Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 72 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 22 post(s) |
FluffyDice
StarFckers Inc. The Jagged Alliance
67
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 04:54:00 -
[1021] - Quote
The "inferno" will be outside jita station and on the forums again if CCP **** this up.
edit: also why is there a rokh picture where the naga should be on this image? http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/8742/1/Caldarishiptree2_1920.jpg |
Carniflex
StarHunt Broken Toys
16
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:01:00 -
[1022] - Quote
I would like to point out, that if you drop the requiments for Tech 1 ships to level 4 then technically Freighter is also tech 1 ship while jump freighter is T2 counterpart of a Freighter. So training time for freighter would be rather short (industrial 4) while training time for Jump Freighter would be relatively long (Freighter 5).
As far as ship re-balance and juggling with all the skills goes I'm not particularly happy with it and have to think about it. Especially the skills part as I spent long time training these skills a long time ago before remaps were in game. And ofc the issue that my alts would lose access to all races command ships and would have to re train (spending more SP for getting the same capabilities as they have now, as far as I understand). But overall the idea is still fresh - have to think about it. |
Ladie Harlot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1793
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:03:00 -
[1023] - Quote
Cyrus Deacon wrote:the proposed capital ship skill requirement change is insane, caps should be HARDER to get into not easier ffs!
Not quite. Regular caps (carriers and dreads) are awesome and really well balanced. It's just supercaps that need to be rarer.
The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
1027
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:05:00 -
[1024] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Mara, I think he was trying to give people some examples people could loosely relate to real life vessels/tactics, not trying to reinvent EVE combat.
I'm willing to wait for more details on exactly how they want to break things down.
This is the thread for discussing the dev blog and possible ship roles, before those poor example roles end up coded into the game by someone "just testing" :)
There should be more discussion about ship roles, less about skill points. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5424
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:09:00 -
[1025] - Quote
Ladie Harlot wrote:Cyrus Deacon wrote:the proposed capital ship skill requirement change is insane, caps should be HARDER to get into not easier ffs! Not quite. Regular caps (carriers and dreads) are awesome and really well balanced. It's just supercaps that need to be rarer. I suppose that, if the Nag becomes the new rifter, those supercaps will become a bit rarer quite quicklyGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
YuuKnow
151
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:10:00 -
[1026] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: BS skill at IV for capitals: alright, there is good feedback on that. Point is to make the progression consistent by requiring a skill at 4 to train for the next, higher size class, and 5 for tech 2 ships. If we feel it becomes suddenly too easy to train for capitals, we can always compensate by adding that time back on one of the other, support skill prerequisites for them. Same reasoning applies for freighters. The point of this blog is to specifically discuss such matters before moving forward with them, and for this, you are welcome. If the Dev teams believes that a ship that is easily going to serve the role of both super tank and super healer simulataneously is not going to be rampantly proliferating, then it has not been paying attention to what the community has been saying about capitals and super capitals. I would be in favor of making the capitals less accessible than what your proposing because look what they truly represent. Lets look at the current ships of Eve in terms of their practical game design.
Most MMOs have the group roles: -Damage dealers (both short range and long range) -Controllers (status effects) -Tank
Eve's unique in its group-roles are: -Any cruiser, BC, BShip, or dreadnaught = Damage dealers both short range and long range -EWAR, interceptors, interdictors = Controllers -Logistics = healer -Carriers = combined healer and tank -Super Carriers = combined super healer and super tank
When the Dev team introduced Carriers and Super Carriers, it introduced a strange, weird, and IMHO unnecessary platform into the fleet for which there still isn't a lot of reason why its so imbalanced that it serves multiple, simulatenous roles. Such a class will become even more viral-like if its so easily trained for.
yk |
Danny Husk
EVE University Ivy League
20
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:11:00 -
[1027] - Quote
Probably because the intern who did that image was working off a powerpoint from a staff meeting, leftover from 2003; which seems to be about when the person who came up with this plan last logged into the game.
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
1027
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:12:00 -
[1028] - Quote
I would like to see more development of "experimental" ship types such as the arbitrator which uses non-racial weapon systems, but not at the expense of the specialists. Thus it might make sense for Angel Cartel to have a Dominix-alike to parallel the Rattlesnake, but not the Amarr, Blood Raisers or Sanshas. |
Moraguth
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
33
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:21:00 -
[1029] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:IsTheOpOver wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:... However someone flying an F-22 trying a MiG-35 would be much more skilled than someone flying a 787 trying out a MiG-35. ... Well, actually neither one would be able to get it off the ground. So not true... I loved that movie!!! But even Clint had to train Russian Experimental Thought Controlled Jet 1 to get it off the ground.
Firefox was grrrrrreeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaat! They just don't make em like they used to. And for some reason, that movie and Robot Jocks are mushed together in my brain even though they had nothing to do with one another. Both were awesome though. I can kill you with my brain too. It's genetic. |
FluffyDice
StarFckers Inc. The Jagged Alliance
67
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:38:00 -
[1030] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:Oh hey, CCP looking to rebalance ships? This is my fort+¬, prom4csm
If its your fort+¬ why the hell didn't you say anything useful or relevant?
Oh you just wanted to advertise yourself. I see. |
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:43:00 -
[1031] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Papa Boats wrote:Bitter vet checking in. I am really annoyed about having to retrain destroyer and BC for 3 races to have them all maxed again. I am at 90mil+ SP and currently have every T1 and T2 ship available to me. I have all T2 weapons at my disposal. I like it this way as I am able to use the very best ships and weapons whenever I need them. I worked hard for this and feel that this would negativly impact the few players who hate supercaps online the way I do.
As I feel what should happen if the racial destroyers and BC if it goes through should be. SP and cost of SB should go back into the pilots account. Also all SP and costs for command ships and interdictors should go back to the pilot. Furthermore any further skills and capital ships that require these ships should be dropped.
I say this for a couple reasons. I will not retrain 4 racial destroyers just so I can fly an interdictor thats outperformed by a HIC which I do not need to train for to have the better and stronger ship. Also for command ships why would I need this skill as the ships do not always match up. I am in the CFC meaning the CMD ship I need is either the cald or minm ships. While the capital ships I fly are the Thanny and the Moros. It is going to make it extremly difficult and add lots of time to getting me into my capital ships if these changes are not well thought out. No one is saying you have to retrain them. Our principle for the reimbursement here will be "if you could fly it yesterday, you can still fly it today". Ytterbium will post the further details of this once it's written up.
I seriously hope you mean "if you could fly it yesterday, you can fly it as well today". I.e. four-race CS 5/Interdictor 5 pilots should have the skills maxed as well, not just the minimum. Reinbursement of SP would be an issue if it doesn't take crosstraining into consideration. A current "dictor 4 single racial frigate 5" pilot should not be on same level as a "all four racial frigs 5, dictor 5"-one. In effect, by training up the (current) t2 ship skills, some of us have trained "one" race while others have trained four. And some of us have all four of them at level 5 as is. I love my four-race cruiser 5 + CS 5, am proud of it, and I know it gives me an edge over almost every other CS pilot I meet. It'd be a damn massive insult to put me on par with someone who wouldn't put in some effort to do the same.
Edit; oh I should add - > Removing the in-class ship tiers looks good, on first glance > Making this new tier progression makes alot of sense, I guess "finally" is a good reaction to this > You guys desperately need to add more subcap ships/modules/skills in game, at 100m+ SP there's not much left to do, we could max out capitals, get all weapon specs 5 and rigs 5 for tiny bit advantage, but you already know players like to specialize and don't want to put SP into industry etc, keyword is subcap. (and making racial destroyer/bc is not the way to go just to add more stuff to train) this is a signature |
Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
17
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:43:00 -
[1032] - Quote
Cleaning the skill tree for ships is not a bad idea, but why should that mean introducing racial destroyer and racial battlecruiser skills?
And a few line later you group the ships with what they have in common. That's the way to start, but start from the begining:
* replace ALL racial ship skills with generic ones, it's the same ship type, only the controls differ * introduce racial Systems Control, that's where they differ from each other * top that with the role skills
I assume that some of you guys at CCP know about Object-Oriented Programming ... apply that stuff to your skill design!
Like the naming change, this is a good idea, but you have to do it right. So, please, lay back and improve the idea, like you did it with naming. You're not in a hurry, because doing this wrong, will make A LOT (close to all players) of people angry/sad.
Another argument: You want to get more people into EVE, so don't make cross-training even harder for them. Doubling the time to get into the BS of another race is not the way to go! In addition, you still have to train the corresponding support skills.
Edit: Decorator Pattern It's a cruiser, decorate it with Amarr Control Systems (see below), decorate it with Combat Ship and get the Maller |
Krops Vont
3 Sun Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 05:59:00 -
[1033] - Quote
Reading this late at night im not at full capacity, but i do get it and how it might work. which is different from how intended. Ofc Reimbursement will happen.
I sincerely hope this happens. it looks great imo! GL o/ |
Patient 2428190
DEGRREE'Fo'FREE Internet Business School
107
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 06:02:00 -
[1034] - Quote
I love how you are going to give everybody who currently has Destroyers V and Battlecruisers V 6,144,000 skillpoints out of thin air.
You guys are truly idiotic. |
Khan Farshatok
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 06:04:00 -
[1035] - Quote
This is not an ultimatum. Nor is this a threat. I am simply telling you how things will go.
If, at the end of all of your changes, I am unable to fly every ship that I can now, you will be losing a customer with multiple accounts. That is all. |
AtvMX
Lost Society Get Off My Lawn
2
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 06:04:00 -
[1036] - Quote
Making racial destroyer/battlecruiser skills? Unless you shorten the train time for them its going to be horribad. 5 x on 4 skills HA! I feel the folks at ccp missed the fact that a non-racial BC skill does let you FLY all the ships, but pilot them effectively? Nah. Last time i checked i could get into any BC i wanted... but still haven't found a way to fit autocannons on the drake. That's another 20dayish? to train. I don't see anything terribly wrong with the current skill tree, going in the wrong direction here guys. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5424
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 06:16:00 -
[1037] - Quote
AtvMX wrote:Making racial destroyer/battlecruiser skills? Unless you shorten the train time for them its going to be horribad. 5 x on 4 skills HA! I feel the folks at ccp missed the fact that a non-racial BC skill does let you FLY all the ships, but pilot them effectively? Nah. Last time i checked i could get into any BC i wanted... but still haven't found a way to fit autocannons on the drake. That's another 20dayish? to train. I don't see anything terribly wrong with the current skill tree, going in the wrong direction here guys. That's why the change from 1+ù BC skill to 4+ù BC skills isn't as big a change as some claim: because that skill is only a small part of what you need to train in order to fly the ships in question.
Consider this: I can fly all Caldari BCs at full effect (including BC V), and now I want to do the same with Minmatar BCs. What will I need to train with this new system?
Minmatar Frigate IV, Minmatar Cruiser IV, possibly all the armour tanking skills, Small Projectiles up to AC Spec IV and Arty Spec IV, Medium Projectiles up to AC Spec V and Arty Spec V, Large Projectiles up to AC Spec V and Arty Spec V (fortunately, I can reuse all the gunnery support skills from the Larg Hybrid specs I needed for the Naga). All in all, that comes to some 35 ranks worth of lvl V and a smattering of lvl IV skills (not even counting the armour skills you might want to add to provide you with all the variations) before we even get to the BC skill itself. Compared to all that, the Minmatar BC V is a pretty small addition. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Anah Karah
Drama Llamas
9
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 06:31:00 -
[1038] - Quote
i have re-evaluated the situation and decided i have all the skills involved in this change max skilled already and thus resolved on the fact i enjoy killing nubblets in carriers who have nowhere near the skills or brainpower needed to actually fly them and thus will glorify my killboard with minimal effort. This epic sentence was brought to you by "Lets_Turn_EVE_Into_WOW.com" in conjunction with "[email protected]"
Bring on the killmails |
Jack Miton
Lapse Of Sanity Exhale.
140
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 06:36:00 -
[1039] - Quote
This change is garbage.
I have BC 5 for example so youre telling me that you'll reimburse the SP, fine, but then i have to spend 4x the SP to get my skills back up to where they were pre patch? GET ******. Or will you give me 4x the SP for free? yeah, good work geniuses,,,,
The only way this is even remotely salvageable is if you give people the skills, already trained, not free SP, in all races to the level they have the BC/Dessie skill trained previously.
Dropping cap ship pre requ to BS 4 is also lame. We don't want every noob with no skills in cap ships, kthnx.
All in all this is extremely poorly thought out.
EDIT: Yeah ok, i may have raged a bit and it looks like the reimbursment will be done like i said it should be but this is still a needless change that wont accomplish anything useful. if you want to balance ships, just balance the ships. this does not require changing skill progressions that work just fine.
also, if i have BS 5 specifically for a cap ship, can i get it reimbursed too? there are many people who only trained it to get into caps. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5424
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 06:38:00 -
[1040] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:This change is garbage.
I have BC 5 for example so youre telling me that you'll reimburse the SP, fine, but then i have to spend 4x the SP to get my skills back up to where they were pre patch? No. Read the OP and follow the links. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
|
Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
17
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 06:45:00 -
[1041] - Quote
Vanessa Vansen wrote:Cleaning the skill tree for ships is not a bad idea, but why should that mean introducing racial destroyer and racial battlecruiser skills?
And a few line later you group the ships with what they have in common. That's the way to start, but start from the begining:
* replace ALL racial ship skills with generic ones, it's the same ship type, only the controls differ * introduce racial Systems Control, that's where they differ from each other * top that with the role skills
I assume that some of you guys at CCP know about Object-Oriented Programming ... apply that stuff to your skill design!
Like the naming change, this is a good idea, but you have to do it right. So, please, lay back and improve the idea, like you did it with naming. You're not in a hurry, because doing this wrong, will make A LOT (close to all players) of people angry/sad.
Another argument: You want to get more people into EVE, so don't make cross-training even harder for them. Doubling the time to get into the BS of another race is not the way to go! In addition, you still have to train the corresponding support skills.
Oh, by the way, you already have racial Systems Control skills ... use the Subsystems skills. -> the ships are the same but you have to be able to handle the systems This will allow you to forget about the tiers and use the subsystem skills to provide access to a single ship. E.g. Amarr Offensive Systems IV for Omen (others at two or three) but Amarr Defensive Systems IV for Augoror (others at two or three).
This way those Subsystems skills get integrated way more into EVE and are not anymore just an add-on for strategic cruisers
edit: in addition you could add Amarr/Caldari/Gallente/Minmatar Control Systems, each level opens access to another size of racial ships Level I - Frigates Level II - Destroyer Level III - Cruiser Level IV - Battlecruiser Level V - Battleships
Amarr/Caldari/Gallente/Minmatar Capital Control Systems, each level opens access to another size of racial ships requires Amarr/Caldari/Gallente/Minmatar Control Systems V Level I - Freighter Level II - Dreadnought, Carriers, Rorqual Level III - Jump Freighter Level IV - Motherships Level V - Titan |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
59
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 07:29:00 -
[1042] - Quote
My luck i have all lvl5 subcap skill. This is another dumb idea from CCP, just like the namechanges.
CCP talking about they want to trying to new players (namechanges), but this changes increasing the new players training times. Just increasing the gap between the old and new players. This is very bad gamepolitic toward to playerbase again.
If they continuing this dumb development direction, i think Hilmar need to write another apologetic letter again. |
Slumber Hawk
Shadow on the moon
6
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 07:36:00 -
[1043] - Quote
ty for the heads up, will start training my missing BS skills asap. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5424
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 07:38:00 -
[1044] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:My luck i have all lvl5 subcap skill. This is another dumb idea from CCP, just like the namechanges.
CCP talking about they want to trying to new players (namechanges), but this changes increasing the new players training times. Just increasing the gap between the old and new players. This is very bad gamepolitic toward to playerbase again. It doesn't increase new player's training times unless the new players decide to do everything at once, which never was a good decision for them to begin with. If they actually decide to specialise, this change reduces the time it takes for them to get to a specific role or ship, and lets them focus on specific tasks much more effectively before.
It's a (very tiny) nerf for the jack-of-al-trades types; a rather significant improvement for everyone else. New players, in particular, will be able to GÇ£catch upGÇ¥ much faster than before since they no longer have to train a whole slew of unnecessary and irrelevant prereqs. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Jodie Amille
Rape of Virtue
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 07:42:00 -
[1045] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:My luck i have all lvl5 subcap skill. This is another dumb idea from CCP, just like the namechanges.
CCP talking about they want to trying to new players (namechanges), but this changes increasing the new players training times. Just increasing the gap between the old and new players. This is very bad gamepolitic toward to playerbase again.
If they continuing this dumb development direction, i think Hilmar need to write another apologetic letter again.
Oh please, it changes jack all. New players had to specialize to compete with older ones anyways. All this does is mildly change how long it takes for them to cross-train.(2.5-3 extra months for the 3 other bc 5 skills ain't that long)
**** you people are ********.
|
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
59
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 08:01:00 -
[1046] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:My luck i have all lvl5 subcap skill. This is another dumb idea from CCP, just like the namechanges.
CCP talking about they want to trying to new players (namechanges), but this changes increasing the new players training times. Just increasing the gap between the old and new players. This is very bad gamepolitic toward to playerbase again. It doesn't increase new player's training times unless the new players decide to do everything at once, which never was a good decision for them to begin with. If they actually decide to specialise, this change reduces the time it takes for them to get to a specific role or ship, and lets them focus on specific tasks much more effectively before. It's a (very tiny) nerf for the jack-of-al-trades types; a rather significant improvement for everyone else. New players, in particular, will be able to GÇ£catch upGÇ¥ much faster than before since they no longer have to train a whole slew of unnecessary and irrelevant prereqs.
Really ? Check my friend the new t3 training time differences and the old one. Just 1.5 month longer with the new idea the learning time.
|
Beckie DeLey
Brigade of Guards SpaceMonkey's Alliance
29
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 08:06:00 -
[1047] - Quote
Changes are good, bittervets need to remove their collective heads from their asses.
Go Dev Team and try not to listen too much to the crybabies that played for 5 years and are now worried that they could maybe lose a week of skill time. It's The Legendary Extraordinary Me |
Ajita al Tchar
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
115
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 08:09:00 -
[1048] - Quote
ITT: Many people who don't understand how skills, nested skill reqs and ship prereqs work screaming very loudly and very incorrectly.
Ranger 1 wrote:Aside from the few legitimate issues (how Jump Freighters and BS 5 will be handled) this entire thread reads like "If illiteracy and deliberately obtuse had a love child, what would it look like?"
Though this can be applied to eve-o in general in most threads (especially those full of passion, RAAAAGE and drool), it's especially apparent here. I'm actually embarrassed that so many EVE players gaze down upon other MMOs condescendingly thinking themselves intellectually superior, yet they produce such fucktastic dumbass shitposts when given an opportunity to speak, so unaware of the hurf blurf that leaks out of the corner of their mouths, collecting in their neckbeards.
I'm looking forward to seeing this change take shape and develop into something good. Getting rid of tiers is long overdue, and I'm happy to see it's no longer just a player lament in features and ideas, or ship improvement suggestion threads. I DO think that the proposed "roles" (e.g. "artillery", "attack ships", etc.) are pretty lol and potentially even worse than the tiers. Let the players decide how they want to use ships, just make sure that every ship has a viable slot layout, reasonable stats like HP, and bonuses that are useful. Don't homogenize ships at that, please. We don't need two energy turret DPS boats, just as we don't really need the Prophecy now anyway. Must the proposed new Support Cruiser (tm) always only do its electronic warfare duty? I think not, it kind of sucks the fun out of playing with fits and roles.
No tiers, no ships that only differ in their model, no T1 ships that can only do one thing well (save that for T2), yes to unique stats and bonuses that can be used in more than one way and work with more than one fit, encouraging player creativity. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5424
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 08:11:00 -
[1049] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Really ? Check my friend the new t3 training time differences and the old one. Just 1.5 month longer with the new idea the learning time. What differences are you referring to and where do you get 1.5 months from? No new training times are presented, and the only change for T3 would be the 1-+ day extra needed to get Destroyer IV. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Ev Xetvvvi
FSPalm
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 08:11:00 -
[1050] - Quote
First of all i hope 1. the skill req for ship will look like>> frigs>destroyers>cruisers>bcs>bs and so
2. dont give all racial BC to lvl 5 if have arleady bc at lvl 5..i hope CCP will just remove those skill and reimburse with SP, for example from BC lvl 5 only 1.5 mil SP
3. anyway you are doing it right.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 72 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |