Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
33
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 20:52:26 -
[1] - Quote
Rather than having skill point loss for a Tech 3 ship when podded make it so that it requires an expensive implant that is required to use the ship. This encourages players to use more Tech 3 ships without the fear of SP loss. |
Zmikund
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
48
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 20:54:29 -
[2] - Quote
Losing skillpoints when you die in ship is stupid, CCP should get rid of it ... its main reason why so many ppl dont want to fly/skill to max theese hulls ... |
Lugh Crow-Slave
244
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 21:32:56 -
[3] - Quote
Zmikund wrote:Losing skillpoints when you die in ship is stupid, CCP should get rid of it ... its main reason why so many ppl dont want to fly/skill to max theese hulls ...
It's the main reason i fly them losing them isk wise isn't a problem but if it means an extra 21hrs of training suddenly a little risk is tossed back in. you remove the SP lose the odd hero railgu fleet will become much much more standard as its easy to get a pilot into and SRPed ship but their is no way for an alliance to replace SP
also i know this exact idea has come up b4 and the wording is way to close for this to just be a search fail |
Ama Scelesta
158
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 21:40:48 -
[4] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote:Rather than having skill point loss for a Tech 3 ship when it gets blown up, make it so that it requires an expensive implant that is required to use the ship. This encourages players to use more Tech 3 ships without the fear of SP loss. Losing SP might be stupid or not, but you're talking about adding a totally pointless tax to flying these ships. That is stupid and certainly not something CCP should be implementing no matter what they do or don't do with the SP loss. T3 ships are already popular and incredibly powerful, so I don't see any dramatic need to get more people to fly them. Anyone with a spine already does when the need arises.
Zmikund wrote:Losing skillpoints when you die in ship is stupid, CCP should get rid of it ... its main reason why so many ppl dont want to fly/skill to max theese hulls ... How many is that and is that a problem? I don't mean to be an ass, but stating it is a widely spread problem doesn't mean it is. The SP loss is also intended to be a deterrent to their casual use, so saying it functions as a deterrent to their casual use might not make a good case for a change. You might not want the change anyway, since the reason they are powerful ships is because there is a unique cost to losing them. Cost initially designed to be heavy in an environment where money doesn't mean anything to some people anymore. SP on the other hand always tends to have value. If you remove that unique cost, you are likely going to see a corresponding nerf to their abilities or some other heavy deterrent to their common use. What is unlikely to happen is the outright removal of the SP loss with no further changes unless you can make a really compelling case why it would be good and why the current situation is harmful. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1731
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 22:27:59 -
[5] - Quote
First T3 Cruisers need a massive nerf stick to their most powerful Subs. They are currently vastly out of balance with the rest of the game and do not actually fit where CCP want T3's to fit. So the skill loss is needed as some sort of balance while this situation lasts. If the tactical destroyers 'modes' works well and CCP apply this to T3 cruisers to bring them back into balance as well, and they are no longer more powerful than T2/Pirate then the skill loss can go away. |
Ix Method
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
344
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 22:36:33 -
[6] - Quote
If the new T3 is anything to go by this will all be kinda moot. T3s with a few interesting specialties rather than ******* stupid Tank/Gank probably won't need such brick walls to restrict their use.
Travelling at the speed of love.
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
544
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 23:02:41 -
[7] - Quote
so I have to pull an implant (or hardwire, to be nit picky they are different and we could have the grey area of slot 6 to debate what it is since it can take omegas or hardwires) if I want to fly a t3?
My t3 clones runs full set implants. And hardwires in slots 7-10. All carefully chosen.
Or are we getting a slot 11 for this because otherwise for many pilots this is a nerf more than a benefit really. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
494
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 23:07:24 -
[8] - Quote
Ama Scelesta wrote: -snip- Anyone with a spine already does when the need arises..
Pweese, giva mah spine, don't have one
signature
|
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
33
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 23:34:09 -
[9] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:so I have to pull an implant (or hardwire, to be nit picky they are different and we could have the grey area of slot 6 to debate what it is since it can take omegas or hardwires) if I want to fly a t3?
My t3 clones runs full set implants. And hardwires in slots 7-10. All carefully chosen.
Or are we getting a slot 11 for this because otherwise for many pilots this is a nerf more than a benefit really.
Good question. I was thinking along the lines of a slot 11. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2011
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 00:15:39 -
[10] - Quote
Howabout make a SP dump skill you can train at any time (same attributes as the subsystem skills) which can store unlimited SP for the purpose of being available when you lose SP--it'll take from the dump skill first to prevent you from losing a level of the skill if you have enough SP stored. That way you still spend SP but you don't have to lose any skill levels when it happens.
There are plenty of pilots out there who have nothing important left to train. I don't want to see the SP loss removed until the strategic cruisers receive heavy nerfs and are no longer overpowered. The first thing to nerf is their insane EHP--either cut those resists to t1 or cut the base HP a lot. (I'd go with the first option)
Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance)
"What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk
|
|
Leonard Nimoy II
Dark Force Protectorate Special Operators Federation Alliance
95
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 00:34:03 -
[11] - Quote
i actually think losing SP for t3 losses is good.....the only reason I say that is that the subsystem skills really aren't a lot of training. Lvl 5 only takes like 4.5 days, and that's without any implants. |
Saisin
State War Academy Caldari State
198
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 10:21:06 -
[12] - Quote
I d o not think the SP loss should be removed.
The only thing I can think to make it possible to train to level V on t3 subsystems would be that the game automatically removes the lowest level of subsystem training when the T3 is detroyed. This way players could still train to lvl 5 and choose the subsystem that would be taking the SP hit on loss, instead of it being random, and it would also specialize pilots in their selected subsyetms and make it reasonable to train some subsystems to lvl 5...
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope...
|
Syrias Bizniz
Krautfleet
387
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 11:21:44 -
[13] - Quote
Saisin wrote:I d o not think the SP loss should be removed.
The only thing I can think to make it possible to train to level V on t3 subsystems would be that the game automatically removes the lowest level of subsystem training when the T3 is detroyed. This way players could still train to lvl 5 and choose the subsystem that would be taking the SP hit on loss, instead of it being random, and it would also specialize pilots in their selected subsyetms and make it reasonable to train some subsystems to lvl 5...
I don't like the idea of giving people a ship that is so versatile, and then make them do a decision on which part of that ship they never ever intend to use.
Remove Skillpoint loss, crank up the Ranks of the skills, and separate the Subsystem bonuses into per level of STRATEGIC CRUISER and per level of SUBSYSTEM.
Thus, maxing these things costs a lot more SP and time, and they're not the replacement for all Tech 2 ships at a fraction of the SP you need for the Tech 2s anymore. |
Medalyn Isis
Aliastra Gallente Federation
448
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 12:18:03 -
[14] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:First T3 Cruisers need a massive nerf stick to their most powerful Subs. They are currently vastly out of balance with the rest of the game and do not actually fit where CCP want T3's to fit. So the skill loss is needed as some sort of balance while this situation lasts. If the tactical destroyers 'modes' works well and CCP apply this to T3 cruisers to bring them back into balance as well, and they are no longer more powerful than T2/Pirate then the skill loss can go away. Please shoot yourself for even suggesting such a horrific proposal. |
Medalyn Isis
Aliastra Gallente Federation
448
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 12:27:41 -
[15] - Quote
With the recent buffs to other ships, I find T3s at the moment fulfil their roles perfectly atm and actually are in a perfect position balance wise. Some of the sub systems could be toned down slightly and others improved, but generally they match up well with T"2 ships, with T2 being better in some areas and T3 having more flexibility and a few ace cards of their own such as EHP, although at a massive increase in cost.
Right now T3s are in a perfect balance I find, they are viable in a great many roles, although you will still get a lot more bang for the buck, and also a more focused approach in a specific area with a specialised T2 ship.
Also quit complaining about SP loss and just suck it up. There should be more ways to lose SP in this game, not less. |
Syrias Bizniz
Krautfleet
387
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 13:36:01 -
[16] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:With the recent buffs to other ships, I find T3s at the moment fulfil their roles perfectly atm and actually are in a perfect position balance wise. Some of the sub systems could be toned down slightly and others improved, but generally they match up well with T"2 ships, with T2 being better in some areas and T3 having more flexibility and a few ace cards of their own such as EHP, although at a massive increase in cost.
Right now T3s are in a perfect balance I find, they are viable in a great many roles, although you will still get a lot more bang for the buck, and also a more focused approach in a specific area with a specialised T2 ship.
Also quit complaining about SP loss and just suck it up. There should be more ways to lose SP in this game, not less.
Imo, they are too easy to train in. You basically invest the time required for a 5x SKill to V, and you suddenly got the CovOps Recon Hac with nullification.
So, i'd suggets beefing up SP requirements, maybe some minor adjustments within the subsystems so all of them have a purpose and not half is horrible, half is mandatory.
And with the Pod changes incoming, i feel there doesn't need to be any way to lose SP anymore.
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
70
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 14:18:35 -
[17] - Quote
Zmikund wrote:Losing skillpoints when you die in ship is stupid, CCP should get rid of it ... its main reason why so many ppl dont want to fly/skill to max theese hulls ...
Then that's up to them.. if you what to get the max out your ship there is a disadvantage if you die (4days of retraining a skill) I don't see this to be that bad to say you cam make T3's into well loads of useful things. |
Vibrance Sovereign
Sovereign Fleet Tax Shelter
3
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 14:23:54 -
[18] - Quote
They could continue this business with the "fatigue" timers...
T3 interfacing fatigue... the more you die in them, the longer you have to recover before you sit in another T3. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Forged of Fire
660
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 14:45:10 -
[19] - Quote
Vibrance Sovereign wrote:They could continue this business with the "fatigue" timers...
T3 interfacing fatigue... the more you die in them, the longer you have to recover before you sit in another T3.
Terrible mechanic.
T3's should keep current resistances, but have the buffer defense subs nerfed. That would bring them in line, without ruining them.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
|
Gawain Edmond
Angry Mustellid The Periphery
142
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 14:49:49 -
[20] - Quote
Vibrance Sovereign wrote:They could continue this business with the "fatigue" timers...
T3 interfacing fatigue... the more you die in them, the longer you have to recover before you sit in another T3.
Didn't someone suggest this idea for pod loss recently too? it's a terrible idea.... it wasn't you was it? Making it so someone can't play the game is a bad idea. That is all that does and will never and should never be implimented. |
|
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
3129
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 14:51:38 -
[21] - Quote
I'd rather retrain subsystems to 4 (or the occasional 5) than pay market prices for an expensive implant again and again. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
802
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 14:51:44 -
[22] - Quote
How about a cut scene where a sleeper agent runs up to the pilots new clone vat and gives them a hefty kick in the groin just before they wake up...the pilot will either be distracted by wincing or laughing for a good 5 minutes... |
Faren Shalni
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
78
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 17:28:28 -
[23] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Vibrance Sovereign wrote:They could continue this business with the "fatigue" timers...
T3 interfacing fatigue... the more you die in them, the longer you have to recover before you sit in another T3. Terrible mechanic. T3's should keep current resistances, but have the buffer defense subs nerfed. That would bring them in line, without ruining them.
Finally someone who makes sense
So Much Space
|
Medalyn Isis
Aliastra Gallente Federation
449
|
Posted - 2014.12.02 11:41:54 -
[24] - Quote
Syrias Bizniz wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:With the recent buffs to other ships, I find T3s at the moment fulfil their roles perfectly atm and actually are in a perfect position balance wise. Some of the sub systems could be toned down slightly and others improved, but generally they match up well with T"2 ships, with T2 being better in some areas and T3 having more flexibility and a few ace cards of their own such as EHP, although at a massive increase in cost.
Right now T3s are in a perfect balance I find, they are viable in a great many roles, although you will still get a lot more bang for the buck, and also a more focused approach in a specific area with a specialised T2 ship.
Also quit complaining about SP loss and just suck it up. There should be more ways to lose SP in this game, not less. Imo, they are too easy to train in. You basically invest the time required for a 5x SKill to V, and you suddenly got the CovOps Recon Hac with nullification. Yes, I agree with you on that one. when I see 2014 players flying with T3s it seems a bit odd.
|
Medalyn Isis
Aliastra Gallente Federation
449
|
Posted - 2014.12.02 11:42:41 -
[25] - Quote
Faren Shalni wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Vibrance Sovereign wrote:They could continue this business with the "fatigue" timers...
T3 interfacing fatigue... the more you die in them, the longer you have to recover before you sit in another T3. Terrible mechanic. T3's should keep current resistances, but have the buffer defense subs nerfed. That would bring them in line, without ruining them. Finally someone who makes sense Yes, just the buffer resists are the ones which need toning down slightly. The others need improvements or being left as is. |
Vibrance Sovereign
Sovereign Fleet Tax Shelter
3
|
Posted - 2014.12.02 12:37:40 -
[26] - Quote
Gawain Edmond wrote:Vibrance Sovereign wrote:They could continue this business with the "fatigue" timers...
T3 interfacing fatigue... the more you die in them, the longer you have to recover before you sit in another T3. Didn't someone suggest this idea for pod loss recently too? it's a terrible idea.... it wasn't you was it? Making it so someone can't play the game is a bad idea. That is all that does and will never and should never be implimented.
Nope, wasn't me, and I'm not going to staunchly argue for it either, it was just a thought.
It wouldn't make it so you "can't play the game". It would just mean you have to use a T1 or T2 for a while. Just like as it currently is, you can't use your T3 as well as before (loss of a skill level).
We could modify the "fatigue" idea, and have "fatigue" impose penalties on your ship, sort of like the penalties you suffer in an incursion system before hte bar is ground down.
Thus after you die, and you sit in a T3, it won't perform as well - which is the way it is now. The penalty goes away with time - which is the way it is now (assuming you have an active skill queue to reskill what you lost). The difference would be that it doesn't cost you training time.
Lose a T3 -> T3 interfacing effect bar goes to max, suffer penalties to DPS and EHP. Fatigue can build up like jump timers, so that the effect bar takes longer to disappate after death.
SImilar effects to current system, no SP loss. |
Igor Nappi
Perkone Caldari State
97
|
Posted - 2014.12.02 12:52:53 -
[27] - Quote
tl,dr: CCP please buff my lowsec T3 blob
Furthermore, I think that links must be removed from the game.
|
Vibrance Sovereign
Sovereign Fleet Tax Shelter
3
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 09:56:00 -
[28] - Quote
More like: tl:dr CCP pleaz no taek mah SPs
What I propose would make it even less viable to jump back into a T3 after being killed, as the penalties would be greater than the loss of 1 skill level |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |