Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:57:00 -
[211]
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
If I have level 1 in all subsystem skills and then dies. Will I then loose no xp, or do I have to get the skill again or..?
You will drop down to level 0 in one of the related ship's subsystem skills. You can still fly them with level 0 in all subsystem skills, just not assemble them yourself, that requires at least level 1.
|
|
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:59:00 -
[212]
Originally by: Finnroth Edited by: Finnroth on 13/02/2009 04:43:36 I believe to have read something on the forums regarding the ability to manualy change light and colour for Tech3 ships. Some dev seems to have said something about that on EVE TV, though i didn't watch it myself and people on this forums tend to talk trash for fun all day.
So a simple question - are/were there plans to do this? It would certainly be amazing.
Sadly know. This was moved into our backlog and will not be in the new expansion. But when we pick it up again we want to make it the most awesome spacepaint(tm) ever.
|
|
Halycon Gamma
Caldari The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:59:00 -
[213]
Originally by: Cadde Another thing that came to mind is, what about being podded? That is in a way an SP loss even if your clone is up to date. How big that SP loss is depends on how prepared you are. Let me explain it
Skill training with +4 implant: 10 days Skill training without +4 implant: 11 days Time "lost" without +4 implant = Time * 0.1
So in that respect, there already is ways to lose good training time in eve. By how much depends on your wallet and access to implants. And those who cannot afford to fly around with +4's in their head when doing pvp are at a huge disadvantage to those who can. At least now things are going to balance out a bit depending on how stupid the T3 pilots will be.
Two different things. Potential loss of earnings, and loss of earnings; are not the same thing. Potential loss of earnings is part of a risk assessment you do before engaging in an activity. Loss of earnings is the actual loss of something. Sure, it sounds like semantics. But they are very much different things and you can't use a potential loss as a straight swap for an actual loss in a balance ledger.
Compare potentially being shot, and being shot. One is way worse than the other.
Now, potentially I could lose training time if I "lose" a ship.
After this change, I will lose training time if I "lose" a ship.
Notice a difference?
|
Ralitge boyter
Minmatar BrightSpark Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 09:29:00 -
[214]
Edited by: Ralitge boyter on 13/02/2009 09:30:26 SapcepaintÖ sounds good to me
As for these new cruisers... what happened to the frigates? Did you guys forget about them are there plans for a future patch to bring them? And what about the industrial ships? Will there in the near future be a configurable industrial ship, that you can grant good agility trading it for cargo space or good protection trading it for agility or maybe even good ECM or ECM protection trading it for protection? The same for barges/exhumers, with the new mining lasers that have been making head lines it sounds like we might need to exchange some subsystems on these in order to accomodate these new wonderful rock suckers...
Of course the battleship hulls what about these are there plans or do you first want to wait till the cruisers are balanced before you even begin to think about something like that?
And as last thing, we clearly need to be able to dock with Titans and maybe even mohterships, giving them something special over the carriers. It makes no sense to pull parts of your ship of in space, but it also makes no sense for a ship like a mothership/titan (maybe only titan ) not to offer a pilot in the middle of no where an option to swap out sub parts of their ship in order to be better able to provide defences for the mothership/titan. Make the titan/mom not able to jump till all players are undocked because of the systems not being able to provide their POD with sufficient protection unless they are in a specially constructed super-capital POD dock. But please do offer us a way to make use of the size of a Titan at least as they are currently nothing more then a big *boom* button once an hour, it looks cool but it is a bit of a waist of investment if it can only do BIG BOOM once an hour and it only makes sense to do so when there is a opposing fleet close enough to actually feel the wrath. ------------------------------------------- Should you disagree with me, well I guess that is because I disagree with you. If you have a problem with that please feel free not to tell me. |
ashellia
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 10:40:00 -
[215]
Edited by: ashellia on 13/02/2009 10:45:01
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
If I have level 1 in all subsystem skills and then dies. Will I then loose no xp, or do I have to get the skill again or..?
You will drop down to level 0 in one of the related ship's subsystem skills. You can still fly them with level 0 in all subsystem skills, just not assemble them yourself, that requires at least level 1.
1. Assemble a couple of t3 ships 2. Get blown up 3. Get in another pre-assemble t3 ship 4. continue pew pew without training back lost skill (without the bonus that come with the skills of coz) 5. ????? 6. PROFIT
in other words, u dont have to train for it if u dont want to, just fly the ship with out the bonuses
|
Jowen Datloran
Caldari Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 12:25:00 -
[216]
Hey you parrots, I have digged out some history: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
Anything sounds familiar?
---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute
|
Khan Soriano
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 12:38:00 -
[217]
If the skills are Rank 1 I couldn't care less if I lose a level when I get destroyed. It's fun & different mechanic so don't change your mind CCP.
Most of them 'omg me lose ships AND my skillz' sayers are just carebearing pussies who won't be flying t3 anyway.
T1 = common T2 = special variety with more risk attached T3 = even more special and more risky
What's unnatural about that? It's a proper ****ing endgame item, not for carebears, not for cheapasses, not for newbies. It's for people who have the resources to buy it and have enough skillpoints to not mind an SP sink.
It's still more accessible for the masses than I'd think/desire. You can train them easily, try a few times without a significant SP loss.
I'm gonna try them and if they are good I will fly them, there aren't THAT many interesting things to train for me anyway. At some point its all about getting a completely new toy and thats what T3 is here for. ----- Arbitrator - Life & Death
|
Khan Soriano
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 12:49:00 -
[218]
Originally by: Jowen Datloran Hey you parrots, I have digged out some history: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
Anything sounds familiar?
Brilliant, brilliant find Jowen.
Time changes but sadly people don't... Whats even more sad is that nobody will learn from that and they will keep spewing nonsense all over these forums
----- Arbitrator - Life & Death
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 13:01:00 -
[219]
Originally by: Jowen Datloran Hey you parrots, I have digged out some history: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
Anything sounds familiar?
LOL @ interceptor insurance. HAHHAHA. Awesome Jowen. |
freak fantom
Caldari The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 13:02:00 -
[220]
Please, remove the skill loss feature (or make it like this - you'll lose skills if you get killed in a clone that is not sufficient to contain your skill points). I've been playing EVE for 2.5 years and I don't have enough skills even for one profession! For instance, I personally do not want to gain skills again and again every time I get AFK killed on a mission by npc. |
|
thelung187
Guiding Hand Social Club
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 13:08:00 -
[221]
Excuse me, but this was a valid post I made, it should not have been deleted, and I think we're due a more definitive answer.
Quote: Disassembling will not make you lose points. Self destruct and ejecting will circumvent loss. Only getting really blown up in the ship will make you lose SP.
Let me rephrase then, why is it that if we eject or self-destruct we don't lose SP, but if we go down in a blaze of glory, we're subsequently punished? Can we get a dev to comment on what the mentality is regarding this? I know many in the Eve community (as well as myself) are asking... "why bother"? |
Miniturret
Amarr Mining Under the influence of Sugar Pals
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 13:14:00 -
[222]
ok so here is what i've gleaned thus far from the 8 pages of stuff.
a select few that are in favor of having an "elite" ship that a "select few" will ever fly. While the bulk of what i've seen is against this idea.
If the bulk of the community is against something than why are you forging ahead with it? find another risk factor with the ship.
Originally by: thelung187
Let me rephrase then, why is it that if we eject or self-destruct we don't lose SP, but if we go down in a blaze of glory, we're subsequently punished? Can we get a dev to comment on what the mentality is regarding this? I know many in the Eve community (as well as myself) are asking... "why bother"?
I believe this is a valid question. Those that are punished should be the ones that eject/SD where as those that try to take as many with them as possible should be rewarded since this is what the game is all about.
Another thought I had is go ahead and keep the skill lose but make the subsystem skills a rank 8+ I would be happy to see that since it would bring T3 ships in line with skills required for T2 and since T3 is suppose to be better than it should require more skill training to be able to fly. |
Athos Zel'tar
Amarr Wonderfull Toys
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 13:34:00 -
[223]
Honestly, from what I have read from the devs, this kind of negative response is why they instituted the SP loss in the first place.
Basically, the lack of demand will make them cheaper.
The supply will be pretty low (read the thread about the first sleeper gang on the test server), and if they didn't have some serious drawback, it might make them more expensive than carriers and pirate battleships.
A cruiser just should not be that expensive.
Instead, now we have a ship that many will refuse to fly, which will bring the price down for those of us who do wish to buy and fly them.
Honestly, I am not sure if there was a better way to do this, but I think that the mechanic will be effective.
|
DaiZ Do
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 13:35:00 -
[224]
I've got a question about Jumpclones within this context.
I have t3 Skills with Clone A, jump to Clone B. Lose ship, lose 1 skill, jump back into Clone A. Which skills has Clone A now?
Case 1 Usually the clone you jump into has the Skills you currently have (before jump). But since we never had less skills at jumpclone creation as at jump time, the "does it make sense" question comes to my mind. I think this is how it is/will be implemented. But
Case 2 Jumpclone A has kept lost skill alive (plus he gets the JumpClone B trained skills).
|
Khan Soriano
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 13:45:00 -
[225]
Originally by: Miniturret ok so here is what i've gleaned thus far from the 8 pages of stuff.
a select few that are in favor of having an "elite" ship that a "select few" will ever fly. While the bulk of what i've seen is against this idea.
If the bulk of the community is against something than why are you forging ahead with it? find another risk factor with the ship.
Why? Simply because quantity doesn't mean quality, it's a fact that most people are stupid and just because there are more of them doesn't mean anybody should listen You had an example with the whole Interceptor insurance thing and it was EXACTLY the same, people whined about the risk without even thinking about the big picture, you NEED that isk sink and risk generated by it, to keep the WHOLE population happy.
Originally by: Miniturret
Originally by: thelung187
Let me rephrase then, why is it that if we eject or self-destruct we don't lose SP, but if we go down in a blaze of glory, we're subsequently punished? Can we get a dev to comment on what the mentality is regarding this? I know many in the Eve community (as well as myself) are asking... "why bother"?
I believe this is a valid question. Those that are punished should be the ones that eject/SD where as those that try to take as many with them as possible should be rewarded since this is what the game is all about.
This 'game is all about' means risk and reward, right? Then what is the problem with this mechanic? You risk your money when flying t3 and if you stay in it while it blows, you risk your skills as well. On the other hand if you decide to leave it and save your precious skills, you risk making your opponent stronger (money wise) because he can board your ship (if its more valueable than his) and get away with it, this is his reward.
Ofc you should stay inside and try to take as many with you as you can, but is something preventing you from doing it? No, it's just a risk/reward thing... ----- Arbitrator - Life & Death
|
Miniturret
Amarr Mining Under the influence of Sugar Pals
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 13:56:00 -
[226]
Edited by: Miniturret on 13/02/2009 13:57:19 because I can risk my isk while still learning skills which i'll never forgot providing i have an updated clone.
In essence all i'm risking is Isk which can be easily obtainable. Real life time to relearn a skill which has been done numerous times I'm not about to risk.
As i've stated will I fly T3 NOPE i'll gladly sell any parts i find providing the price is in accordance to the risks involved in finding them. As i've also stated I believe there should be a risk to flying the T3 ships but not in a lose such as that. Others have posted ideas as well, from ship crews that gain experience, concurrent skill training providing your piloting the T3 ship, and even reducing the effectiveness of the ship so that it gains over time until the ship is lost. All of which are valid risks that the MAJORITY of eve would accept a hell of a lot easier than letting the gap between new players / mid range players / Old timers expand even more.
-=edit=- Also take a look at my one post, I've also suggested that they increase the rank of the subsystem skills and skill for the Hull to bring the ship in line with natural progression of EvE. |
Khan Soriano
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 14:11:00 -
[227]
Originally by: Miniturret Edited by: Miniturret on 13/02/2009 13:57:19 because I can risk my isk while still learning skills which i'll never forgot providing i have an updated clone.
In essence all i'm risking is Isk which can be easily obtainable. Real life time to relearn a skill which has been done numerous times I'm not about to risk.
As i've stated will I fly T3 NOPE i'll gladly sell any parts i find providing the price is in accordance to the risks involved in finding them. As i've also stated I believe there should be a risk to flying the T3 ships but not in a lose such as that. Others have posted ideas as well, from ship crews that gain experience, concurrent skill training providing your piloting the T3 ship, and even reducing the effectiveness of the ship so that it gains over time until the ship is lost. All of which are valid risks that the MAJORITY of eve would accept a hell of a lot easier than letting the gap between new players / mid range players / Old timers expand even more.
-=edit=- Also take a look at my one post, I've also suggested that they increase the rank of the subsystem skills and skill for the Hull to bring the ship in line with natural progression of EvE.
You completely and utterly fail to understand this matter:
Originally by: Miniturret All of which are valid risks that the MAJORITY of eve would accept a hell of a lot easier than letting the gap between new players / mid range players / Old timers expand even more.
Mechanic that CCP provided would do exactly OPPOSITE then what you stated!!!!! You didn't give this even a little bit of thought and yet you make claims 'this won't work, that will'...
Newbies with 3 months under their belt won't be flying T3, one year pilots won't be flying it (they will at first but will fail at it so they will stop, its all part of a learning process), VETERANS WILL BE FLYING IT!!! It's them that will lose SP and thus narrowing the gap between Top and Middle/Bottom.
|
KayTwoEx
Caldari Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 14:15:00 -
[228]
Just to ask:
What about t3 battleships or t3 battlecruiser? :-) |
Eleana Tomelac
Gallente Eclats de verre
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 14:34:00 -
[229]
I went to sisi, trained skills and built up an Amarr SC... So, I got my Space Balls aligned up and looked at the number of slots and the stats and it looked weird.
The hull has 3 meds and 3 low. One of the parts said +1med +2 low (the one with loads of HP I think). Another said +2 low -1 med and I end with 5 lows.
Well, I didn't understand too much why there was 5 lows and not 3+2+2=7? As the amarr one didn't even have graphics, well, maybe it wasn't done at all.
Other thing : the skillpoints loss. So, you want us to be penalized for the loss of a T3 ship. You found a way to get us ****ed after loosing one. Why not make a temporary malus to the strategic ships/parts of that race, like a time to recover from the shock of being brutally disconnected of that new technology? Or even disable the ability to get back (can't board it) in one for some time (few hours)?
Now, questions about the skills and the bonus they will give. Will each subsystem skill give bonus to some/every 'bonusable' stat of that subsystem? What is the ship skill useful for? Will the ship possess bonuses on his own? Will subsystems add skill bonus to the description of the ship? Making it look like a super bonused ship? It would be like adding a weapon bonus or a tank bonus based on what subsystem you added either based on the subsystem skill or on the strategic skill. |
A Sinner
THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY PuPPet MasTers
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 14:39:00 -
[230]
Please CCP take into consideration the name Pazuzu for the gallente T3 Cruiser. Its way more suitable than Proteus if u check the linky and read the legend. Even though its not from greek mythology as most gallente ships, you have some exceptions like the ishtar (which is frome Babylonian mythology as Pazuzu) and others, so that wont be a problem. Not to mention the fact that it sounds a lot more cooler than Proteus. *wink* |
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 14:49:00 -
[231]
Originally by: Jowen Datloran Hey you parrots, I have digged out some history: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
Anything sounds familiar?
Very nice, but you forgot to quote all the threads bitterly proclaiming that... nobody would fly T2 because of the skimpy insurance payouts. nobody would ever use ECM because it was such a crap shoot and too easy to die. nobody would use Heavy Interdictors because they are too slow and can't be remote repped while doing their job. nobody would ever fly a Cap or Super Cap because they are too cost prohibitive and not enough bang for the buck.
We could, of course, go on all day with examples like this. It's the nature of the forums. One difference being, of course, that most of the above threads were written AFTER people actually had complete ships to test and form their learned opinions on.
|
Miniturret
Amarr Mining Under the influence of Sugar Pals
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 14:53:00 -
[232]
Originally by: Khan Soriano
Stuff
I'm pretty sure I fully understand the implications of this design and since you clearly have stated it's for the "veterans" I revert back to my previous post in which I stated "a select few that are in favor of having an "elite" ship that a "select few" will ever fly. While the bulk of what i've seen is against this idea." Which you just proved true by your own statement.
If you for the sp loss than you shouldn't have a problem with the skills to fly the ship being in line with a natural progression. racial cruiser is rank 5 (which is a current prereq for T3 cruisers) so therefore in order to pilot a T3 ship the skills should be of atleast that rank if not higher. Raising the rank of the skills should be something you would embrace it would mean more risk for piloting the ship.
Once again I will have to quote my previous post with "a select few that are in favor of having an "elite" ship that a "select few" will ever fly." AKA Elitist. You want everything for you. I'm not only thinking about myself but the other pilots of my skill level and lower. You have a new ships which can be made into anything you want (much like we've wanted for years instead of one hull with various module combo's) yet you claim no one but "veterans" will be piloting them. If that's what you believe than you haven't been in high sec recently. so following that the skill gap will remain the same if not increase further since the newer players will be the ones losing them. |
Khan Soriano
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 15:19:00 -
[233]
Originally by: Miniturret
Originally by: Khan Soriano
Stuff
I'm pretty sure I fully understand the implications of this design and since you clearly have stated it's for the "veterans" I revert back to my previous post in which I stated "a select few that are in favor of having an "elite" ship that a "select few" will ever fly. While the bulk of what i've seen is against this idea." Which you just proved true by your own statement.
If you for the sp loss than you shouldn't have a problem with the skills to fly the ship being in line with a natural progression. racial cruiser is rank 5 (which is a current prereq for T3 cruisers) so therefore in order to pilot a T3 ship the skills should be of atleast that rank if not higher. Raising the rank of the skills should be something you would embrace it would mean more risk for piloting the ship.
Once again I will have to quote my previous post with "a select few that are in favor of having an "elite" ship that a "select few" will ever fly." AKA Elitist. You want everything for you. I'm not only thinking about myself but the other pilots of my skill level and lower. You have a new ships which can be made into anything you want (much like we've wanted for years instead of one hull with various module combo's) yet you claim no one but "veterans" will be piloting them. If that's what you believe than you haven't been in high sec recently. so following that the skill gap will remain the same if not increase further since the newer players will be the ones losing them.
Yes, only veterans will fly them on a regular basis, everyone else will fly them for fun/novelty. Whats wrong about that? Its the same mechanic as T2 ships, you fly them if you can afford them. Simple as that.
If a noob (said noob has about 1 year of experience, mind you) tries T3 and dies miserably he won't spend a bigger part of the week getting his skills up, he just won't fly them. Exactly as he would do when he tries T2 and feels such loss in his wallet.
This is EVE, EVE the sandbox. YOU make decisions about what you use and for what purpose. If you make stupid decissions then you will get stupid results. If you keep buying Astartes and keep losing it to a nearby gatecamp and you're out of ISK in a day then it's your problem not ours or EVEs or CCPs. Same thing with T3.. where does it say that it's for everyone?
You are not thinking about other players, you are caring for them, you are trying to be the nanny they obviously (from your point of view) need. This is SICK and creates masses that can't be bothered to think on their own because they know somebody is doing it for them... ----- Arbitrator - Life & Death
|
COMMANDER KATHRYN
Gallente DEATHFUNK Doctrine.
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 15:36:00 -
[234]
IMHO, we will have to wait until we see how they are BALANCED, without seeing bonuses and possible fitting combinations it is hard to tell who would fly them and for what purpose.
I can nopt see them being used unless you can make them better than t2 in some way. Either more DPS, more Tank or better EW value but not all at once of course. If you end up with the same dps and less tank people will go for t2. same with the opposite.
It will all come down to the imaginations of the devs in the end. Lets just hope they dont go the way of the Faction ship, Nothing but an Empire *****. Or the way of the Destroyer, Very little combat effectiveness in pvp(To big and slow to effectively counter t2 frigs, to easy a target for Cruiser class ships).
With that said, Will there in the Future be BS/BC class t3 ships or even frigate class??? |
Miniturret
Amarr Mining Under the influence of Sugar Pals
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 15:43:00 -
[235]
so your fine with losing skills on top of the est. 400-1bil (figuring 50mil per ship part which is a conservative figure plus fittings) that T3 is going to initially cost until more parts hit the market? so figuring 20mil/hr from mission running your looking at bare minimum 15-20 hours just to afford the ship plus the initial 5-6 days of training to pilot it effectively. Now to a "hardcore" veteran that is nothing but to the casual player such as myself who only plays roughly 2 hours a day your looking at a roughly 2 weeks just to get into the ship.
As I've stated numerous times will I be flying T3 cruisers personally, NOPE not worth it in my opinion I would rather put those 5-6 days + any time I'd lose when the inevitable happened towards other skills which I'll never forget.
You also have to remember how many people actually read the forums or even bother to post? not many yet they are still upset by ccp's choices.
|
Illectroculus Defined
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 16:22:00 -
[236]
So on the subject of skill loss on ship loss - I approve 100%
no whining here, although I'd imagine it'll be a while before I can get near a t3 ship
|
Isil Rahsen
Ferrum Superum
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 16:45:00 -
[237]
Edited by: Isil Rahsen on 13/02/2009 16:48:12
Originally by: Dr Resheph Edited by: Dr Resheph on 12/02/2009 23:03:54
Beef #2: Tech 3 has absolutely nothing new to offer in combat.
Why? You underestimate the level of variety we already have, and the impact of 'fully' customizable ships in existing PVP. All of the newness is at your fitting screen and in the industry pipeline. Your blog mentions how Tech 2 are more specialized and Tech 3 is meant to give more freedoms. That's a very generalized statement.
Have you seen the number of classes we have? Have you seen the number of ships we have? Have you seen the huge variation in stats, attributes and fittings?
While I doubt a Tech 3 ship will perfectly match existing ships, I am pretty certain that their capabilities will fall within the current spectrum. Otherwise you just nuked what morsel of balance we currently have. When viewed as a whole collection of ship options, Tech 2 is not as specialized as you think. If Tech 3 uses the same stats, the same mechanics, and presumably the same bonuses, what is the difference between swapping Tech 2 ships and swapping Tech 3 subsystems to achieve a desired result?
I'd just like to respond to this imparticular since all of the whines have already been hashed out during the alliance tourny and will probably never subside. While we may have a impressive array of ships to fill all these roles we do not have one class of ship that can do any role. By training for T3 Strategic Cruisers you have only one skillset to train up and then you can refit your ship to fill any role currently filled by a specialist T2 ship. This lets people who find themselves in a situation where their gank fit Proteus with lots of DPS would be better served as an ECM boat for what your scouts have found ahead of you. So you dock up and refit a subsystem and some modules and voila you're flying an ECM ship. Now look at T2, if this were to happen you would have to go get a different ship and fit it out all while having had to previously train for that T2 specialised ship. This isn't the case with T3 and you can refit on the fly for the situation much easier than T2 and at a much lower skillpoint investment. Now this will be offset by balance I'm sure, for example while you may be able to refit for ECM in this example I doubt CCP will let your T3 ECM refit be as effective as the specialised T2 ship also designed to fill that role. Hence the term Strategic Cruisers. Now everyone breath it will be ok T3 will not kill EVE. |
Salizar Amolkshue
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 17:01:00 -
[238]
Originally by: Susan Fiona Otherwise, I predict these ships will be used more by carebears for mission running than for PVP, as the loss can be very carefully controlled in missions, but not in PVP.
I completely agree. My character is only 8 months old, and I still have a HUGE list of skills that I'd like to train but just haven't gotten around to getting yet. I am a self-professed carebear, and I wouldn't hesitate to take a t3 ship out for a spin while mission running in high-sec because you have to get really unlucky (lagged) or be AFK before you actually lose a ship in missions. So the risk of me losing skillpoints is extremely low.
But if I were interested in PVPing, I wouldn't do it in a t3 ship, regardless of the cost of the ship. Here's the thing. I can replace ISK, and therefore the ship and modules, simply by playing the game. The more I play, the more ISK I have to spend on ships and modules. I can borrow money, I can bank money, I can stuff it in my mattress and take it out when I need it.
But there is absolutely NOTHING I can do speed up regaining lost skillpoints. I just have to wait. No player skill is required to regain these skillpoints, just real world money in the form of paying for a subscription. This is where this is vastly different from xp losses in other MMOs. In other games, you go out and get your XP back. The more you play, and the better you are at it, the faster you get the XP back. But Eve has a real-world time component to training, and you can't buy real-world time.
To me, that makes is a money sink. The only people who are going to PvP in these ships are ones who either have all the skills they ever want to train already trained up (and how many are out there, seriously) or those who are willing to stall their character progression until further notice just to play with a new toy. In contrast, carebears like me will be flying them shortly after they come out, running L4 missions in high-sec. And when I have to make a run to low-sec for some reason, you can bet the t3 ship will stay docked.
Yup, I'm a chicken and that makes me scorned by the hard-core PvP crowd, and I'm ok with that. I just don't understand why CCP, who claims that the real game of Eve is played in 0.0 space against other players, is rewarding me for being a yellow-bellied carebear who hides in Empire space.
|
Pronas
Scoopex Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 17:32:00 -
[239]
don't like much the skillpoint lose but maybe to earlier to said it's bad... We will see in game |
Ron Bacardi
SniggWaffe
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 17:47:00 -
[240]
Edited by: Ron Bacardi on 13/02/2009 17:47:51 ABSOLUTELY LOVE THE SP LOSS IDEA!!! For the love of all that is cake, please do not give in and remove this feature.
Time to separate the men from the bears.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |