is still there.
Also, it’s worth considering that even in the case of lolololololol-rich alliances constantly changing SP to adjust for meta, this is still sinking ISK that could have gone into ships, POSes, etc, so there would have to be a point at which enough is enough and this would no longer be desirable regardless of what the penalty is on the basis of the price of skill extractors combined with the scale at which this would take place. In the end, it’s not as if there’s a net increase in SP anyway; ISK is burned and SP is the same at no penalty or lost with penalty.
At 150 mil SP there is literally zero reason to “re-allocate” anything as you can use pretty much any ship and module. And re-allocating capital/supercapital-related skills should come at a price.
With respect, this is far from true in general, and even less true for indy pilots looking to cross over into combat (or vice versa). Characters heavily specialized in just one domain are at a severe disadvantage, with respect to skill injectors, if they are looking to crossover into a different domain without making use of a different Omega char on its own account or using MPTCs because they’ll be at the 150k tier even if their skills are minimal with respect to the new domain they want to expand into.
Even if your premise were true, it doesn’t change the fact that many players, rich or not, would love to have skill injectors/reallocators to advance their skill objectives.
Highly specialized characters are just that. They usually dont have many SP and generally there isnt much penalty to extract and re-inject that amount either in the same character or a new one. Exactly what you wanted. So your point and suggestion as a whole are moot.
Not everyone wants to have different characters/accounts for different things, especially when this decision is imposed on them. While I agree to a large extent this is the way things should be, I do believe there is room for compromise, which is why I proposed a reduced penalty for re-injection rather than full penalty or no penalty. I don’t expect that everyone or even most will support the idea, but I think it’s worth discussing and fleshing out before getting a final yay-or-nay.
an agreement or settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.
settle a dispute by mutual concession.
expediently accept standards that are lower than is desirable.
There is no dispute. The penalty exists for a reason and giving people the option to avoid it is a no-go. CCP is in no position requiring them to make any concessions to anyone at all. Calling it a “compromise” shows that you believe that there’s an issue where there is none.
