Skill extractors & mechanics Question


(CongO Din0) #1

Hello,
I was curious if this mechanic existed or could be thought about.

When useing a skill extractor and taking out 500k sp, is it possible to inject that 500k right back into the same character but in a different skill? Without the Sp total penalty?
I.E. skill point reassignment? With the cost of moving 500k sp being x1 skill extractor???

Thoughts?

Fly Dangerously,
Congo Din0


(Daichi Yamato) #2

Why would it going back into the same character change anything?

So people can extract and inject into whatever ships are op this season?


(Wander Prian) #3

The skill penalty is there just for this particular reason. You cannot just reskill your character to the FOTM without a loss. Yes, you will lose the skillpoints depending on how much you have and no, it’s not going away.


(Old Pervert) #4

I like the SP loss that the OP describes. While I was closing this topic without intent to comment (as the previous two said all that there was to say) I realized something.

CCP sells extractors.

Imagine how many more of them they’d sell if players could remap their SP without penalty (or even a small one). That would probably greatly disrupt both the plex and extractor markets, with a significant increase in demand.

More income for CCP is never a bad thing.


(Nevyn Auscent) #5

Yes it is if it compromises game play and the sandbox too much. And instant FOTM would massively disrupt both.


(Old Pervert) #6

There exists a cure for every form of terminal cancer on the planet.

That cure is the very cancer that is incurable, in that the cancer effectively kills itself along with its host.

When T3Ds were at their worst, imagine corps and alliances could simply say “okay, everyone re-skill into svipuls”.

Would svipuls really be cancer at that point? You’d most likely run into another svipul gang, at which point, it’s an apples to apples fight.

FOTM only works when it’s imba and certain stubborn individuals refuse to fly them (and then complain that said FOTM ships are too imba).


(Nevyn Auscent) #7

So where do these magical extractors come from? They have to be bought somehow which means you also have to be able to afford it. And you have to have the SP spare to extract that aren’t needed for another thing.
So your proposal empowers the super rich to win all their fights and get richer, while anyone who can’t afford the FOTM ends up getting even poorer because they constantly lose.
Oh look, you’ve just made EVE an actually P2W game.


(Old Pervert) #8

How long were T3Ds (svipuls)? More than a month? How about 5 months? (genuine question, I honestly don’t remember how long they were retardedly OP). 3 extractors would certainly get you into one. That’s really not expensive. Yea I’d feel a billon isk expense, but it would only take me a week to get it back so meh?

The only people who would really struggle with it are the hisec scrubs that nobody cares about anyways. Anyone in low or null could easily finance a doctrine change every 3 months, if it only cost them 3 extractors.

Meanwhile, the boon of money for CCP gives them more resources to produce more content generators, better balance, etc. Heck, it could be that they fix FOTM issues well before anyone decides to invest the isk in a doctrine change, if they had more staff.


(Nevyn Auscent) #9

And that right there says all that needs to be said about how biased your attitude is and why it would be bad for the game.


(Old Pervert) #10

Eve is a PVP game. This straight from the devs. You know… the people who made the game? Sure you can do PVE content, but ultimately Eve is a PVP game where your dreams are supposed to be crushed.

The people who stay in hisec because they’re afraid of or wish to avoid pvp should have exactly zero say, because they have zero stake.

And I should also point out that the hisec scrubs would be unaffected, unless CCP somehow makes it benefitial for hisec gankers to inject new doctrines (unlikely at best).

Anyone in low or null that actually lives by a doctrine should have no problems coming up with isk for the occasional doctrine change.