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 Fallout
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 15:52:00 -
[1]
All I can say is...
Gentlemen and ladies... Tech 3.
Fallout Associate Community Manager CCP Hf, EVE Online
|
|
Dav Varan
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 15:53:00 -
[2]
\o/
|
Lantelle
Caldari The Clones Corp Gemini Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 15:57:00 -
[3]
|
Nora Syrinx
Knights of the Old Empire The Chamber of Commerce
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:01:00 -
[4]
Nice
The Strong Will Survive |
DeTox MinRohim
Madhatters Inc. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:03:00 -
[5]
Quote: ... you can expect seeing the Strategic Cruisers on Singularity soon.
I guess that the T3 stuff can say "IN BEFORE THE DEV BLOG".
------ This sig space is Read-only ! omgalink - Online Skillsheet |
Tmarte
Caldari Slackers Incorporated
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:03:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Tmarte on 12/02/2009 16:02:57 Glad to see the subsystems will be the only skills that you could lose by flying one of the ships. Also glad it's going to stay as a Rank 1 skill, so even if you lose Caldari Defense Subsystem V or whatever arbitrary skill it might be, it's only going to be a 4 day jaunt to relearn it at most.
Looks good so far!
|
Michayel Lyon
Gallente Mercantile Exchange
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:06:00 -
[7]
For those that might have missed it...
Originally by: CCP Nozh Oh. One last thing: Import and export overview settings..
--- Lasiverin Dark > Is everyone here allied? Red Knight > we are allied by our zombie like ability to ***** missions
GM Xamother: "Beeing online is not considered harassment or exploit." |
|
CCP TomB
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:07:00 -
[8]
|
|
Graisse
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:10:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Graisse on 12/02/2009 16:10:07
Originally by: CCP TomB
Holy "$%&! (last post in 2007!!11!!)
|
Hawks Eye
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:12:00 -
[10]
w00t!
|
|
Dian Plex
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:12:00 -
[11]
Originally by: CCP TomB
what? you guys have been hiding text in your blogs and posts for a while now. some of us have been block highlighting text for quite a while now.
(that and I personaly cant see the blogs and posts at all on the default black background so I copy past to the clipboard)
|
Illectroculus Defined
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:13:00 -
[12]
So it sounds like you need all the parts of the ship, early on people had been speculating that you could just take the core out on its own, or perhaps the core + propulsion.
|
|
CCP Dionysus
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:16:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Illectroculus Defined So it sounds like you need all the parts of the ship, early on people had been speculating that you could just take the core out on its own, or perhaps the core + propulsion.
Yes exatly. Think of the hull as the "skeleton", and the subsystems as the different organs and muscles.
You need all the bits to make a complete ship. Assembling the ship will need all the subsystems to be available.
|
|
Crenshaw Dallas
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:17:00 -
[14]
This is almost as unbelievably cool as being able to finally fix my base Willpower skill from 3. GAWD that better be real or I will lose my mind. Thanks CCP... this was/is/will continue to be the most awesome game I have ever played! CD
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:19:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 12/02/2009 16:25:22 SWEET JESUS! WOOHOO!
Edit. Bah. Another empty devblog.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
silken mouth
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:20:00 -
[16]
will it be possible to combine subsystems of different races? also will each race have its own skillset?
|
Mon Fin
Gallente Carniffles Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:20:00 -
[17]
Get EFT involved early and 50,000 people will tell you what all thousands of variations can do.
O yeah - first page ... woot
__________________________________________________ Only my credit card gets my signature |
TimGascoigne
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:23:00 -
[18]
reserved
|
Evelgrivion
Ignatium. Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:23:00 -
[19]
Epic devblog for an epic feature of an epic expansion. Also, nice to see you again, TomB
|
Ron Bacardi
SniggWaffe
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:26:00 -
[20]
omg
Sweet Jesus,....especially that last bit
|
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:28:00 -
[21]
Yay \o/
Balancing will be tough though, very.
Also I wondered about:
"Once the ship has been assembled, players are free to switch out the subsystems completely at will, given they are docked at a station."
How about using a ship maintainance array at a pos also?
|
Daelin Blackleaf
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:28:00 -
[22]
- Skillpoint loss will result is lack of use
- Lack of use will result in low prices
- Low prices will result in little profit for related material acquisition, research, and production
- Lack of profit will lead to lack of use of these features
- Lack of use pretty much invalidates the primary content of the entire expansion
While some are willing to risk SP loss (and be the clusters first called primary and favorite suicide-gank-4-lulz target) we're talking about a relatively small market, these ships aren't for everyone for many their SP are precious being the only way to truly improve your character over time. If this follows through we'll end up with a whole lot of features that may as well not exist due to lack of use.
The whole SP loss system massively benefits those players with SP levels well beyond those gathered by the average player in their 7 month average (?) time in the game. Splitting it racially makes it worse as those with high SP will have three other races worth of t3 ship skills to fall back on. This all means that the older a character is the less they have to lose.
Combine the subsystem skills and provide a separate SP pool for subsystems to maintain the high level of risk (losing a level IV/V will still be significant) or drop the SP loss idea.
Either way the increased risk promotes empire use while punishing PvP use, promotes blobbing while punishing riskier styles of play and ejecting removing the penalty effectively makes it a punishment solely for those with high latency or suffering from lag, a genuinely terrible idea.
Other than all the SP related stuff the concept looks fantastic, as do the models. Im just glad Im not the one responsible for balancing it.
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:29:00 -
[23]
That minmatar ship sort of looks like a four legged predator leaping on its pray . A sexy beast.
|
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:29:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Gnulpie Yay \o/
Balancing will be tough though, very.
Also I wondered about:
"Once the ship has been assembled, players are free to switch out the subsystems completely at will, given they are docked at a station."
How about using a ship maintainance array at a pos also?
For the time being the configuration will only be available in stations.
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
Alex V0X2
Minmatar Exiled. Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:29:00 -
[25]
****ing awesome on so many levels. ----------------- http://cakematar.wordpress.com/ (epicness in rabbles) |
Asagi Sandoval
Caldari The Perfect Storm
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:30:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Asagi Sandoval on 12/02/2009 16:30:49 Edited by: Asagi Sandoval on 12/02/2009 16:30:36 SWEEEEEEET!!! Awesome job on that Loki CCP :D It looks very nice.
Also, question, is it true that minmatar are advancing their technology? Will that be reflected in the story or will it just remain a general story "fluff"?
PS. How about a "auto-eject" button?
|
Asterisk Grat
Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:30:00 -
[27]
It looks like a rabbit.
|
Lieutenant Isis
Gristle Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:31:00 -
[28]
How many sub systems will be offered per type? I know that there are 3 of each type for each race on sisi atm, but are those the final numbers?
Originally by: Roc Wieler I enhance my RP experience by filling my bathtub with red jello, balancing a wooden plank across it, then play EVE naked on my laptop.
|
Rivqua
Caldari Omega Wing R.E.P.O.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:32:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Lieutenant Isis How many sub systems will be offered per type? I know that there are 3 of each type for each race on sisi atm, but are those the final numbers?
It has been said as 5 per subsystem per race.
/Riv
|
Rivqua
Caldari Omega Wing R.E.P.O.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:33:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf
- Skillpoint loss will result is lack of use
- Lack of use will result in low prices
- Low prices will result in little profit for related material acquisition, research, and production
- Lack of profit will lead to lack of use of these features
- Lack of use pretty much invalidates the primary content of the entire expansion
While some are willing to risk SP loss (and be the clusters first called primary and favorite suicide-gank-4-lulz target) we're talking about a relatively small market, these ships aren't for everyone for many their SP are precious being the only way to truly improve your character over time. If this follows through we'll end up with a whole lot of features that may as well not exist due to lack of use.
The whole SP loss system massively benefits those players with SP levels well beyond those gathered by the average player in their 7 month average (?) time in the game. Splitting it racially makes it worse as those with high SP will have three other races worth of t3 ship skills to fall back on. This all means that the older a character is the less they have to lose.
Combine the subsystem skills and provide a separate SP pool for subsystems to maintain the high level of risk (losing a level IV/V will still be significant) or drop the SP loss idea.
Either way the increased risk promotes empire use while punishing PvP use, promotes blobbing while punishing riskier styles of play and ejecting removing the penalty effectively makes it a punishment solely for those with high latency or suffering from lag, a genuinely terrible idea.
Other than all the SP related stuff the concept looks fantastic, as do the models. Im just glad Im not the one responsible for balancing it.
I think you underestimate the pvp mind. I would guess they will one day equal the number of Command ships sold per race on the market.
/Riv
|
|
jam6549
Paladines
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:40:00 -
[31]
i think i just ****ED IN MY PANTS
|
Kuranta
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:40:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Kuranta on 12/02/2009 16:42:37 Can the sub system skills be trained parallel with "normal" skills, as it is atm on Sisi?
Edit: welcome back on the forums, TomB.
|
Vyktor Abyss
IONSTAR Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:41:00 -
[33]
Smashing.
Glad the new skills are rank 1 (it stops the massive "grind" feel to get nice ships).
I'm personally also liking the skill loss idea. I hope this will stop all but the boldest from using the T3 ships, so that they don't become the "norm" unlike with Tech 2.
I'm curious to know if these will come "pre-nerfed"? I hate it when you do that personally, since its rare things every recover any great balance after the initial/early nerfs (*cough* Amarr).
Welcome back I guess to T0mb. What happened to the other project he had been usurped to?
Altogether a nice blog, and smashing to hear it really is happening on March 10th. I have had my suspicions you'd not complete the balancing/testing etc in time, but what do I know? -Nothing obviously.
Thanks.
|
Master Akira
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:42:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf
- Skillpoint loss will result is lack of use
- Lack of use will result in low prices
- Low prices will result in little profit for related material acquisition, research, and production
- Lack of profit will lead to lack of use of these features
- Lack of use pretty much invalidates the primary content of the entire expansion
While some are willing to risk SP loss (and be the clusters first called primary and favorite suicide-gank-4-lulz target) we're talking about a relatively small market, these ships aren't for everyone for many their SP are precious being the only way to truly improve your character over time. If this follows through we'll end up with a whole lot of features that may as well not exist due to lack of use.
The whole SP loss system massively benefits those players with SP levels well beyond those gathered by the average player in their 7 month average (?) time in the game. Splitting it racially makes it worse as those with high SP will have three other races worth of t3 ship skills to fall back on. This all means that the older a character is the less they have to lose.
Combine the subsystem skills and provide a separate SP pool for subsystems to maintain the high level of risk (losing a level IV/V will still be significant) or drop the SP loss idea.
Either way the increased risk promotes empire use while punishing PvP use, promotes blobbing while punishing riskier styles of play and ejecting removing the penalty effectively makes it a punishment solely for those with high latency or suffering from lag, a genuinely terrible idea.
Other than all the SP related stuff the concept looks fantastic, as do the models. Im just glad Im not the one responsible for balancing it.
Lol dude, it's only a rank 1 skill. If you lose it from lvl IV to lvl III, that's what, less than a day training?
Totally worthy if the ships are good IMO.
|
Disteeler
Segunda Fundacion Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:44:00 -
[35]
For those that have not realized, at the end of the dev blog there is an almost invisible (in black) line that says:
"Oh. One last thing: Import and export overview settings."
Thanks!
|
Horchan
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:44:00 -
[36]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Oh. One last thing: Import and export overview settings.
I came. ---
DesuSigs |
Steve Thomas
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:45:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Evelgrivion Epic devblog for an epic feature of an epic expansion. Also, nice to see you again, TomB
. . .
anyone whos payed attention to whats going on in the test server already knows all the info that was in this blog and have expounded on it to death.
to be honest to me the only way it could be any more "meh" is if they found an unposted blog on the new auto cloak on jump feature for Castor and posted that instead.
|
Daelin Blackleaf
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:50:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Rivqua I think you underestimate the pvp mind. I would guess they will one day equal the number of Command ships sold per race on the market.
/Riv
Unless the market for these ships is high manufacture of them will be pretty much a hobby for the bored/profit-ignorant.
Using your example if command ships were the only t2 ships then moon mineral supply would vastly outstrip demand. Price of the minerals, parts, and the ships themselves would plummet, and possessing the moons (and thus mining POS, sov, and territory in general) would be relatively pointless devaluing a huge chunk of content.
As to the "PvP mind" (cos apparently me and my alt don't PvP) you'll find it's the PvP'ers who enjoy blowing up your faction ships in their Rifters for challenge and lulz, or ganking your CNR in disposable BS for profits and hatemail. It's they who suffer most from losses because they take the most risks and while taking a big gamble every now and then is great for the adrenaline it's not the kind of thing you want to do all the time given the number of circumstances beyond your control.
|
Daelin Blackleaf
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:52:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Master Akira Lol dude, it's only a rank 1 skill. If you lose it from lvl IV to lvl III, that's what, less than a day training?
And to me with my well of SP that's bugger all but to a newer player that's another day playing catchup with the veterans.
|
Xtreem
Gallente Knockaround Guys Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:53:00 -
[40]
cool :D
|
|
brinelan
Caldari Victory Not Vengeance Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:57:00 -
[41]
If losing 4 hours of training time to make up your sp loss is going to hurt, you probably cant afford/dont have the other skills needed to fly these ships anyway.
I want the one in the concept art... so awesome...
Some days you're the bug, some days you're the windshield. |
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:02:00 -
[42]
Originally by: silken mouth will it be possible to combine subsystems of different races? also will each race have its own skillset?
You can only combine the subsystems form one race with each other. You can't assemble a ship with subsystems from different races.
|
|
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:04:00 -
[43]
Edited by: CCP Lemur on 12/02/2009 17:04:10
Originally by: Kuranta Edited by: Kuranta on 12/02/2009 16:42:37 Can the sub system skills be trained parallel with "normal" skills, as it is atm on Sisi?
No. They work as normal skills do. The issue on sisi right now is a Bug and going to be fixed.
|
|
Cailais
Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:05:00 -
[44]
some nice info - but I think most of us knew 99.99% of this already.
With only a short period to go we're still no closer to knowing any of the subsystem attributes, or have even seen the Amarr designs (and with only a couple of concept art pieces for Gallente and Min designs).
New dev blog required with MOAR details please
C.
Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
|
Casiella Truza
White Rose Society
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:05:00 -
[45]
Okay, so we've seen art for the Tengu and Loki. How about the Proteus and Legion? --
IC Twitter |
Steve Thomas
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:06:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Master Akira Totally worthy if the ships are good IMO.
well they already have a threadnaught on the Developemnt board about it.
|
Myra2007
Shafrak Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:07:00 -
[47]
Originally by: brinelan If losing 4 hours of training time to make up your sp loss is going to hurt, you probably cant afford/dont have the other skills needed to fly these ships anyway.
So you're gonna fly them with skills to lvl2 or 3 only? Don't you feel thats kind of a waste?
The way it is i may fly one once in a blue moon (with all subsystem skills to 5 though mind you) just for the fun of it. The same way i'd treat a faction bs but with even more caution. I think it'll be the same for most people. --
Originally by: kublai on Ankhesentapemkah That said, the "i'm a girl who plays your computer game and i'm not that ugly" has always been a certain winner in the mmo world
|
DDemon
The Order of Chivalry Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:08:00 -
[48]
I'd rather not loose SP... Will be fun to have tho not to actually use.
|
Tareen Kashaar
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:14:00 -
[49]
Personally, I'd rather risk losing SP than get swamped in the same old "oh well, if this dies I'll just buy another" way of thinking. Getting rich = getting bored. ____________
|
El'essar Viocragh
Minmatar Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:14:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf ... or ganking your CNR in disposable BS for profits and hatemail. It's they who suffer most from losses because they take the most risks...
I'm quite startled how you jump from disposable BS ganks to high loss and high risk.
But whatever. Just like T2 isn't for everyone because of the price-to-insurance ratio, T3 won't be for everyone.
Every second feature CCP introduces gets pages of flames about dumbing Eve down and catering to the masses. Now they introduce a new feature that clearly does not cater to the masses and reinforces Eve's position as an MMO with severe death penalties. And people whine on.
It's a conscious decission you have to make when you undock. Just like with that faction fit Marauder you're not quite sure you can replace if you lose it.
"Don't undock what you aren't willing to lose" simply got expanded to our SP now. If Eve pvp and its pvpers are as hardcore as we always portray them to be, T3 will be a huge hit. Because we all want harsh death penalties - but apparantly only for other people?!? -- [17:47] <Mephysto> its dead, jim |
|
Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:17:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf
- Skillpoint loss will result is lack of use
- Lack of use will result in low prices
- Low prices will result in little profit for related material acquisition, research, and production
- Lack of profit will lead to lack of use of these features
- Lack of use pretty much invalidates the primary content of the entire expansion
While some are willing to risk SP loss (and be the clusters first called primary and favorite suicide-gank-4-lulz target) we're talking about a relatively small market, these ships aren't for everyone for many their SP are precious being the only way to truly improve your character over time. If this follows through we'll end up with a whole lot of features that may as well not exist due to lack of use.
The whole SP loss system massively benefits those players with SP levels well beyond those gathered by the average player in their 7 month average (?) time in the game. Splitting it racially makes it worse as those with high SP will have three other races worth of t3 ship skills to fall back on. This all means that the older a character is the less they have to lose.
Combine the subsystem skills and provide a separate SP pool for subsystems to maintain the high level of risk (losing a level IV/V will still be significant) or drop the SP loss idea.
Either way the increased risk promotes empire use while punishing PvP use, promotes blobbing while punishing riskier styles of play and ejecting removing the penalty effectively makes it a punishment solely for those with high latency or suffering from lag, a genuinely terrible idea.
Other than all the SP related stuff the concept looks fantastic, as do the models. Im just glad Im not the one responsible for balancing it.
don't be silly
you can use a bog standard t2 ship while waiting for your precious subsystem skill to train up.
anyway will there be T3 frigates ??? I am waiting for those ... --- SIG --- CSM: your support is needed ! |
Dracira Dracc
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:17:00 -
[52]
loss of skill points...hmmmm... i would prefere new specializet implant slots and that you need to fit some "neuro-connector" implants to use the diffrent part of the T3 ship - and you loose (they burn down) them when your ship is exploding.
|
Shadowsword
Epsilon Lyr Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:22:00 -
[53]
We'll be able to "save" our setups?
Like, auto-fitting a ship if we have the modules alaivable?
That would be so nice... ------------------------------------------
|
Arkios Odymei
Incarnation of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:22:00 -
[54]
OH MAN!!!!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Avalira
Caldari Pax Minor Asylum
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:26:00 -
[55]
So... Tuxford is in the team? Do you guys still laugh at him? *looks at sig*
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Its been fixed. All in all its one of the more embarrassing mistakes I made, but it made game design laugh. Now lets never speak of this again.
|
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:35:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Shadowsword We'll be able to "save" our setups?
Like, auto-fitting a ship if we have the modules alaivable?
That would be so nice...
That is the plan. Player can save their own fittings and corps can save fittings for their members too. And if you have all stuff available you can just click "fit".
|
|
Avalira
Caldari Pax Minor Asylum
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:37:00 -
[57]
Import and export overview setting!? Highlight the end of the devblog
Wooot!
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Its been fixed. All in all its one of the more embarrassing mistakes I made, but it made game design laugh. Now lets never speak of this again.
|
Haywoode Jablome
The Templars Knights
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:37:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Haywoode Jablome on 12/02/2009 17:38:08
Originally by: CCP Fallout All I can say is...
Gentlemen and ladies... Tech 3.
Learn some manners
Ladies come first
|
Cailais
Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:38:00 -
[59]
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: Shadowsword We'll be able to "save" our setups?
Like, auto-fitting a ship if we have the modules alaivable?
That would be so nice...
That is the plan. Player can save their own fittings and corps can save fittings for their members too. And if you have all stuff available you can just click "fit".
W I N
C.
Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
|
Elaron
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:42:00 -
[60]
Originally by: CCP Lemur Player can save their own fittings and corps can save fittings for their members too. And if you have all stuff available you can just click "fit".
I take it this will only work if the requisite modules are on your hangar floor, for back-end database reasons if no other?
|
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:42:00 -
[61]
FINALLY
you us fly them before tellin us what they did
goes to read*
|
Avalira
Caldari Pax Minor Asylum
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:43:00 -
[62]
Oh yeah, will carriers/MS/Titans give us the ability to change the subsystems while "in space". I know you only said stations but it would be cool to be able to swap them out too. Same thing with POS's.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Its been fixed. All in all its one of the more embarrassing mistakes I made, but it made game design laugh. Now lets never speak of this again.
|
Zhula Guixgrixks
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:44:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Zhula Guixgrixks on 12/02/2009 17:44:36 I know cruiser are quite popular in Eve, but where are T3 frigates ???? But anyhow, good job, CCP :-)
|
Brutal Psycho
Amarr East Khanid Laboratories Khanid Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:47:00 -
[64]
More delicious WinSauce for the Masses. Thank you CCP!
|
Daelin Blackleaf
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:47:00 -
[65]
Originally by: El'essar Viocragh I'm quite startled how you jump from disposable BS ganks to high loss and high risk.
To counter the claim that the PvP mindset revolves around high loss/ high risk situations.
Originally by: El'essar Viocragh Just like T2 isn't for everyone because of the price-to-insurance ratio, T3 won't be for everyone.
At around 10m a pop t2 Frigates are available to just about everyone, but that's not the point. If I play well I can cover greater losses and risk more, this doesn't apply to t3, no matter how well I play my losses cannot be covered and due to the nature of EVE unavoidable losses will be incurred.
Originally by: El'essar Viocragh Every second feature CCP introduces gets pages of flames about dumbing Eve down and catering to the masses. Now they introduce a new feature that clearly does not cater to the masses and reinforces Eve's position as an MMO with severe death penalties. And people whine on.
Originally by: El'essar Viocragh Because we all want harsh death penalties - but apparantly only for other people?!?
Your pigeon-hole, it appears I don't fit into it. Seems I don't fit your definition of us "all" or "people" either. Risk should be present, but so should targets and increasing risk will decrease the amount of PvP going on. It's a fine balance. In this case I feel with the way people feel about their SP we'll see very little use of t3 ships beyond those veterans with the SP to spare.
It's not just a PvP issue though, without a lot of these ships being fielded wormhole space and the materials it provides will be relatively pointless. As with all professions in EVE if it can't compare well with running level 4's most people just aren't going to do it.
|
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:50:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Avalira Oh yeah, will carriers/MS/Titans give us the ability to change the subsystems while "in space". I know you only said stations but it would be cool to be able to swap them out too. Same thing with POS's.
Removing whole sections of your ship in space might not be such a wise idea.
|
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:52:00 -
[67]
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: Avalira Oh yeah, will carriers/MS/Titans give us the ability to change the subsystems while "in space". I know you only said stations but it would be cool to be able to swap them out too. Same thing with POS's.
Removing whole sections of your ship in space might not be such a wise idea.
let us dock inside titans
|
Illectroculus Defined
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:53:00 -
[68]
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Removing whole sections of your ship in space might not be such a wise idea.
You only want to do that kind of maintenance in a fully equipped dry dock.
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:57:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf It's not just a PvP issue though, without a lot of these ships being fielded wormhole space and the materials it provides will be relatively pointless. As with all professions in EVE if it can't compare well with running level 4's most people just aren't going to do it.
If you keep all your T3 sub-system skills at lvl 3, you'll only lose 3 hours of skilling for each popped ship. When you take into account that these won't be the same kind of 'throw-away' pew pew ships as T1 cruisers, it isn't so bad.
And if you're going into low armor, etc, you can just eject to avoid the loss. Would of course not work always.
|
Lubricious Cain
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 17:58:00 -
[70]
Perhaps my brain isn't working correctly, but could someone clarify the skill point loss for me? It says a random skill point loss to one of the racial sub systems. But then it says its one level.
Does it mean to say that you lose 1 level from a random subsystem skill? Or could this random loss of points actual lose more then 1 level?
Thanks
|
|
Cypherous
Minmatar Liberty Rogues CORPVS DELICTI
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:00:00 -
[71]
Can't wait to get my hands on them properly to play with a test, just need you guys to fix me not being able to train the propulsion subsystem skill for the Loki :( --------- Rally Against Evil Site[/center]
|
Zex Maxwell
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:08:00 -
[72]
Quote:
Oh. One last thing: Import and export overview settings.
I laughed when i seen this
|
Gartel Reiman
Civis Romanus Sum
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:10:00 -
[73]
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: Shadowsword We'll be able to "save" our setups?
Like, auto-fitting a ship if we have the modules alaivable?
That would be so nice...
That is the plan. Player can save their own fittings and corps can save fittings for their members too. And if you have all stuff available you can just click "fit".
Awesome stuff.
Also, since this is the official devblog thread on SP loss for T3 ships, confirming I am good with the idea and looking forward to flying T3 ships!
Originally by: Lubricious Cain Perhaps my brain isn't working correctly, but could someone clarify the skill point loss for me? It says a random skill point loss to one of the racial sub systems. But then it says its one level.
Does it mean to say that you lose 1 level from a random subsystem skill? Or could this random loss of points actual lose more then 1 level?
When I read that I thought that the word "random" was in a misleading place too. My understanding is that you will lose exactly one level from a random one of the five (appropriate racial) subsystem skills.
|
defiler
Mad Hermit Wayward Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:14:00 -
[74]
T3, new fitting screen, exporting overview settings... I'm lost for words, so I'll just keep this weird smile and mad glint in my eyes for the rest of the day.
Which reminds me, Originally by: the blog a familiar face to many of you, the one and only TomB.
No, no it isn't. He's still a Jove to me.
Mad Hermit corporation Minding our own business since 2004 |
Armoured C
Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:18:00 -
[75]
Originally by: CCP TomB
ooohgawd IT BACK
run for your lives the bat is back
\o/
This week EvE Life: Wormhole Wars 01/Feb
|
Missiles Jesus
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:20:00 -
[76]
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: silken mouth will it be possible to combine subsystems of different races? also will each race have its own skillset?
You can only combine the subsystems form one race with each other. You can't assemble a ship with subsystems from different races.
Why that?If i can fly all 4 races ships, would it been not fun to get the power of 4 in one shipOld players would love that,noobs not such much.
|
Dakisha
Amok. Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:24:00 -
[77]
Okay; so after listening to us talk about how crap an idea losing SP is (for the many reasons people have already stated in the other 20 odd page thread) - and being told to wait for moar detail; we get....
You lose a whole level of a random subsystem skill.
Leaving all the previous points raised in the aforementioned thread just as valid as they were before.
This is an unnessasary and unwanted (by the ppl it's going to affect the most; i.e pvp'ers) change. As a customer before a player - please stop wasting time on this and focus on what people are asking for.
I'll not rehash what everyone has said before; someone else will no doubt put it better than I - but consider this a +1 for getting rid of this unwanted idea.
|
ArmyOfMe
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:27:00 -
[78]
Originally by: CCP TomB
welcome back to these forums TomB, miss your old avatar tho
very nice blog, but a bit short with way to little details. I just hope you guys make t3 good enough to actually be worth risking sp over, but with TomB around im sure it will come out perfect or he will slap you all with a nerf bat
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:28:00 -
[79]
Edited by: keepiru on 12/02/2009 18:32:31
Originally by: Armoured C
Originally by: CCP TomB
ooohgawd IT BACK
run for your lives the bat is back
\o/
And it has now been upgraded to T3 :< Originally by: ArmyOfMe
Originally by: CCP TomB
welcome back to these forums TomB, miss your old avatar tho
Devs ain't devs anymore since they've stopped using Jove avatars. Everytime I see blue bars around a Caldari I think "Imposter! You can't be a dev!"
...
"Where has all the custard gone? Jelly just ain't the same." ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
Suitonia
Gallente interimo End of The Line.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:29:00 -
[80]
Quote: Oh. One last thing: Import and export overview settings.
Beautiful
|
|
Marlona Sky
Caldari Astroglide X
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:29:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Dakisha Okay; so after listening to us talk about how crap an idea losing SP is (for the many reasons people have already stated in the other 20 odd page thread) - and being told to wait for moar detail; we get....
You lose a whole level of a random subsystem skill.
Leaving all the previous points raised in the aforementioned thread just as valid as they were before.
This is an unnessasary and unwanted (by the ppl it's going to affect the most; i.e pvp'ers) change. As a customer before a player - please stop wasting time on this and focus on what people are asking for.
I'll not rehash what everyone has said before; someone else will no doubt put it better than I - but consider this a +1 for getting rid of this unwanted idea.
Don't like it? Don't fly it! End of story.
|
Eldern Minderhost
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:31:00 -
[82]
Yes, get rid of SP loss upon ship death. These are cruisers... unless you make them incredibly over-powered they will be lost often and easily making this an annoying, aggravating, time sink for those of us who want to actually fly these.
Parallel training of subsystem skills or lose the SP loss please.
|
Rin Marcosad
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:34:00 -
[83]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Oh. One last thing: Import and export overview settings.
YESSSSSSSSSSS.
(Oh, and that tech 3 stuff is kinda interesting too, I suppose.)
|
Agrigan
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:38:00 -
[84]
No one knows weather or not SP loss is worthwhile, and they won't until people are flying these ships. I believe stats on the ships themselves and the subsystems will help in determining value.
|
Armoured C
Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:38:00 -
[85]
opeople might moan about loosing SP at what not but they are off only specific skill and those skills are rank 1 so come on >_>
just yer baby wine and dont fly if you dont want to ....jeeez
and good blog finally we haz pictures ... been wanting a new desktop picture for AGESSSSSS
This week EvE Life: Wormhole Wars 01/Feb
|
Vir Hellnamin
Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:39:00 -
[86]
Edited by: Vir Hellnamin on 12/02/2009 18:40:08
Originally by: CCP Lemur
That is the plan. Player can save their own fittings and corps can save fittings for their members too. And if you have all stuff available you can just click "fit".
Mother****ing awesomesauce!
Epic awesomeness of Epicness, with frosting and cherries on top.
-- V.H.
"Entering MH means instant death. It's worse than 0.0. Even the asteroids shoot back." - Alex Harumichi [GRD]
|
Marine HK4861
Caldari Radical Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:40:00 -
[87]
If I read that devblog correctly, you only lose subsystem SP when you're inside the ship when it goes pop. If you self destruct it or eject, you don't lose any SP.
Therefore all the people complaining of SP loss can just eject and run the normal SP loss risk of being podded.
|
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:40:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Lubricious Cain Perhaps my brain isn't working correctly, but could someone clarify the skill point loss for me? It says a random skill point loss to one of the racial sub systems. But then it says its one level.
Does it mean to say that you lose 1 level from a random subsystem skill? Or could this random loss of points actual lose more then 1 level?
Thanks
It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly.
|
|
Des Jardin
Ad Astra Vexillum Arcane Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:44:00 -
[89]
Skill point loss recovery from destruction of T3 cruiser dovetails nicely with the new skill queue.
See, there is a method to the madness after all.
Des Jardin
|
Dakisha
Amok. Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:50:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Marine HK4861 Therefore all the people complaining of SP loss can just eject and run the normal SP loss risk of being podded.
You mean the zero risk of losing SP as you have an up to date clone?
|
|
Leumas Kharzim
Amarr Intaki Armaments
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:52:00 -
[91]
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: Lubricious Cain Perhaps my brain isn't working correctly, but could someone clarify the skill point loss for me? It says a random skill point loss to one of the racial sub systems. But then it says its one level.
Does it mean to say that you lose 1 level from a random subsystem skill? Or could this random loss of points actual lose more then 1 level?
Thanks
It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly.
How does that work with partially trained skills?
Let's say, for an unrealistic example, that all 5 skills are partially trained and stopped befor completing the next level (stupid, I know, but still a valid question). How does the system determine what to take away?
|
Rhys Onasi
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:54:00 -
[92]
Edited by: Rhys Onasi on 12/02/2009 18:55:10
Originally by: CCP Lemur
It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly.
1. Is that the racially related subsystem skills? Or after losing your ASC (Amarr Strategic Cruiser- Look ma, I made an acronym!) could you lose some of your Caldari Racial Subsystem skills instead?
2. In previous statements on Tech 3 a while back, one of the Devs stated that dissasembling a SC would cause skill loss/ experience. Considering that was a couple months ago, a lot could have changed. Are we still going to lose SP from dissasembling? (I'm thinking no, that was a relic of an idea from back when you wanted to have the t3 ships themselves contain SP?) Can you confirm that the ONLY way to lose SP is to be sitting in the ship as it reaches <0 structure hitpoints?
And that any other way of escaping that scenario will prevent loss of sp?
and finally: 3. Who came up with the names?
EDIT: And 4. Please answer the poster directly above me who has a question that I have wondered about myself for a while, and forgot to add.
|
Mikal Drey
Minmatar Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:55:00 -
[93]
hey hey
firstly the loki is a sexy little bugger. I went for the caldari style spikey front and the slender subsystem 2 frame. ofc i completly fitted for looks :)
Although the real stats arent currently available its looking like a real fun ship to fly. Just a couple of Questions tbh..
1. What are the plans for the availability and pricing for them ? from the production blog in game dev its looking to be a real expensive cruiser but we dont know how hard/easy/rare the parts will be to aquire or how much of a sink the "reverse engineering" process will be. is it CCP's intention that they are rare or commonplace. as someone said if anyone if flying one in fleet it will be primary for sure just fot he expensive loss to its pilot.
2. will there be an additional bonus if you fit all subsystems of the same type ? If you managed to get all subsystem 2's will there be a benefit to have them all working in unison ?
atm ive described the Loki as a vagabond on steroids. but SISI stats are placeholders atm so its hard to tell :)
|
Dr Ming
Mindworks
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:55:00 -
[94]
This is what I suspect is going on:
-Too many variations to balance.
-A need to at least pretend that the ships have some semblance of balance to keep forums from exploding in fire and having people ragequit because the game isn't balanced.
-Solution: Balance the ships so they are generally garbage compared to T2 at level 3 and just accept that there will be grotesquely OP combos at rank 5, and implement skill loss on death. i.e. don't actually balance the the ships.
This keeps the forums from exploding in fire because when people start a threadnaught about how these cruisers with max skills are solopwnmobiles, because the 'solution' is to kill the unbalanced ship because that nerfs the pilot for a little while.
Obviously its a case of 'we'll see', but that is what I suspect the deal with these ships is going to be.
I don't like the SP loss mechanic one bit. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think the ships are going to be popular in the long run. Players are really particular about their SP, and once the 'it won't happen to me' self delusion wears off, I don't imagine people are going to like these ships in the long run. I don't like that, because the worth of wormhole space seems to be tightly bound to the worth of T3.
|
Shadowsword
Epsilon Lyr Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:00:00 -
[95]
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: Shadowsword We'll be able to "save" our setups?
Like, auto-fitting a ship if we have the modules alaivable?
That would be so nice...
That is the plan. Player can save their own fittings and corps can save fittings for their members too. And if you have all stuff available you can just click "fit".
Nice nice nice.
Will it do the same with ammos and drones? ------------------------------------------
|
Aeo IV
Amarr Xomic OmniCorporation
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:01:00 -
[96]
:( I want to see Legion!
Plz?
|
Ki Tarra
Caldari Ki Tech Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:04:00 -
[97]
Originally by: CCP Lemur It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly.
Just to clarify how the skill loss works:
If you are unlucky enough to lose SP from a support skill that you are half an hour away from getting to level 5, it would knock you all the way back from >250K SP to 8K SP?
|
General Exception
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:09:00 -
[98]
Am I the only one who thinks the Loki looks like a Tengu with rust? Caldari is meant to look butt ugly, but minnie is supposed to be a flying scrapheap with sails mesmerising the pilot in how it even holds itself together, not a clean-lined box with prongs.
Also, I really don't like the idea of going into a lagfest knowing I will lose SP. If Eve were faster and lagfree it'd be OK, but no, not even EVE64 is good enough. Also even though it's Rank 1, these skills will be trained to level 5 so often that in effect the training time spent on them would be equivalent to a Rank 32 skill - pants idea tbh.
|
Susan Fiona
Fish.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:09:00 -
[99]
Edited by: Susan Fiona on 12/02/2009 19:11:23
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: Lubricious Cain Perhaps my brain isn't working correctly, but could someone clarify the skill point loss for me? It says a random skill point loss to one of the racial sub systems. But then it says its one level.
Does it mean to say that you lose 1 level from a random subsystem skill? Or could this random loss of points actual lose more then 1 level?
Thanks
It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly.
Wow, the force is strong with SP loss angst. I see the SP loss much like the overheating problem, in that if doing something risks your modules/ship/isk/SP, there must be a way for a savvy pilot to mitigate the risks of that behavior to some degree.
Why not solve the problem in a somewhat more efficient way by having a "nanite paste" equivalent utility (and an associated high rank skill [> rank 8]) that modifies the likelihood of SP loss (never 100% guaranteed that you won't lose, but with the "SP paste" skill up to L5, you have an 80% chance of not losing SP or something)? That way there's still the pain of loss, which is key for EvE, and the ability to mitigate that loss through careful planning. 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. Just a thought.
edit for clarity of language
|
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:11:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Leumas Kharzim
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: Lubricious Cain Perhaps my brain isn't working correctly, but could someone clarify the skill point loss for me? It says a random skill point loss to one of the racial sub systems. But then it says its one level.
Does it mean to say that you lose 1 level from a random subsystem skill? Or could this random loss of points actual lose more then 1 level?
Thanks
It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly.
How does that work with partially trained skills?
Let's say, for an unrealistic example, that all 5 skills are partially trained and stopped befor completing the next level (stupid, I know, but still a valid question). How does the system determine what to take away?
It will take the amount of points you would lose from the last complete level to the one below. So if you are 250k almost lvl 5 and die, you will lose the 37kish SP you needed to get from level 3 to 4. I won't swear on it, but I will check with the guys and come back if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Daelorn
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:14:00 -
[101]
Originally by: CCP TomB
YYYYYYYYYUUUUUUUUOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
|
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:14:00 -
[102]
Edited by: CCP Lemur on 12/02/2009 19:14:35
Originally by: Rhys Onasi Edited by: Rhys Onasi on 12/02/2009 18:55:10
Originally by: CCP Lemur
It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly.
1. Is that the racially related subsystem skills? Or after losing your ASC (Amarr Strategic Cruiser- Look ma, I made an acronym!) could you lose some of your Caldari Racial Subsystem skills instead?
2. In previous statements on Tech 3 a while back, one of the Devs stated that dissasembling a SC would cause skill loss/ experience. Considering that was a couple months ago, a lot could have changed. Are we still going to lose SP from dissasembling? (I'm thinking no, that was a relic of an idea from back when you wanted to have the t3 ships themselves contain SP?) Can you confirm that the ONLY way to lose SP is to be sitting in the ship as it reaches <0 structure hitpoints?
And that any other way of escaping that scenario will prevent loss of sp?
and finally: 3. Who came up with the names?
EDIT: And 4. Please answer the poster directly above me who has a question that I have wondered about myself for a while, and forgot to add.
1. Only racially related. Dieing in an ASC will only choose from the 5 amarr subssytem skills to invoke the loss. 2. 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. 3. Mostly Nozh with some hints/sugesstion/rants from the rest of team. 4. see above
|
|
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:16:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Mikal Drey hey hey
firstly the loki is a sexy little bugger. I went for the caldari style spikey front and the slender subsystem 2 frame. ofc i completly fitted for looks :)
Although the real stats arent currently available its looking like a real fun ship to fly. Just a couple of Questions tbh..
1. What are the plans for the availability and pricing for them ? from the production blog in game dev its looking to be a real expensive cruiser but we dont know how hard/easy/rare the parts will be to aquire or how much of a sink the "reverse engineering" process will be. is it CCP's intention that they are rare or commonplace. as someone said if anyone if flying one in fleet it will be primary for sure just fot he expensive loss to its pilot.
2. will there be an additional bonus if you fit all subsystems of the same type ? If you managed to get all subsystem 2's will there be a benefit to have them all working in unison ?
atm ive described the Loki as a vagabond on steroids. but SISI stats are placeholders atm so its hard to tell :)
1. That is still under balancing, but we do want you guys to fly those things of course 2. There will be no set bonus.
|
|
Isac Hands
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:16:00 -
[104]
Edited by: Isac Hands on 12/02/2009 19:17:50 Let us assume i have a subsytem skill at lev 4 and has traind it 3 days towards lev 5 when i fly out and loose my T3 ship. The ramdom skill loss choose just this skill to take the loss. How would this be done?
|
Sovereign533
Caldari The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:18:00 -
[105]
Quote: Oh. One last thing: Import and export overview settings.
<3... all i have to say about the entire dev blog =D
*Your signature file has been removed for the inclusion of inappropriate language. -- Fallout 3 |
Daelin Blackleaf
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:20:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Armoured C opeople might moan about loosing SP at what not but they are off only specific skill and those skills are rank 1 so come on >_>
It's the perception of it not the reality. If balanced to make them worth the loss I'll happily fly them, but a lot of people will go "omg my precious SP" and refuse to. More will probably try them and then give up after a few losses and retrainings.
There needs to be a market for these ships otherwise all the related content isn't going to be worth engaging in.
Of course if the worst happens I benefit massively from a powerful ship few are willing to fly that I can lose over and over due to low price, relatively low value of SP to those of us who have been here for years, and the fact that I already meet the hull requirements for all four races t3 cruisers allowing me to lose a few hours and use another races ship while the loss is retrained.
I just don't think it's good for those without dozens of millions of SP, those who value their character development more highly than I do, and the new contents usefulness to the community.
|
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:21:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Shadowsword
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: Shadowsword We'll be able to "save" our setups?
Like, auto-fitting a ship if we have the modules alaivable?
That would be so nice...
That is the plan. Player can save their own fittings and corps can save fittings for their members too. And if you have all stuff available you can just click "fit".
Nice nice nice.
Will it do the same with ammos and drones?
Drones and Ammo fitted to the ship will be saved too.
|
|
SirFett
Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:22:00 -
[108]
so thats umm a fancy way of saying nothing at all the ppl rushing to the incredibly broken release on sisi havent already figured out of disected and later confirmed by various dev statements
p.s. why not implement a mechanic where the ship itself gains in strength per kill or something (ya know like other mmo's gain sp's) that way if you get blown up you start from the base + skills and have to work you way up ... unless you get blown up probably wayyy to hard to program thou
|
Gal'drea
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:23:00 -
[109]
tl;dr
CCP thought it would be too hard to code in the ships having "experience" and getting better the longer you fly them (a really cool idea). So instead, they decided to gimp the actual pilot (losing SP, a very bad idea).
And stop giving me the argument, "you can eject or self destruct" ...
1) lag prevents this most of the time 2) if you really want to boost piracy, give us an auto eject feature... pirate gets ship AND we keep SP (what I assume is the preferred alternative to losing hard earned SP). 3) what was so wrong with the ship gaining SP? Obviously that is where you were headed with "dimantling the ship causes a loss"
|
Haradgrim
Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:29:00 -
[110]
Edited by: Haradgrim on 12/02/2009 19:29:48 1) are the hulls themselves associated with a race and if so are there seperate requisites and bonuses associated with them.
2) if the hulls are racial in nature; can you fit another races subsystems on it if you use only the subsystems of one other race.
3) I love the self-destruct/eject doesn't make you lose SP aspect, thats pretty cool and could mitigate the downside (if say you actually lose SP once for every two or three losses, I can see that being reasonable) --
Originally by: CCP Oveur Just donæt forget the reach-around.
|
|
Manfred Rickenbocker
The Elliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:34:00 -
[111]
Edited by: Manfred Rickenbocker on 12/02/2009 19:35:17 It seems that everyone is getting burned by the skill level loss mechanic. How about a simpler idea: 10% loss (therabouts) of total SP in that skill for the randomly chosen skill? This would:
- Reduce hatred for the loss of an ENTIRE level of SP
- Simplifies the confusion over partially trained levels
- Stay in line with the beating CCP wants to give for training it longer, but less harsh
- Allow you to introduce (if so desired) a skill that can reduce the percentage
Edit: spelling ------------------------ Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times. |
Daelin Blackleaf
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:35:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Gal'drea CCP thought it would be too hard to code in the ships having "experience" and getting better the longer you fly them (a really cool idea).
XP... in EVE... either you have to grind NPC's or grind your alts/corp mates either way I don't see it being a workable idea.
Originally by: Gal'drea 2) if you really want to boost piracy, give us an auto eject feature... pirate gets ship AND we keep SP (what I assume is the preferred alternative to losing hard earned SP).
That's actually a nice idea, though it benefits the wealthy a lot as they're not too bothered by ship loses making it very similar to t2 with it's nigh uninsurability.
Originally by: Gal'drea 3) what was so wrong with the ship gaining SP? Obviously that is where you were headed with "dimantling the ship causes a loss"
Because I'd buy a hangar full of ships and set them training, only using those with very high or even level V skills with enough in stock to keep me from running out.
Still the best answer I can see, if SP loss is CCP's preferred mechanic for increasing risk, is parallel training of subsystem skills alongside the merging of all races subsystems. Losing (f.ex.) offensive subsystems IV is then going to be just as much a kick in the balls to a vet as a regular player as the vet can't just switch race and the regular can carry on training his other much needed skills.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:38:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf <stuff>
TBH, skillpoint loss won't even put a dent in their use. It's a shock right now. We're not used to the idea. But that will change.
Further more, people like myself who's main interest in the game is pushing the performance envelope of their ships won't bat an eye at bringing every skill to 5, regardless of the risk. These are the same people that fly multibillion ISK ships in PVP. Just because it's the best.
This is what Eve needs. Advanced content. Something for people to work towards.
If you look at the skill requirements for T3, you'll see that it isn't that much really. Not any longer than it would take to skill up T2 large guns for a BS, to be sure. You could be flying a max skilled T3 ship for the time cost it would take to fly a max skilled T2 fit BS. Pretty reasonable barrier to entry IMO. Very light skill requirements.
Cost? Supply and demand. Right now T2 is SUPER cheap. It's INSANE. Why? Because there is ISK to be made, no matter how small, and people are producing whatever the market can handle. T3 will be the exact same.
At first it'll be expensive, but in time the prices will drop. Maybe not to the levels of T2, but they'll be reasonable, given the time cost required to gather the materials. Rigs are a good example of this mechanic. At first rigs were 150m+ per rig for T1 stuff, now they're down to 15-20m each for most of the popular ones.
T3 required to compete? No way. T3 won't provide more peak performance IMO. You won't see more DPS than a BS, or more tank than a T2 command ship, or faster top speeds than an interceptor, or better EW performance than a Recon.
What I think you will see is the ability to do many of the above, with obvious limits and restrictions, from a basic platform that lends unpredictability to combat that hasn't been in Eve for a long time.
I'm already able to fly all four T3 ships on SISI, with all subsystem skills at 3 and climbing. I LOVE THE SKILL QUEUE!!! (when it works, lol)
Nuances like ejecting or self destructing to save your SP will add more depth to PVP as well. It's more choices to be made, more levels of skill to be added to combat. More ways to set apart the really good players from everyone else. I can't wait.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Gartel Reiman
Civis Romanus Sum
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:38:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Dakisha This is an unnessasary and unwanted (by the ppl it's going to affect the most; i.e pvp'ers) change.
D.
I'm a PvPer and I welcome this move. I also don't accept the validity of the points in the other thread, which is why I've been quite active in there recently, to try to get to the bottom of why the people who don't want the change are against it.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:50:00 -
[115]
Originally by: SirFett so thats umm a fancy way of saying nothing at all the ppl rushing to the incredibly broken release on sisi havent already figured out of disected and later confirmed by various dev statements
p.s. why not implement a mechanic where the ship itself gains in strength per kill or something (ya know like other mmo's gain sp's) that way if you get blown up you start from the base + skills and have to work you way up ... unless you get blown up probably wayyy to hard to program thou
Easy to code and implement. But why use that mechanic? It's easily cheated.
Get an alt in a ship, insure it, explode it. Rinse, repeat until you have the requested level of 'skilling' for that ship, continue for other ships as backups and/or sell them off as 'pre-skilled' on contract etc.
Do not want.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Susan Fiona
Fish.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:50:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Haradgrim Edited by: Haradgrim on 12/02/2009 19:29:48 stuff 3) I love the self-destruct/eject doesn't make you lose SP aspect, thats pretty cool and could mitigate the downside (if say you actually lose SP once for every two or three losses, I can see that being reasonable)
Actually, thinking through this, it is a great mechanic. If those with lots of isk to burn are carebearing in lowsec/0.0, and gankers come along, it makes it more likely the carebear will eject and give the gank squad a shiny, if somewhat dented, T3 ship to board. Will make ransoms much more interesting, I think.
|
Gal'drea
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:51:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf
XP... in EVE... either you have to grind NPC's or grind your alts/corp mates either way I don't see it being a workable idea.
I'll admit this isn't completely clear how it could best be implemented. However, with a little imagination a lot of options can be conceived (# jumps traversed in low/null sec, for example...)
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf
That's actually a nice idea, though it benefits the wealthy a lot as they're not too bothered by ship loses making it very similar to t2 with it's nigh uninsurability.
We already know these won't be insured, and while I don't like the idea of SP loss (as many don't) ... I think it would be nice to have a "lag proof" method of abandoning ship. This would make pirates happy (ooh! T3 loot!) and players (ooh! no gimped SP!).
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf
Because I'd buy a hangar full of ships and set them training, only using those with very high or even level V skills with enough in stock to keep me from running out.
/me is confused.
Are you talking about the ship experience idea here? Because I didn't mean that experience should be gained for no reason. Granted, it can't really be done on the basis of kills (and is truly a difficult problem). I think the best solution with minimal change at this point would be to NOT fix the Sisi bug, and allow the support skills for T3 to train parallel to previous skills. This would in essence decrease a pilots T3 skill temporarilly, while not hindering his attempt to fly a carrier next, for example.
So after we bashed heads a little on the earlier points... I think most of what I said agrees with what you've said here.
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf
Still the best answer I can see, if SP loss is CCP's preferred mechanic for increasing risk, is parallel training of subsystem skills alongside the merging of all races subsystems. Losing (f.ex.) offensive subsystems IV is then going to be just as much a kick in the balls to a vet as a regular player as the vet can't just switch race and the regular can carry on training his other much needed skills.
|
silken mouth
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:57:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Missiles Jesus
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: silken mouth will it be possible to combine subsystems of different races? also will each race have its own skillset?
You can only combine the subsystems form one race with each other. You can't assemble a ship with subsystems from different races.
Why that?If i can fly all 4 races ships, would it been not fun to get the power of 4 in one shipOld players would love that,noobs not such much.
Aye! i was hoping it would be possible to build your own phantasm like ship... maybe with one additional skill and the risk to lose one random skill of each races subsystem...
|
Dari Anoh
Amarr Anoh Shavar
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:57:00 -
[119]
*does the happy dance* I love it! Very much looking forward to seeing the possibilities of this in the future. I hope the balancing will be as good in-game as it sounds on paper, and I even like the concept of losing random subsystem skillpoints. Very, very cool.
*meek mumble* Now can I see some concept art of the Ammarian Strategic Cruiser pretty please with an Empress on top?
|
Red 7
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:02:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: SirFett so thats umm a fancy way of saying nothing at all the ppl rushing to the incredibly broken release on sisi havent already figured out of disected and later confirmed by various dev statements
p.s. why not implement a mechanic where the ship itself gains in strength per kill or something (ya know like other mmo's gain sp's) that way if you get blown up you start from the base + skills and have to work you way up ... unless you get blown up probably wayyy to hard to program thou
Easy to code and implement. But why use that mechanic? It's easily cheated.
Get an alt in a ship, insure it, explode it. Rinse, repeat until you have the requested level of 'skilling' for that ship, continue for other ships as backups and/or sell them off as 'pre-skilled' on contract etc.
Do not want.
That's simple to counter - just make the Ship SP linked to the pilot - like insurance.
|
|
Hitachi Morimoto
Gallente Hematite Rose Bionic Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:08:00 -
[121]
Hi, Couple of questions for Dr. Awesome the dev.
1: Reverse engineering. Will it require a special lab or structure to produce the necessary BPCs? (BPOs?)
2: I heard that to actually produce using said BP a special structure will be needed. Will there be changes to the high sec assembly lines to allow empire dwellers to produce these ships and subs?
3: Will the subsystems change the amount of dronespace, hardpoints, etc? (IE can i make a glass cannon with 8 launcher hardpoints and 125 dronespace + bandwidth?)
4: The sleepers will apparently be tougher than a concrete creme brulee. Will they be utilizing T3, making their tactics and weaknesses a crapshoot?
5: Will the SP loss include the skills required to fly T3, or just the subsystem skills?
Thanks for your time. -------------------------------------------------- If tomorrow technically doesn't exist until it happens, then doesn't that beg the askin if today didn't exist yesterday? |
Jaisan
Minmatar Alcatraz Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:08:00 -
[122]
TomB , what happened to your face man.
You had such a pretty Jove one.
Have all Jove chars been nerfed ?
and great work on the T3 ships
Just too orangey for crows. |
Daelin Blackleaf
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:09:00 -
[123]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf <stuff>
TBH, skillpoint loss won't even put a dent in their use. It's a shock right now. We're not used to the idea. But that will change.
Perhaps your right, there really is no way to tell until it hits TQ, but my suspicion is that their use will be restricted to so small a group that few people will find use for any of the related content. While that small group includes me it'll be a shame for everyone else.
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Nuances like ejecting or self destructing to save your SP will add more depth to PVP as well. It's more choices to be made, more levels of skill to be added to combat. More ways to set apart the really good players from everyone else. I can't wait.
I'd agree if EVE was a lagless environment or an auto-eject feature was implemented. As it stands it's too often out of the pilots control except under ideal conditions.
Originally by: Gal'drea So after we bashed heads a little on the earlier points... I think most of what I said agrees with what you've said here.
Aye pretty much in agreement, I just dislike the idea of experience for doing something in EVE, the lack of that is one of things that makes EVE a great game that stands out from the market.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:15:00 -
[124]
Originally by: Red 7
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: SirFett so thats umm a fancy way of saying nothing at all the ppl rushing to the incredibly broken release on sisi havent already figured out of disected and later confirmed by various dev statements
p.s. why not implement a mechanic where the ship itself gains in strength per kill or something (ya know like other mmo's gain sp's) that way if you get blown up you start from the base + skills and have to work you way up ... unless you get blown up probably wayyy to hard to program thou
Easy to code and implement. But why use that mechanic? It's easily cheated.
Get an alt in a ship, insure it, explode it. Rinse, repeat until you have the requested level of 'skilling' for that ship, continue for other ships as backups and/or sell them off as 'pre-skilled' on contract etc.
Do not want.
That's simple to counter - just make the Ship SP linked to the pilot - like insurance.
It's simple to break. Just keep shooting alt ships until your personal ship is 'skilled up enough'. Too bad if you can't sell them off. People will still artificially farm their 'skillpoints' up to make their ships better. It's a crap mechanic.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Adam C
Caldari H A V O C Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:15:00 -
[125]
Edited by: Adam C on 12/02/2009 20:15:32 n/a
|
|
CCP Lemur
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:39:00 -
[126]
Edited by: CCP Lemur on 12/02/2009 20:39:27
Originally by: Hitachi Morimoto Edited by: Hitachi Morimoto on 12/02/2009 20:27:08 Hi, Couple of questions for Dr. Awesome the dev.
1: Reverse engineering. Will it require a special lab or structure to produce the necessary BPCs? (BPOs?)
2: I heard that to actually produce using said BP a special structure will be needed. Will there be changes to the high sec assembly lines to allow empire dwellers to produce these ships and subs?
3: Will the subsystems change the amount of dronespace, hardpoints, etc? (IE can i make a glass cannon with 8 launcher hardpoints and 125 dronespace + bandwidth?)
4: The sleepers will apparently be tougher than a concrete creme brulee. Will they be utilizing T3, making their tactics and weaknesses a crapshoot?
5: Will the SP loss include the skills required to fly T3, or just the subsystem skills?
6: Do you ever get tired of reading threads?
Thanks for your time.
1. + 2.: See here 3. In general yes, but to what extent depends on Nozh and TomB with their balancing and overall vision. 4. They won't, because T3 is attribute wise nothing new. They are hard as f*, though 5. Just the 5 related subssystem skills of the ship you blow up in. 6. I'm a bit tired right now, but we still love you guys.
|
|
Red 7
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:41:00 -
[127]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Red 7
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: SirFett so thats umm a fancy way of saying nothing at all the ppl rushing to the incredibly broken release on sisi havent already figured out of disected and later confirmed by various dev statements
p.s. why not implement a mechanic where the ship itself gains in strength per kill or something (ya know like other mmo's gain sp's) that way if you get blown up you start from the base + skills and have to work you way up ... unless you get blown up probably wayyy to hard to program thou
Easy to code and implement. But why use that mechanic? It's easily cheated.
Get an alt in a ship, insure it, explode it. Rinse, repeat until you have the requested level of 'skilling' for that ship, continue for other ships as backups and/or sell them off as 'pre-skilled' on contract etc.
Do not want.
That's simple to counter - just make the Ship SP linked to the pilot - like insurance.
It's simple to break. Just keep shooting alt ships until your personal ship is 'skilled up enough'. Too bad if you can't sell them off. People will still artificially farm their 'skillpoints' up to make their ships better. It's a crap mechanic.
It could be a crap mechanic but what makes it interesting is that it adds an additional dimension. What's a crap mechanic is "coding/fixing" wormholes to stop -sec players from ending up in high sec - as has been mentioned by some.
But for the sake of argument - how would you design a ship experience mechanic that wouldn't be as easy to game?
|
Cyberus
Caldari Final Destination. BrightSpark Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:45:00 -
[128]
So far so good.
But still i did not find answere for my question.
Lets say all subsystems trained to lvl5 and i did lose the ship will it bring one of my skills down completely to lvl4 or just take some amaunt of SP between lvl4 and 5.
Because if it will downgrade to lvl4 completely seems to me prety much ( though on lower levels it wont be big problem)
Personaly i think it will be much fair if it took randomly some SP from current lvl it trained ( even if it still training in progress) lets say like between 15-30% randomly.
Cyb. ===== * Your signature file is broken. Please use one that will display - Fallout |
Eldern Minderhost
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:45:00 -
[129]
Parallel training but only while in the selected ship.
|
Vir Hellnamin
Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:46:00 -
[130]
Originally by: CCP Lemur
That is the plan. Player can save their own fittings and corps can save fittings for their members too. And if you have all stuff available you can just click "fit".
Any chance to get a nice pop-up message that would list all missing modules, if that might happen after clicking that "fit" button?
-- V.H.
"Entering MH means instant death. It's worse than 0.0. Even the asteroids shoot back." - Alex Harumichi [GRD]
|
|
Franga
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:46:00 -
[131]
I saw Tuxford's name in there. Due to this, I am less skeptical regarding t3 ships. ----------
|
A'Sadar Malindra
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:52:00 -
[132]
If you need to explain the name then you've used the wrong word. "Modular cruisers", or "tactical cruisers" would be better.
|
Mashie Saldana
Minmatar Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:52:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Cyberus But still i did not find answere for my question.
Lets say all subsystems trained to lvl5 and i did lose the ship will it bring one of my skills down completely to lvl4 or just take some amaunt of SP between lvl4 and 5.
Originally by: Dev blog The penalty is one level off the top. Observe that whether that is a downgrade from, say, level 2 to 1 on your underdeveloped electronics or a painful fall from level 5 to 4 on the spit-polished offensive subsystem, is entirely dependent upon lady luck.
|
Armoured C
Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:57:00 -
[134]
Originally by: CCP Lemur
6. I'm a bit tired right now, but we still love you guys.
you should hire me , i always love forums
This week EvE Life: Wormhole Wars 01/Feb
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:58:00 -
[135]
Originally by: A'Sadar Malindra If you need to explain the name then you've used the wrong word. "Modular cruisers", or "tactical cruisers" would be better.
+1 for 'Tactical Cruisers'.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Kylegar
Caldari Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:58:00 -
[136]
Quick Question, does it pull a random skill rank off the top regardless of race?
Eg: You have Amarr/Gallente/Caldari subsystem skills trained, and you lose a Tengu (Caldari Cruiser). Will the random chance pull off from any race's skills, or just Caldari skills? --
Originally by: CCP Ginger No sex changes.
|
Strom Nekth
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:04:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Red 7
But for the sake of argument - how would you design a ship experience mechanic that wouldn't be as easy to game?
How about having diminishing returns both with respect to pilots and ships? So killing a pilot for the third time gives a lot less experience than killing them for the first time. Same with ship types. Major disadvantage of this is potential database load though.
Base the experience on isk value of ship - max insurance value. So you get no experience for blowing up a ship that doesn't cost anything, but a lot of experience for blowing up valuable (T2, T3, faction fitted) ships.
Finally you could have T3 ship experience decay over time, especially if the ship isn't being flown.
So, yes, you can still game this if you're willing to 'feed' your T3 ship a constant supply of T2 ships (worth hundreds of millions if iskies). You might even be able to maintain a backup ship or two at increased cost. I don't think that that's such a bad trade-off.
|
CareBeer
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:06:00 -
[138]
Sounds great, but plz skip the SP loss
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:14:00 -
[139]
Originally by: Red 7 <clipped to prevent mod wrath lol> It could be a crap mechanic but what makes it interesting is that it adds an additional dimension. What's a crap mechanic is "coding/fixing" wormholes to stop -sec players from ending up in high sec - as has been mentioned by some.
But for the sake of argument - how would you design a ship experience mechanic that wouldn't be as easy to game?
For starters, I wouldn't be in favor of making a mechanic like that in the first place. But if I HAD to design a mechanic like that, here's how I would do it:
#1, remove ALL insurance. No 'base' 50% money back either. Zero ISK back for loss of ship.
#2, ships destroyed would have a value modifier assigned to it depending on who was piloting it at the time. A highly skilled PVP pilot = higher value modifier (or less of a penalty, if you will) than someone who either has no PVP SP, or simply has little to no SP at all (alt).
#3, fitting value modifier: exponentially reduce the value of the kill for reduced fittings. If ship is only 90% fit (missing 1-2 modules, this includes rigs) kill value is reduced by 75%, as a *starting point*. If only 50% fit, kill value is reduced by 90%. Any ship fit less than 50% counts as zero.
#4, module modifiers: each module will have a PVP value assigned to it, and will have an internal bonus structure built into the tag so as to have synergistic effects with other modules. If you have an armor rep fit, and you fit a DC2 and a few EANMs, the bonus for the kill will be higher than if you fit 3x civilian armor repairers and a civvi shield booster. T2 will get more points for kill value, faction and officer exponentially more.
Add to all of this additional factors such as sec status of the system killed in (lowsec getting the highest bonus between 0.0, lowsec and empire), amount of damage taken, other ships killed in the same engagement (multikill bonus anyone?), number of people on the kill, damage done by the recipient of the kill, etc. etc.
The whole focus of all of this is to promote real world PVP kills, and make it horribly ineffective (useless even) to simply try and farm empty ships for a gain. The SP gained by the T3 ships would be small in comparison to the ISK value destroyed, so it will be fairly impractical to just throw ISK at the problem (although it's still possible), and it would have a very rapidly diminishing return to top it all off.
The only problem with the above is that it would be a database nightmare to administrate. It could be done. Everything that I've mentioned above is already in existence in one form or another, but that doesn't mean that it's cost effective to do it.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
xXApophisXx
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:20:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Myra2007
Originally by: brinelan If losing 4 hours of training time to make up your sp loss is going to hurt, you probably cant afford/dont have the other skills needed to fly these ships anyway.
So you're gonna fly them with skills to lvl2 or 3 only? Don't you feel thats kind of a waste?
The way it is i may fly one once in a blue moon (with all subsystem skills to 5 though mind you) just for the fun of it. The same way i'd treat a faction bs but with even more caution. I think it'll be the same for most people.
On that note... If i train all the skills to lvl 5 being that there are going to be 20 or 25 levels (based on 5 levels each skill) then id be happy to lose 1 point.. to that end i believe CCP have introduced a new curve to the game that i strongly support. so any haters that say something bad cos of 1 point loss needs to seriously consider whats happening here... atleast CCP hvent turned round and said that a 1 point loss will affect all attributes... hell im 50 days from a Titan and i would be ****** if i lost capital ships v skill!
Awesome stuff going on CCP... just one problem.... i feel the need to see more images of new areas... the new wormholes... new ships and other insanely cool stuffs you are cooking up in your crazy little corner of the world!
Also... please make a funny video like the boot.ini video... that was classic and cool!
|
|
Malen Nenokal
Eden Federal Recon
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:22:00 -
[141]
Whoa, the devs just changed the picture in the blog, good thing I saved the old one. :)
Eden Federal Recon
|
Sgt Blade
Caldari Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:27:00 -
[142]
Edited by: Sgt Blade on 12/02/2009 21:26:53 \o/ I love the idea of losing SP when you die in T3 ships, makes ransoms to people flying in said ships more willing to pay up or eject , so for those who don't like it, either don't fly them or pay the man
Hypnotic Pelvic Thrusting Level 5 |
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:41:00 -
[143]
Edited by: Tonto Auri on 12/02/2009 21:41:31
Quote: This is important: Due to the sudden rift in the symbiotic ship relationship that exists between a pilot and a Tech 3 ship, losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills.
So, you made system that not available for testing. How do we expected to test them (means - die alot in a day, as there are no other way to test ship efficiency, than actually destroy it... or survive)... and you dare invite us for testing? Not to mention - using? Let me say, I will petition every single skill point loss for reimbursement, until your GM's start coming to you with baseball bites. -- Thanks CCP for cu |
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:45:00 -
[144]
Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: CCP Lemur
Originally by: Avalira Oh yeah, will carriers/MS/Titans give us the ability to change the subsystems while "in space". I know you only said stations but it would be cool to be able to swap them out too. Same thing with POS's.
Removing whole sections of your ship in space might not be such a wise idea.
let us dock inside titans
That wouldn't solve the things. If you gone offline inside Titan, she would be need to dump you where you left, to not create exploitable issues. -- Thanks CCP for cu |
Dr Resheph
Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:11:00 -
[145]
The blog doesn't say anything new about T3 ships. What the hell?? :\
|
thelung187
Guiding Hand Social Club
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:16:00 -
[146]
Originally by: CCP Lemur Self destruct and ejecting will circumvent loss. Only getting really blown up in the ship will make you lose SP.
So take the coward's way out and eject/self-destruct and you're A-OK, fight to the bitter end and you catch the proverbial kick to the gonads? You can see where some (read: most) of us would be scratching our heads saying "Why bother?" with the logic CCP has apparently implemented regarding this. Can we maybe get a bit more insight into the "why we did it this way" mentality?
|
Gartel Reiman
Civis Romanus Sum
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:17:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Tonto Auri Let me say, I will petition every single skill point loss for reimbursement, until your GM's start coming to you with baseball bites.
I expect you'd be banned for breaking the EULA/generally being a **** long before that point.
|
Miniturret
Amarr Mining Under the influence of Sugar Pals
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:24:00 -
[148]
[rant] ok I've scanned through the 5 pages of crap and am going to give my 2 cents on this subject.
At first glance it appears to be utter crap. sheer and utter crap. There is already a rift between those that don't think the SP lose is a big deal and those that do think it is.
Yes it is only a Rank 1 Skill lvl 4 to 5 takes roughly 4-5 days. Those 4-5 days could be better spent learning something else useful.
The concept itself of modular ships I rather enjoyed until I found this out and have been mulling it over in my head. I understand the concept of you need to learn the ship but once you learn a specific setup why would you forget it when it blows up? This is a half assed attempt to throw in some sort of risk to flying the ship.
Will I be flying the T3 ships? not unless the training is left as it is on SISI where you learn concurrently.
Will I be buying any T3 ships? Nope
Will I sell the parts? In a heart beat. I will gladly take your isk for nothing but garbage.
[/rant]
|
Bethulsunamen
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:33:00 -
[149]
Why change the already nice looking fitting screen? Its sort of compact and great, with no BIG OPEN HOLES lol.. Why not just add new info to the old fitting screen? Or at least add MOAR info to the new fitting screen, such as how long your capacitor lasts and other stuff that third party apps have been doing for ages.
As for the T3 ships.. Well, i dont understand why you gotta loose SP when the ship gets destroyed.. Because we are rich? We arent rich.. Only the few elite players and alliances with 18 accounts are rich, so you are going to mold the game around the minority?
Seriously, T3 ships are going to be so insanely expensive, even after 6 months or so. If the sleepers are so hard, then T3 materials are gonna take alot of effort and cost (loosing BS after BS) to obtain. And even then, their cost will be even higher due to the inherent "awesome-factor" and the fact that everyone will want one.
I suspect they are gonna cost way way way too much for the vast majority of us, at least so much that we cant afford 3 of them, hence cant afford to pvp in them or do anything dangerous in them. Adding skill-loss to this is just dumb. The billions of isk you will loose is bad enough. Or donate a few billion isk to every character on the server so money doesnt become an issue (as you already claim it isnt), then i can accept the skill loss ^_^
|
Illectroculus Defined
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:34:00 -
[150]
One thing I guess that's not clear is the nature of some of the bonuses, will all the t3 modules be designed around combat or will there be modules that give bonuses to more logistical things like mining yield, cargo space, remote reps or astrometrics.
Will there be some t3 config which creates a miner comparable to a hulk, or lets them fit covert op cloaks. Or will these still remain in the realm of specialised ships.
|
|
Vitrael
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:38:00 -
[151]
Quote: Due to the sudden rift in the symbiotic ship relationship that exists between a pilot and a Tech 3 ship, losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills.
No.
Just No.
Don't do that to us. Training skills is painstaking enough as it is throughout the game. We need to train the skill basics plus FIVE subsystem skills already, which is bad even if they are x1 training multiplier. Increase the skill multiplier, or something. Anything other than an indefinite timesink that punishes us for playing the game.
The sudden rift in my hemispheres of my brain caused by the reading of this planned "feature" will result in random loss of IQ points and gray matter from one of my cerebral lobes.
-----
|
Dr Resheph
Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:39:00 -
[152]
Edited by: Dr Resheph on 12/02/2009 22:42:42 Actually, this might be the place to get a straight answer on the two major grievances I have with Tech 3. I've blocked them out for easier reading.
The first is obviously skill loss. For you game designers, which is more important?
- skill loss as a death penalty
or
- ships that gain 'experience' and lose it upon death
From everything I've heard and seen, this was the concept of 'ship crews' being implemented with existing mechanics. Essentially you don't have the resources to do it properly, and will probably end up overhauling this in the future.
Assuming you care more about the gain and loss of experience than the penalty of sp loss, would you ever consider the following implementation:
Subsystem skills autotrain in parallel with existing skills, but at a set rate and only when the character has boarded a Tech 3 ship (in space). That way, the same experience gain/loss mechanic is present but without causing players to burn away skill points. In addition, the tech 3 strategic cruiser skill could simply modify the rate at which these skills train.
That way, at least, you can overhaul it in the future with ship crews (or equivalently complex mechanic) without having thousands of players who wasted their SP for no reason.
|
Sylper Illysten
Caldari Ex Coelis The Bantam Menace
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:40:00 -
[153]
Must say i'm a bit disappointed by the fact you can't mix racial subsystems. I was lookign forward to pulse laser/drone/shield tanks and other strange setups, instead we just seem to be heading for variants on the same old themes.
|
Dr Resheph
Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:42:00 -
[154]
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? Then the total number of ships? 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. The spectrum is pretty wide and crowded. Tech 2 is not as specialized as you think. Tech 3 uses the same stats, the same mechanics, and presumably the same bonuses.
I've been pvping 6 years and I'm definitely not happy with an explosion of "more of the same". You're making combat less tactical because it's no longer about fitting to your enemy's weaknesses. Instead, it comes down to min/maxing efforts and numbers. When I think of Tech 3, I immediately think of some kind of Heat tie-in. Initially I though Tech 3 would be the same as Tech 2, but be able to sustain overloaded status much longer. Thus benefiting the person who micromanaged well, and used his capacity wisely.
But ever since you've made this 'modular ships' announcement, I've been thinking of ways for Tech 3 to offer something new in combat. Some options from easiest implementation, to hardest.
- 10% heat damage reduction bonus, so that Tech 3 ships with equivalent hardpoints/bonuses are roughly 50% better on a short term basis. This allows you to make the ships awesome, without making them superior in every case and without bloating up the bonuses/hardpoints.
- The subsystems themselves can be overloaded (needs slight UI change to show them in space). This way you'd have some level of modularity in space, allowing you to remain flexible within combat, and not just within the fittings screen. Like, you encounter ECM ships, you might want to overload your electronics subsystem. You are being made primary, so you beef up your defensive subsystem. And so on..
- Modularity on the fly (hard to implement, and 100% unlikely to happen in Apocrypha). The idea is you can swap subsystems in space, on your own. To accomplish this requires CCP to create two types of cargo bays: one for charges only, and the other for traditional stuff. Each swapout takes time and nanite paste, unlike the instant and free version offered by carriers/POS. By separating the cargos you can balance things out easier. A pilot might want to carry many subsystems and a bit of paste, or fewer subsystems and lots of paste. The choice would then be between 'prepared for anything' or 'limited number of alternate forms, but the ability to switch between them more times'.
|
SirSpectre
Gallente Harbingers Of Destruction
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:50:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Dr Resheph
- The subsystems themselves can be overloaded (needs slight UI change to show them in space). This way you'd have some level of modularity in space, allowing you to remain flexible within combat, and not just within the fittings screen. Like, you encounter ECM ships, you might want to overload your electronics subsystem. You are being made primary, so you beef up your defensive subsystem. And so on..
oh man! that is a sweeeeeeet idea! ----
Sig here. ---> X |
london
Gallente KDS Navy
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:57:00 -
[156]
Originally by: Sylper Illysten Must say i'm a bit disappointed by the fact you can't mix racial subsystems. I was lookign forward to pulse laser/drone/shield tanks and other strange setups, instead we just seem to be heading for variants on the same old themes.
Hell no, could you imagine the Frankenstein ships?
|
fuxinos
Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 23:09:00 -
[157]
Originally by: SirSpectre
Originally by: Dr Resheph
- The subsystems themselves can be overloaded (needs slight UI change to show them in space). This way you'd have some level of modularity in space, allowing you to remain flexible within combat, and not just within the fittings screen. Like, you encounter ECM ships, you might want to overload your electronics subsystem. You are being made primary, so you beef up your defensive subsystem. And so on..
oh man! that is a sweeeeeeet idea!
So, basically overloading your modules, comes out the same.
|
Dr Resheph
Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 23:18:00 -
[158]
Originally by: fuxinos
Originally by: SirSpectre
Originally by: Dr Resheph
- The subsystems themselves can be overloaded (needs slight UI change to show them in space). This way you'd have some level of modularity in space, allowing you to remain flexible within combat, and not just within the fittings screen. Like, you encounter ECM ships, you might want to overload your electronics subsystem. You are being made primary, so you beef up your defensive subsystem. And so on..
oh man! that is a sweeeeeeet idea!
So, basically overloading your modules, comes out the same.
Really?
Mind telling me how you managed to overload your Sensor Boosters and ECCM? And without fitting them? Which module should I overload to increase my warp speed, or agility? How do I add extra shield, armor or capacitor buffer through overloading? Can you tell me which module I should overload for extra drone bandwidth?
So, basically you didn't think before posting.
|
JimBob Leeroy
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 23:37:00 -
[159]
hi all:
i have played FFXI for 2 yrs, so the idea of lost xp is nothing new to me,but been playing this for 3 yrs now, and the idea of sp loss is scary. but if the ships are worth it( tougher than current t2's)then i will gladly fly them. and think they will have a long line of ppl wanting to as well, i know ccp does not want to make anything stronger than the current t2's.this beening the reason t2 bs's sucked so much,my mael out dps's my vargur(and minmy suk to fit,4X1200'2's more than exceeds the pg)but that is for other forums. but hope that the sp loss is there counter to a more powerful ship. this will make t3's very worth while, and with the WH's a solo ship would be nice. but will probly have to wait for t3 bs's for that, or bc's at best.
but for the most part the expansion looks good, hope yall can work all the bugs out in time, grats and thanks dev's
|
Popperr
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 23:52:00 -
[160]
Will we be able to configure cargo along with fittings? I'm sure everyone would like to have ammo/charges in their cargo, on top of this traders or logistic people could have pre-set loads
|
|
fuxinos
Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 00:05:00 -
[161]
Originally by: Dr Resheph
Originally by: fuxinos
Originally by: SirSpectre
Originally by: Dr Resheph
- The subsystems themselves can be overloaded (needs slight UI change to show them in space). This way you'd have some level of modularity in space, allowing you to remain flexible within combat, and not just within the fittings screen. Like, you encounter ECM ships, you might want to overload your electronics subsystem. You are being made primary, so you beef up your defensive subsystem. And so on..
oh man! that is a sweeeeeeet idea!
So, basically overloading your modules, comes out the same.
Really?
Mind telling me how you managed to overload your Sensor Boosters and ECCM? And without fitting them? Which module should I overload to increase my warp speed, or agility? How do I add extra shield, armor or capacitor buffer through overloading? Can you tell me which module I should overload for extra drone bandwidth?
So, basically you didn't think before posting.
Apart from ECCM and Sensor Boosters not being overloadable, your idea is the same, just these modules not being overloadable lol.
For deffence, Hardeners and Reper ARE overloadable.
CCP should make ECCM and SBs overloable too and voila, your idea is obsolet.
And besides, how hilarious would it be if you could overload Plates to get more Armor out of them. There should be still a bit logic behind ideas and metals are simply not overloadable.
|
Belliana
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 00:08:00 -
[162]
To the people crying about losing SP....
You can train 15 levels of T3 subsystem skills in a day with some time left over. Exactly how many T3 ships per day are you planning on losing?
|
Smooth Kitty
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 00:11:00 -
[163]
skillpoint loss with a time based skilling system is a horrible idea. Its not like we can work to get those points back. With the number of years you have to train to enjoy differing aspects of this game who would want to constantly be punished for playing by losing sp?
Makes t3 ships worthless for anything but an instant primary while roaming.
|
Louis deGuerre
Gallente Public Funded War Targets
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 00:20:00 -
[164]
Skillpoint loss idea is epic fail.
Weren't we tortured enough with the learning skills ?
I'll give these T3 ships a miss.
Nice artwork tough :)
|
Gal'drea
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 00:33:00 -
[165]
Originally by: Belliana To the people crying about losing SP....
You can train 15 levels of T3 subsystem skills in a day with some time left over. Exactly how many T3 ships per day are you planning on losing?
I'll get back to you on that after you recheck how long it takes to train one of those skills from 4 to 5.
Why bother with T3 if you can't train these to 5 because you'll repeatedly lose them? If it's anything like T2 and the rest of Eve, if you want to be competent at all, you'll need lv 4/5.
|
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 00:39:00 -
[166]
Changing parts on the fly is a bad idea from all points of view, except careless ones. All six parts (hull and 5 subsystems) comprise one "ship" as we know them today. You can think about it as about 1000 new ships added into game... from EVE server standpoint. Serber handling your metal scrapheap as single hull for the sake of all things that could happen to you in space.
Only possible solution for changing parts on the fly is to demand them to be - literally - changed. I.e.
Come into maintenance array proximity, Right-click specific part, choose "Change", Select desired replacement.
But think about it once more... in the way like... what is the size of these parts? Let me tell you - they are nearly the ship's size... means, do not fit in the average cruiser cargohold. -- Thanks CCP for cu |
Arnos Von
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 00:52:00 -
[167]
As others mentioned, SP loss isn't terrible IMO. Would it be better without skill point loss but having each of them be rank 4 or 5 skills? I guess it depends on how many T3 cruisers you plan on losing.
It will come down to how this is balanced, both in bonuses and in obtaining the parts. If T3 will be about as good as T2 with subsystems at 2 or 3 each, T3 should be pretty popular.
On the other hand, T3 could end up a lot like COSMOS modules, mixing the worst parts of COSMOS (poor bonuses compared to meta level, hard to farm the parts and very expensive) and boosters (negative side effects to scare off mainstream users). Why use COSMOS when you can get something cheaper, easier, and better. T3 could be the same way.
So I'm reserving judgment until the balancing team comes out with the final stats. If the idea behind T3 is to make something better than what we currently have, it should be good. If a T2 HAC is superior to a T3 battle oriented cruiser, with less skills required, and is easier to farm mats for, well T3, meet COSMOS items.
|
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 00:54:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Gartel Reiman
Originally by: Tonto Auri Let me say, I will petition every single skill point loss for reimbursement, until your GM's start coming to you with baseball bites.
I expect you'd be banned for breaking the EULA/generally being a **** long before that point.
There's nothing in EULA that prevent me from writing a petition. I've had updated clone, why'd I loose my SP? It's VERY BASIS of the EVE game. "Your clone and your POD" (c)
On a simple note of comparison: You need to train 6 skills to level 2-3 to have at least any minimally reasonable level of efficiency with new ships. These 6 skills will take you (considering they're all rank 1) a day of training, with roughly 3 hours to get each of them from level 2 to 3. Average "deathbeat rate" is, say, 1 ship loss per week. Which in the end counts for ~156 hours of lost training. That's highly conservative measure, considering that you relearn your lost skill immediately and not die on a daily basis in a bad coincidence of events. Sorry, but I'd better buy a beer for that money, than spend it for training something that i will "forget" at random. -- Thanks CCP for cu |
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 01:01:00 -
[169]
Originally by: Arnos Von As others mentioned, SP loss isn't terrible IMO. Would it be better without skill point loss but having each of them be rank 4 or 5 skills?
Signal Acquisition V... you know it's rank?
Quote: I guess it depends on how many T3 cruisers you plan on losing.
There's no plan. You will loose it. Period. Once you undocked, you're looking for death even if you think you're doing something else.
Or, if you want more "epicness": If you dare not prepared to die, don't be dare to undock. -- Thanks CCP for cu |
Arnos Von
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 01:28:00 -
[170]
Actually I do know the rank of SA (8), as it's a skill I have. Perhaps depending on how the exploration skills look post M10 it SA level 5 will be nerfed to worthlessness, the same as if one "lost" those skill points/ training time. Just like many nerfs in the past.
My point was that if the subsystem skills were safe no loss rank 4 skills, it would take you 20x longer to raise all your subsystems to level 4 than a loss based rank 1 skill. Until you lose 20 ships you're better off with the new system.
I'm betting it will depend on how the bonuses will stack from the subsystems (or if theres any overlap at all). If you can't get multiple bonuses to one aspect (tank, gank or Ewar/ tackling/ whatever) then the "get everything to level 4" paradigm goes out the window. T3 will be people getting 2-3 levels in most subsystems, and 5 in one of them they're focusing on. Then you have 80% chance of losing a couple hours of time at most, and you'd have to lose a truly horrendous number for it to make a real difference. If bonuses will stack it makes it tougher to decide, but again its all about how these things are bonused.
End of the day, I think T3 sounds interesting, looks nice, and I just hope they don't turn out to be as niche as COSMOS mods. It might take a shift in thinking to play with T3, but again, nobody is forcing you into them.
|
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 01:51:00 -
[171]
Question of lore:
Considering the backstory of the Sleepers, will the T3 ships be without a crew?
|
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 01:57:00 -
[172]
Originally by: Arnos Von My point was that if the subsystem skills were safe no loss rank 4 skills, it would take you 4x longer to raise all your subsystems to level 4 than a loss based rank 1 skill. So you'd have to lose each subsystem 4x times -- a total of 20 ships before the rank 4 skill no loss system was better than the rank 1 lossy.
As you said, it's only 20 ships. After that point, you'll start to ACTUALLY LOOSE your training time. No matter what you're doing, as long as you flying T3 ships, you loosing SP. -- Thanks CCP for cu |
Cadde
Gallente Gene Works AKA-AHN KINGDOM
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 02:02:00 -
[173]
While i agree that the current implementation of skill-point loss isn't ideal, there is no reason to remove the function completely. Most of you opposing the loss of SP need to be open minded to the possibility of the basic idea being a good one. First, take a good look at how long it takes to train a rank 1 combat skill (Perception / Willpower) with the attributes 26 perception and 24 willpower:
- LVL 1 - 6m 29s
- LVL 2 - 30m 15s
- LVL 5 - 2h, 51m, 2s
- LVL 4 - 16h 7m 39s
- LVL 5 - 3d 19h 13m 53s
Total training time from LVL 0 to LVL 5: 4d 14h 49m 21s
Now consider that it isn't absolutely necessary to have all 5 subsystem skills at lvl 5 to fly the ship in combat and should you want that it is your RISK vs REWARD choice! If you happen to have all these skills trained to lvl 5 and decide to undock in your Strategic Cruiser that too is your RISK vs REWARD choice, would another ship be worth the risk in that particular situation? As it is now in eve, all you risk when flying a ship is the modules fitted, the ship itself and maybe... your pod. In the end, all that boils down to ISK and if you engage in such activities that will most likely cost you a ship you are probably already aware of the phrase "Don't fly what you cannot afford to lose". In other words, you can afford to lose it, this function adds another element to the mix. Even though it is too straightforward in most cases.
Lets assume a fully fitted Strategic Cruiser will cost us a nice round 1 Billion isk after the market has been supplied and prices have settled. The players with "mad isk making skeelz" will have zero problems replacing such a loss while some others will have to work for several days to make that amount. For them, the loss of the ship will be way worse than the loss of a level in a rank 1 skill! That is the sole purpose as i see it, make it hurt those that normally wouldn't be hurt that hard by it with the loss of training. For them, time is worth more than the isk they have in their wallet(s).
Lets take a look at what happens when you blow up while still inside your ship. You lose a random level from a subsystem skill no matter if it's trained to lvl 1 or lvl 5, that is anything from 6 minutes lost to ~4 days lost in training time. But you are also given the chance to eject from your ship BEFORE it blows up and depending on the situation, that time can be anything from a lifetime to a few seconds. Needless to say, it is your choice whether you take your "t3ch" ship to blob warfare of small gang PvP and your choice will determine (for most cases) how much time you have to decide if you wanna eject or take your chances.
Finally, what is making eve such a great game in terms of PvP? As far as i know, it is that it doesn't take much (unless you want to take on poses and sov mechanics) to take part of the PvP game. It takes 1 week to get into a frigate sized ship that, in small packs, can take down cruisers, battle cruisers and even battleships! If you want more you have to train longer and risk more. It is all part of your growth in eve, moving on to the next level. Unfortunately, popular belief is that you have to have T2 ships and T2 modules and T2 drones and T2 piloting skills to partake in small gang PvP but that isn't the case in eve. Sure, it gives you that extra edge in battle but i have seen the most amazing examples of David vs Goliath before. The point is, you grow in eve. When and to me the order of growth is as follows:
- T1 Frigate, Small weapons
- T1 Cruiser, Basic tanking / Ewar, Medium weapons
- Skills buildup / specialization
- Path 1: Battle cruiser | Path 2: T2 Frigates
- Path 1: T2 Tanking, more skill specialization | Path 2: T2 Guns, T2 Tanking / Ewar
- P1: Battleship | P2: HACs
- P1: Large T2 guns / Logistics | P2: More specialization
- P1: Larger... Expensive | P2: More Ewar/Speed/etc etc
- Much later! T3!
You will get there... --------------- Opinions? Yes they belong to me, not my corp! |
Cadde
Gallente Gene Works AKA-AHN KINGDOM
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 02:08:00 -
[174]
Oh, and just to make it clear...
YOU DON'T NEED LVL 5 ON YOUR SUBSYSTEMS SKILLS TO FLY THE SHIP WELL!
And WHEN you have LVL 5 on your subsystem skills you are aware of the fact you can lose your training if you don't play your cards right! Eject from your ship if you hear "YARR" in local... And like all others said, how often do you explode in ~1 billion ships anyways? --------------- Opinions? Yes they belong to me, not my corp! |
Dr Resheph
Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 02:27:00 -
[175]
Originally by: fuxinos
Originally by: Dr Resheph
Originally by: fuxinos So, basically overloading your modules, comes out the same.
Really?
Mind telling me how you managed to overload your Sensor Boosters and ECCM? And without fitting them? Which module should I overload to increase my warp speed, or agility? How do I add extra shield, armor or capacitor buffer through overloading? Can you tell me which module I should overload for extra drone bandwidth?
So, basically you didn't think before posting.
Apart from ECCM and Sensor Boosters not being overloadable, your idea is the same, just these modules not being overloadable lol.
For deffence, Hardeners and Reper ARE overloadable.
CCP should make ECCM and SBs overloable too and voila, your idea is obsolet.
And besides, how hilarious would it be if you could overload Plates to get more Armor out of them. There should be still a bit logic behind ideas and metals are simply not overloadable.
You concede to the sensors argument, then equate active tanking with passive buffers. Which shows you don't know the merits of either, or have never been in a fleet battle.
Then you sidestep and ignore the other stats I mentioned: like warp speed, agility, capacitor size, drone bandwidth, etc, while questioning the logic of overloading metal to get hitpoints.
That last part is equivalent to asking why armor plates consume powergrid, why armor hardeners need to be activated, what repairers do with all that cap, and how exactly 'energized' platings work.
Ignoring your inability to understand the fictional premises of EVE's technology, I don't think you've explained how overloaded Sensor Boosters and ECCM modules makes the overloading of entire subsystems obsolete.
Not only can you overload stats that no module can modify, you can overload stats like sensors, capacitor, hitpoints etc without having that module fitted. But feel free to squirm anyway.
|
Mors Magne
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 02:32:00 -
[176]
Don't like the skill point loss.
Apart form that, excellent. The NEW M.Corp Data Hub - Check it out! |
Mortgarra
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 02:38:00 -
[177]
Quote: Due to the sudden rift in the symbiotic ship relationship that exists between a pilot and a Tech 3 ship, losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills.
I certainly understand the notion of "risk vs. reward" within Eve-Online. Fly a battleship and you bring big guns to a fight, but also 100x the price tag of a frigate. If you lose your investment, you may spend hours, days or weeks to recoup your loss for a significant investment. If you get podded, you could lose billions of ISK in implants if you're not careful.
I'm going to take a wild guess at what you, the development team, intended the RISK to be in flying Tech3 ships: Tech3 ships require more than an ISK investment to fly, and losing a Tech3 ship requires more than ISK to replace.
Assuming that was your intended risk model, the game design mechanic chosen seems an arbitrarily punitive consequence of flying Tech3 ships. The risk in this case is not against Tech3 skills, but the OTHER skills you could have trained safely in lieu of those Tech3 subsystem skills. It's akin to saying "I want to raise the price of ore in Eve-online, so from here on out, asteroids will occasionally explode when mined, destroying the mining barge and giving a 50% chance to pod-kill the occupant". Yes, it accomplishes your goal since most miners would give up their careers, lowering supply and increasing demand, but there are a dozen other ways to accomplish the same result without such an arbitrary game mechanic.
I understand the Apocrypha release deadline is fast approaching, and major design changes are hard to make, but please, PLEASE, reconsider this. Tie the risk to the ship, NOT to the character skills which must be constantly retrained when ships are lost, and conversely penalizing the other (more) permanent skills.
|
Miniturret
Amarr Mining Under the influence of Sugar Pals
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 02:44:00 -
[178]
I've stated this once before the idea of losing SP for losing a ship is a bad choice. Now that I've had time to chill out and think things through I'll explain it more.
If there were crews involved in the ships function than sure I wouldn't mind losing the crews experience with the ships particular abilities when the ship went boom. hey stuff happens have to find a new crew (much like rigs)
But when the ship goes boom you don't randomly go "ahhh duh gee george how do I fly this again?" That is the basics of this thinking.
The way I think about this is is for instance my character is Amarr but I'm cross trained in Caldari Ships as well. So if I were to fly a Caldari ship (Since it's not my races ship) in theory I should lose a lvl at random needed to pilot said ship. Implement that and see how many of you that are in favor of the sp loss change over.
There are better ways to offer a risk to flying the ship. My personal preference would have been the crews which would have actually given a reason to have charisma (higher the charisma the easier your crew works for you) But I do understand that at this current point the programming aspect of having crews would be a major undertaking. Oh wait since we already have session changes the database already knows what we've done, what ships we're in etc. so in that database update if we hopped into a T3 cruiser with crews installed (much like rigs) upon un-docking the crews begin training to be more efficient. The longer they are with a particular ship the better they become. once they switch ships their experience is cut in half or even a 1/3 if it's the same load out and reset completely if it's a new combo of ship parts.
|
Dr Resheph
Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 02:56:00 -
[179]
Originally by: Cadde While i agree that the current implementation of skill-point loss isn't ideal, there is no reason to remove the function completely. Most of you opposing the loss of SP need to be open minded to the possibility of the basic idea being a good one.
You're kidding, right? The basic idea with this mechanic is this:
SKILLPOINTS ARE NOW A CONSUMABLE COMMODITY
They are consumable items that can't be bought, insured, traded, harvested, or worked for. Now they're a basic commodity item that is spent through normal gameplay. Not even PODKILLING, which is the most direct assault on your "body" in EVE, can do any permanent damage. As long as the person is willing to sidestep with ISK, the loss of skillpoints is impossible in this game and has been from the dawn of time.
In your entire post, you're trying to convince people how its not that big of a deal. Except here's the kicker, as a regular user of Tech 3 ships you're not going to experience just one loss.
Died five times? Grats you just lost a million skillpoints, or roughly 15-20 days worth of training. I don't think I've lost two weeks worth of training in the last six years combined when it comes to my main.
So, while you're busy trying to rationalize this monumentally stupid mechanic, I'm faced with the following choice:
Abandon racial development and cross train for ships I don't want nor need to fly, because I only have a few more months left. Then hope training another race from scratch stalls time long enough for CCP to introduce more skill depth into my main race - all the while ignoring a whole plethora of new ships and content for my main race.
-or-
Abandon six years of character time/isk investment and racial specialization to burn through skillpoints - just so I can play with pretty new ships. Thus forgoing whatever benefits the ~100million skillpoints I have currently give me; benefits that are by the way, constantly diminishing.
To dumb it down for you, the choice is between maintaining a skillpoint lead, and adding a few months extra to my racial specialization.
Now, if Tech 3 ships did something no other ship could - that might be an incentive. But as it stands the entire mechanic is a giant FUUUUUUUUUUUUUU to vets. If they want skillpoint loss, why not just do it through podding?
|
Mortgarra
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 03:02:00 -
[180]
Originally by: Dr Resheph But as it stands the entire mechanic is a giant FUUUUUUUUUUUUUU to vets.
I'd actually say it's a bigger FU to the "middle class" of Eve. Congratulations, you have the SP to fly Tech2, and theoretically the SP to fly Tech3, but you can either try to catch up to the big dogs of Eve-Online, or stunt your SP advancement by constantly losing a day here or week there of SP when your ship blows up.
|
|
Dr Resheph
Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 03:14:00 -
[181]
Edited by: Dr Resheph on 13/02/2009 03:15:07 I guess, but that's a choice you at least have where either direction takes you down the same road.
Both are specific to your skillset, both result in new ships and toys to play with under the same race.
The difference is for vets (if I were Amarr)...
Training for a Damnation/Redeemer/Paladin or a Legion
-or-
Training for Caldari/Gallente/Minmatar or a Legion
edit: Let's assume I actually like flying my race the most, or have other characters specialized in the other races.
|
Shadow's Caress
Dark Skullz Empire Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 03:21:00 -
[182]
Who thought that loosing skillpoints to an inevitable occurance was a good idea? The simple fact is that when you buy a ship, it is likely to eventually get blown up. If I have to loose sp every time I loose a t3 ship, I'm simply not going to fly t3. The only way I can be convinced to accept that mechanic is if the T3 ship somehow gives me extra skillpoints to replace the ones that were lost due to an eventuality.
Please, balance risk and reward. loosing skillpoints is an EXTREMELY HIGH risk, and the reward here seems very minimal at best.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 03:46:00 -
[183]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf <stuff>
TBH, skillpoint loss won't even put a dent in their use. It's a shock right now. We're not used to the idea. But that will change.
Further more, people like myself who's main interest in the game is pushing the performance envelope of their ships won't bat an eye at bringing every skill to 5, regardless of the risk. These are the same people that fly multibillion ISK ships in PVP. Just because it's the best.
This is what Eve needs. Advanced content. Something for people to work towards.
If you look at the skill requirements for T3, you'll see that it isn't that much really. Not any longer than it would take to skill up T2 large guns for a BS, to be sure. You could be flying a max skilled T3 ship for the time cost it would take to fly a max skilled T2 fit BS. Pretty reasonable barrier to entry IMO. Very light skill requirements.
Cost? Supply and demand. Right now T2 is SUPER cheap. It's INSANE. Why? Because there is ISK to be made, no matter how small, and people are producing whatever the market can handle. T3 will be the exact same.
At first it'll be expensive, but in time the prices will drop. Maybe not to the levels of T2, but they'll be reasonable, given the time cost required to gather the materials. Rigs are a good example of this mechanic. At first rigs were 150m+ per rig for T1 stuff, now they're down to 15-20m each for most of the popular ones.
T3 required to compete? No way. T3 won't provide more peak performance IMO. You won't see more DPS than a BS, or more tank than a T2 command ship, or faster top speeds than an interceptor, or better EW performance than a Recon.
What I think you will see is the ability to do many of the above, with obvious limits and restrictions, from a basic platform that lends unpredictability to combat that hasn't been in Eve for a long time.
I'm already able to fly all four T3 ships on SISI, with all subsystem skills at 3 and climbing. I LOVE THE SKILL QUEUE!!! (when it works, lol)
Nuances like ejecting or self destructing to save your SP will add more depth to PVP as well. It's more choices to be made, more levels of skill to be added to combat. More ways to set apart the really good players from everyone else. I can't wait.
GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!!!
this has been almost exactly my line of thinking. I was hoping no one would post anything sensible on the fourms and I would have cheap t3 ships.
|
Niccolado Starwalker
Shadow Templars
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 03:52:00 -
[184]
This devblog is pure ♥ Particularily the saving of ship fittings!!
So I love you guys!!! I really do!
A question though.
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..?
Originally by: Dianabolic Your tears are absolutely divine, like a fine fine wine, rolling down your cheeks until they flow down the river of LOL |
Gal'drea
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 04:14:00 -
[185]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
This is what Eve needs. Advanced content. Something for people to work towards. ...Again. And Again. And Again.
Nuances like ejecting or self destructing to save your SP will add more depth to PVP as well. [...] More ways to set apart the really good/laggy players from everyone else. I can wait.
Fixed a few things for you [in bold].
|
DrDooma
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 04:20:00 -
[186]
Someone else has already raised this issue but I have not seen a response to this so far:
You paused learning ôMinmatar Engineering Subsystemö skill lvl5, lets say its worth 2 million skill points and that is 90% competed when your T3 ship explodes. If you randomly happen to loose ôMinmatar Engineering Subsystemö skill lvl4 (that may only be worth 750k of learning points) what actually happens?
Does the system simply subtracts the skills you lost 750K from æcreditÆ1,800K leaving you with 1,050 æcreditÆ points to loose the next time around?
Lets change the scenario: You have just started learning Minmatar Engineering Subsystem lvl5 skill and got exploded on the Internet in you T3 ship. You donÆt have enough skill points to completely cover lvl4 skill (like you did in previous scenario). Do you stop learning altogether or do you simply start learning lvl4 skill instead of lvl5?
This is a very big issue as you may have died due to some event that prevents you getting back into EVE and setting your learning skills.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 04:20:00 -
[187]
Originally by: Dr Resheph
I've been pvping 6 years and I'm definitely not happy with an explosion of "more of the same". You're making combat less tactical because it's no longer about fitting to your enemy's weaknesses. Instead, it comes down to min/maxing efforts and sheer numbers.
wait...
I thought half of pvp was fitting to be able to engage many different threats. as well you don't know what your enemy is going to bring.
that and it is rather hard to do anything that makes sheer number ineffective.
although as for your ideas at the end I love em!
|
Finnroth
Caldari The Guardian Agency Guardian Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 04:33:00 -
[188]
I believe to have read something on the forums regarding a change of 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.
|
OzDeaDMeaT
Gallente Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 04:43:00 -
[189]
Looks good so far.
The Question i have is. Are Cruiser class ships going to be the only tech 3 class ships in Eve?
That is all...
My Super Mega Uber Fleet Battle participation Lag reduction idea |
Daan Sai
Polytrope
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 04:44:00 -
[190]
These are tactical cruisers, not strategic
Strategy applies to how you plan an entire champaign.
Tactics are how you adapt to the local situation.
These ships can adapt to different tasks, so they are tactical.
Often confused, like precision and accuracy.
|
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 05:04:00 -
[191]
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!!!
this has been almost exactly my line of thinking. I was hoping no one would post anything sensible on the fourms and I would have cheap t3 ships.
Hehehe...
Frankly I think it's a bit silly for all the rabbling so far. T3 isn't even usable on SISI yet. We don't know how far we can push it, what it can do, anything.
Everyone knows I have no problem what so ever about voicing my opinion about something (lol?), but seriously, wtf ppl? It's not even testable yet.
By the way, I'm going to try and run for CSM next time around as well if I can get my passport sorted...
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 05:14:00 -
[192]
Originally by: Gal'drea
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
This is what Eve needs. Advanced content. Something for people to work towards. ...Again. And Again. And Again.
Nuances like ejecting or self destructing to save your SP will add more depth to PVP as well. [...] More ways to set apart the really good/laggy players from everyone else. I can wait.
Fixed a few things for you [in bold].
That's only a problem if you're a failure as a human being and keep losing ships.
Just an example: I have a k/d ratio of around 60:1. I'm just not that worried about losing 4-5 days of training if I get nicked, mostly because I feel that I'll be able to eject or SD in time to save my SP, assuming someone is able to kill me at all.
But I guess the skillpoint outlook is a little different for all of the cattle in Eve who end up getting owned in the face every day. For some reason, it just doesn't worry me that much.
[/sarcasm]
Two years ago an Ishtar or an Arazu was a hyper exotic rarity that was both feared and envied. Now they're nothing. Do you really want T3 to *start* out being what T2 has become? I'd rather keep that feeling of flying a Ferarri for a while, thanks.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Typhado3
Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 05:18:00 -
[193]
t3 ship jumps into gatecamp... pilot screams 'FF*****&&&&@@@@@' ejects and tries to make a run for it in his pod.
ccp fix mining agent missions % pls |
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 05:43:00 -
[194]
T3 will separate the carebear pew pew'ers from the hardcore pew pew'ers.
That is all.
|
Gal'drea
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 05:56:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
That's only a problem if you're a failure as a human being and keep losing ships.
Just an example: I have a k/d ratio of around 60:1. I'm just not that worried about losing 4-5 days of training if I get nicked, mostly because I feel that I'll be able to eject or SD in time to save my SP, assuming someone is able to kill me at all.
But I guess the skillpoint outlook is a little different for all of the cattle in Eve who end up getting owned in the face every day. For some reason, it just doesn't worry me that much.
[/sarcasm]
Two years ago an Ishtar or an Arazu was a hyper exotic rarity that was both feared and envied. Now they're nothing. Do you really want T3 to *start* out being what T2 has become? I'd rather keep that feeling of flying a Ferarri for a while, thanks.
[sarcasm] Do you expect no one will check such a claim? I fail to see a 60:1 k/d ratio. Also, your ego is not on trial here. [/sarcasm]
Assuming I'm only supposed to really respond to anything after the handy /sarcasm tag... These will not be seeded on market from day one, and most likely will prove very hard to get and expensive. The point I think most people are trying to make, is there is a lot of opposition to losing SP for ANY reason. Taking a loss in a T3 ship is as good as losing sp from any "random" skill, as that's time you could have spent on another useful skill.
How many eve players were sitting around a month ago thinking... "I don't want to train anything else in Eve, they should give me a nice fat SP-sink so that I'll have something to do with all this time"?
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 06:02:00 -
[196]
Apparently there are a lot of obsessive/compulsive bean counters in this game that suck at combat.
If you put the total number of skill points that your character has above the enjoyment you get from actually playing the game, you have your head screwed on upside down.
As a side note, it has always been difficult for players to earn significant amounts of Isk purely from PVP activities. This system (apparently) provides excellent incentive for targets in T3 vessels to abandon ship or negotiate an escape. Pure win for those with an aggressive mindset. ===== * Now I know how George Washington felt when Napoleon bombed him at Pearl Harbor. - Beast Boy |
Pliauga
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 06:05:00 -
[197]
Originally by: Cailais some nice info - but I think most of us knew 99.99% of this already.
With only a short period to go we're still no closer to knowing any of the subsystem attributes, or have even seen the Amarr designs (and with only a couple of concept art pieces for Gallente and Min designs).
New dev blog required with MOAR details please
C.
This
------- "Skynet" is my internet provider, should I be worried? |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 06:12:00 -
[198]
Originally by: Gal'drea
[sarcasm] Do you expect no one will check such a claim? I fail to see a 60:1 k/d ratio. Also, your ego is not on trial here. [/sarcasm]
Assuming I'm only supposed to really respond to anything after the handy /sarcasm tag... These will not be seeded on market from day one, and most likely will prove very hard to get and expensive. The point I think most people are trying to make, is there is a lot of opposition to losing SP for ANY reason. Taking a loss in a T3 ship is as good as losing sp from any "random" skill, as that's time you could have spent on another useful skill.
How many eve players were sitting around a month ago thinking... "I don't want to train anything else in Eve, they should give me a nice fat SP-sink so that I'll have something to do with all this time"?
Looks like a 60:1 k/d ratio to me... You're right, you do fail.
The only one's worried about this loss of SP are the people who are worried about loss in general. If you can't afford to lose it, don't fly it. If you're so worried about losing SP (or losing at all) then don't play.
People such as yourself are too focused on LOSING. I'm focused on winning. You're assuming you're going to lose without even trying. I assume I'm going to win before I even undock. But then again, if I had a 1:1 k/d ratio, I'd probably be worried too.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Cadde
Gallente Gene Works AKA-AHN KINGDOM
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 06:50:00 -
[199]
Edited by: Cadde on 13/02/2009 06:53:20 I repeat, you have a choice! If you wanna go into blob warfare with your T3 and have the risk of being called primary with like half a second to respond before you go *BOOM* then that is your choice.
IT ISN'T BLACK OR WHITE, YOU HAVE A GREY AREA! - You will find it between the ears.
T3 will NOT be...
- good for large fleet fights.
- twice as good as T2.
- used in every situation.
- the end of your current skills, only T3 related subsystem skills.
- affordable for the average player. (And don't buy isk, not even from GTC's to get one)
- the one ship to rule them all.
T3 will be... Whatever you can make of it!
-Will i lose a skill every time i lose a T3 ship? Not necessarily, you can always eject in the last second.
-But i lose 5 T3 ships a week? Then maybe you would be better off in another ship class...?
-I just lost 5 T3 ships in a row trying to defend my alliance space from a blob and i had no time to eject and now all my lvl 5 skills are down to lvl 4 That is very unfortunate, however if you can get alpha popped then you clearly shouldn't fly a T3. In all other cases you should have way enough time to eject to save your skill, the ship is dead anyways if you stay in it.
I too was thinking about letting one train the T3 skills in tandem with normal skills, but now i understand how brilliant CCPs idea is. It is a very dynamic ship for very dynamic situations and the possible combinations makes it nearly impossible to "just hop into a ship that can counter it". There are limitations involved such as certain subsystems doesn't match with certain others, preventing a "super ship" and the risk of losing training means people are not going to go and suicide with it. Not in highsec, lowsec or 0.0! The tactics involved in fielding such a ship will be awesome and pirates will have a field day!
"YARR? Eject from your ship or lose your SP!"
What better way is there to hijack a ship?
--------------- Opinions? Yes they belong to me, not my corp! |
Halycon Gamma
Caldari The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 06:53:00 -
[200]
Let me tell you a bit about myself. I fly frigates, a year and a half old character who doesn't take anything larger than a frigate into battle. I don't do that because I can't afford to lose anything larger, I do it because I enjoy them. In a well fit frigate I can fight some battleships to an absolute standstill. So, I've got the grand idea of flying every single frigate in the game at perfect skill; some people might call that a stupid goal, but its my goal. To do that is going to, in total, take more than 3 years of subscription to eve. Name me one other MMO that has goals that take 3 years to accomplish. So yes, i see the entire idea of skill point loss as a slap in the face. CCP's game mechanics, as they currently stand, already requires more time spent than any other two MMO's on the market. And now they want to make that time spent longer? Not spiffy.
If you dev's want to add a major balance idea like that, give us a major new piece of gameplay to balance it against. WiS, Planetary Flight, Ground Based Combat. All of those are ground breaking pieces of gameplay that you guys have mentioned over the years as in development. And for truly brand new gameplay elements, sure, I'll except the idea an SP sink. I'm getting something unbelievably cool for my new risk. But a new ship? A ship which doesn't even add in a new way to play the game? You guys are on something. Tech3 is just a flashier version of tech1 and tech2. There is nothing new here from a gameplay standpoint once you leave dock. No new mechanic or bonus that makes that sort of negative worth while.
Scrap this, in a hurry, because as it sits, this is the single silliest new addition to the game I can think of in my time playing. Or re-work it to where you're able to train these 5 skills and training other skills at once, but only while in a Tech3 ship. Something.
|
|
Deric
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 07:25:00 -
[201]
Risk is an important factor in this game, but so is risk management and recovery and a sense of involvement in that process. Very few things in EVE can be lost that can't be regained, players can control what they risk by flying cheaper setups or engaging in less risky behavior, they can manage recovery by stockpiling ISK and equipment, and their behavior is a significant factor in how fast they can do this.
Many players, including myself, just don't see SP loss the same way. For many, SP is a positional good, valuable in itself to be sure, but also in terms of how much more of it you have than someone else, see all the talk of "catching up to veterans," for example. From this perspective loss of SP is a loss of standing relative to everyone else in the game and is basically unrecoverable. Relative SP cannot be stockpiled to prepare for loss, and players have relatively little effect on how fast they gain SP.
Of course, particularly if a character is already specialized and/or has a lot of them, more SP doesn't always mean better performance at any particular task and those who say that tactical skills might offer the best return on investment even if they can be lost might be right. What is new and causing such a reaction, and what I oppose, is being asked to risk something I can never get back. |
Dr Resheph
Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 07:34:00 -
[202]
Edited by: Dr Resheph on 13/02/2009 07:34:02
Jesus Christ, some you guys are monumentally stupid for even trying to play the carebear/pvper/egotrip card in this thread.
Facts:
I have more money, kills, experience, and ballsy recklessness than all of you combined.
I have disposable characters I don't care about. I'm doing the type of small scale PVP where Tech 3 would excel. I am exactly the type of person you'd think of when it comes to 'Tech 3 user' demographic. So before you dudes bust a nut trying to come up with more clever 'lol carebear' one-liners, maybe you can explain why then, I would find the entire concept behind tech 3 so flaccid.
HINT: 'Real' pvpers don't play with toys when having fun.
|
Lord Lojak
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:06:00 -
[203]
ok silly question but i havent seen anything related to this so here goes. will this be ONLY a cruiser class ship or the other classes of ships to follow in the future. still awesome either way
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:06:00 -
[204]
Originally by: Dr Resheph Edited by: Dr Resheph on 13/02/2009 07:34:02
Jesus Christ, some you guys are monumentally stupid for even trying to play the carebear/pvper/egotrip card in this thread.
Facts:
I have more money, kills, experience, and ballsy recklessness than all of you combined.
I have disposable characters I don't care about. I'm doing the type of small scale PVP where Tech 3 would excel. I am exactly the type of person you'd think of when it comes to 'Tech 3 user' demographic. So before you dudes bust a nut trying to come up with more clever 'lol carebear' one-liners, maybe you can explain why then, I would find the entire concept behind tech 3 so flaccid.
HINT: 'Real' pvpers don't play with toys when having fun.
What about the concept do you find 'flaccid'? The performance of T3 ships? The skillpoint loss concept?
If you're trying to discuss T3 ship performance, you can't, as all the stats are simply placeholders at this point. But make no mistake, as soon as we have some concrete stuff to test, I'll be there *****ing about what's broke.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Daan Sai
Polytrope
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:12:00 -
[205]
Originally by: Cadde ... The tactics involved in fielding such a ship will be awesome and pirates will have a field day!
See, tactical cruisers, not strategic. (I agree with the rest BTW)
|
Lusulpher
Raddick Explorations BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:14:00 -
[206]
Let's end the SP loss whine...
If these T3 ships had the stats of Field Commandships and the rank 1 system of training and loss, this would not be an issue.
T3 are going to at least be that powerful, but only according to how you assemble your ship and knowing what the enemy has.
Expecting Falcons, build some nano/superlong-range Myrmidon. That Myrmidon variant should still lose you SP when a Rapier pops the drones and outranges it.
Gimme my skill loss please. Nom nom nom nom.
7 |
Kim Telkin
Caldari Kingfisher Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:29:00 -
[207]
Edited by: Kim Telkin on 13/02/2009 08:30:44 It was stated that if you have a partially trained skill, you only lose skillpoints equal to the ammount of the highest FULLY trained level in that skill. This, in my opinion, makes it worthwhile to really fly T3 ships. Do so as follows:
Train all subsystem skills to level IV. Then train them all 95% of the way to lvl V. Now you go out in combat. You get your ship blown up and you go to lvl IV + 75%. Then lvl IV + 55% etc etc. You can get blown up 5 times per skill. Or: you must die roughly 25 times before you loose a 'REAL' level.
Now I don't think that's exploiting the mechanics too much because you only have a lvl 4 bonus in each subsystem, so only having to retrain lvl 4 is fair.
And with < 1 day to retrain 20% of a lvl 5, rank 1 skill. That's not so bad. This means you can 'bank' your sp over a few weeks, and then go into battle over and over and loose your ships many times before you become worse at your skils.
If 1 day is too much for you. Keep your skills at lvl 3 + 95% of the way to lvl 4. Same thing for 1/5th of the price.
I mean really. If you loose a T2 cruiser, how long does it take to grind the 100M to replace it? A few hours at the very least unless you have godlike isk/hr revenue streams. What's a few hours, or a day, to 'replace' your blown up T3 ship.
I'll be flying them around. Probably at lvl 3+95% to start with until I figure out how often I die. Then maybe 4+95%.
|
JimBob Leeroy
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:30:00 -
[208]
lol personally i think "carebears" will be the primary demographic for t3's, WH's will be full of "carebears" that have wanted to do some pvp, but not have to be in 20 man gang to get past gate camps, or join a big ally so they can do some small roving gang.and this will lead to many pirates, since they can get all rewards from them, since there are no bounties, only what you can get home. but mass limits will make it better odds of meting small gangs, and they will not have 50 friends a jump or 2 away to come if they start to lose.this is the area that t3 ships would be best suited for,so would not think the normal pvper would be who ccp is worried about with these ships.but of course many will try to fit them in to there scope of what eve is, not in the context of what the WH's are going to be.
|
Cadde
Gallente Gene Works AKA-AHN KINGDOM
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:31:00 -
[209]
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. --------------- Opinions? Yes they belong to me, not my corp! |
Luteros
Minmatar Corps der Traenen
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 08:50:00 -
[210]
Ships are consumables, but loosing skillpoints will suck. I guess T3 Ships will be expensive. This in combination with possible skillpoint loss will render them useless for anything other than Hi-Sec Mission Running.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Wardo21
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 18:06:00 -
[241]
I like the idea of a real loss to the character when the ship goes boom with the pilot in it. Keep that. Until we see what the actual skill bonuses are per subsystem, we are just questioning an unknown.
One thing that most folks have failed to recognize is that short of ship scanning or knowing the 100 subsystem variations on sight and what they mean for fittings, each cruiser is an unknown quantity in a fight. (4 races, 5 systems with 5 types each).
Some pirate gang comes upon a pair of cruisers in a belt cleaning up after rat slaying. Which one is the tank and which one is the gank? Classic themed ships would be obvious to any experienced player. The Heavy Assault is the gank and/or tank and might have the tackle. The Recon is supporting and may be the tackler or ECM or just cloaked eyes for the pair. Replace the two known ship types with big question marks as to benefits and it should give the pirates reason to consider their attack.
Or their own cloaked recon getting eyes on target to decide on which T3 ship is likely fitted for which role.
Similar thing in a fleet engagement. You will either need to bring in ship scanners to see who's doing what, or react to the T3 ships as they display their "combat role". Calling them primary to spite the pilot with SP loss, may just cost you the fight because you ignore the real gank ships in the enemy fleet. |
Rawr Cristina
Caldari Naqam Exalted.
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 18:32:00 -
[242]
It's not a real loss, just train all the skills to 4 and you lose 2 days most
..and by the sounds of things you're not going to be losing these much anyway.
...and you can escape the SP loss, by ejecting. |
Vanessa Vasquez
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 18:35:00 -
[243]
Yo,
one thing we really needed in EVE. After spending months of skilling for T2 stuff, i might not need it anymore. And it gets better. Not only that i my super-uber-pwn-5 billion-laser-canon gets destroyed, no. I also loose SP now. Great idea!
Well, why don't we just invent a random internet hacker who clears random wallets from time to time? Keep the crowd addicted CCP. Set them back as much as you can!
/not supported |
Eranicus II
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 18:51:00 -
[244]
Hmmmm maybe im not getting something here. But where are t3 battleships / Battle cruisers ? Because from what i can see i cant make a battleship from this lego :)
Are we getting t3 battleships lego in expansion or only cruiser based ships ?
|
Jowen Datloran
Caldari Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 18:58:00 -
[245]
Originally by: Eranicus II Hmmmm maybe im not getting something here. But where are t3 battleships / Battle cruisers ? Because from what i can see i cant make a battleship from this lego :)
Are we getting t3 battleships lego in expansion or only cruiser based ships ?
New Dev Blog: Strategic Cruisers ---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute
|
Salizar Amolkshue
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 19:07:00 -
[246]
Originally by: Gnulpie
"Once the ship has been assembled, players are free to switch out the subsystems completely at will, given they are docked at a station"
Ok, does that mean that all of the possible components for the ship will come with the original hull, or do you need to buy the hull and the different components separately? Do you need to carry the other components around with you in order to reconfigure at the station or do they just somehow magically come along with you all the time?
Originally by: CCP Nozh
For the time being the configuration will only be available in stations.
What about in a capital ship hanger bay, is that considered a "mobile station?" |
August Guns
Minmatar Infinite ISK.
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 19:19:00 -
[247]
What sort of skill bonuses will we see implemented?
Will it be anything like:
Racial Strategic Cruiser Bonus x% improvement of all subsystem bonuses per skill level
Each subsystem gets a bonus too: Racial Offensive Subsystem Bonus x% increase turret rate of fire per level
The exact bonus would vary from each subsystem. I would hope that CCP would include non-combat specialties as well, like a mining amount, cov ops cpu bonus, etc.
Will we get different names for subsystems to add some RP flavor, or are we keeping subsystem numbers 1-5? |
Miniturret
Amarr Mining Under the influence of Sugar Pals
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 19:52:00 -
[248]
ok so the more I've mulled this over since I've been at work it's still meh but one question I do have for the devs is,
What has caused the "the sudden rift in the symbiotic ship relationship"? since we already have that relationship with current ships (one person controlling a carrier, dreadnought, battleship etc.) |
Julius Rigel
House Rigel
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 20:00:00 -
[249]
What about probes? |
Reiisha
Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 20:00:00 -
[250]
Originally by: CCP TomB
I want your Jove avatar back. |
|
John McCreedy
Caldari Eve Defence Force Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 20:20:00 -
[251]
What I'd really like to know is where the hell did the Minmatar find designers who can actually design something that doesn't look like a tin can with rusty nails glued on it?
|
John McCreedy
Caldari Eve Defence Force Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 20:34:00 -
[252]
Have I got this right? You have five subsystems that "bolt" onto your hull. Each of those subsystems then have five "skill" levels? If so, what is the minimum number of subsystems I need to "bolt" on in order to fly the Cruiser and what is the maximum number I can add?
I mean, can I take out a cruiser for a spin with all five attached if I so chose? One other thing, will these Strategic Cruisers be designed as front line ships rather than support class vessels (EW, Remote Repping etc.) or can either role be fufilled?
J |
Praetor Novak
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 20:49:00 -
[253]
Simply awesome! You've outdone yourself this time CCP. Scrum and Sprint Away!
One question though: Will all these "unique ships" cause more procedural or database processing overhead in the node for fleet fights? In the past cool new features have had an unintended ôfeatureö of causing lag.
Warning - Additional Feature Idea:
Originally by: CCP Nozh we're also working on a new and improved fitting screen, mechanics that allow you to save and share your setups and of course
There is a great level of satisfaction in finding a ship fit that works, however is is constantly tempered by the need to go back to a major trade hub and refitting a new ship the same way. Could there ever be a time that the saved profile could include a [Buy Setup] button that pops a market purchase window that includes all those items we need in one transaction (obviously lowest prices first)? Hunting and pecking through the market screen, expanding and collapsing windows and clicking items and then expanding the market view, etc for 20-50 modules, rigs, ammo, paste, boosters, scripts and drones is not a good spend of time in EVE. We'd rather be out piloting our ship in a fight somewhere in the vast reaches of EVE than sitting in a market hub! With the complexity of Tech3 ships this will only become severely compounded. A T2 Cruiser fit that used to cost us 20-30min to fit out will now take an hour with a T3 Cruiser.
|
Halycon Gamma
Caldari The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 21:01:00 -
[254]
None of this changes my reasons for being against SP loss.
Tech 3 isn't a new gameplay element. Why should you arbitrarily penalize someone for playing exactly how they've always played, except in a new shiny ship.
The people who can most afford the SP loss risk aren't PVP characters, its carebears who don't have to worry about dieing in a battle. We're rewarding carebears.
This isn't even a SP sink, its a TIME SINK. SP = TIME in eve. And please, someone, please tell me that eve already isn't the worlds largest MMO time sink. No other MMO requires half as much time, planning, thought, and care as eve. What other game nearly requires you to download a program like EveMon just to track time management. We don't need another time sink, we have more than enough of them with the current SP system, thanks.
Or how about the fact that this penalty only affects PVP combat players. Doesn't affect carebear combat players. Doesn't affect miners. Doesn't affect builders, haulers, or researchers. Nope. This penalty only affects one very small portion of the playerbase.
If CCP wants to give me something new, something truly new that incurs this sorta penalty. Sure, I'd halfway accept that. I may not like it, but I'd live with it just to fiddle with the new shiny and test it out. Maybe even learn to love it. But this? I can shoot stuff in a tech1, I can shoot stuff in a tech2. Why should shooting stuff exactly the same way I did in tech1 and tech2 be so different, so revolutionary; that they had to invent a brand new gameplay mechanic that only penalizes tech3.
And the final reason I hate this change. It sets a horrible precedent. One of the truisms of the world is:
"Good ideas, if over used, become bad ideas. All good ideas are over used."
What that means is, they've already done the work to implement this, systems are in place. Next time the devs decide to implement a really harsh penalty, there ya go. Already made. Don't have to think one up that could make better sense, just reuse this one. Why re-invent the wheel after all? We'll become used to it, come to accept it as how the game works, and the penalties will just become worse and worse. Yet chances are, it won't ever address my earlier reasons for hating the idea in the first place. Time Sink/Carebear Friendly/Arbitrary Reasoning.
|
Sarah Moonshine
The Maverick Navy Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 21:10:00 -
[255]
Edited by: Sarah Moonshine on 13/02/2009 21:13:00
Originally by: Rawr Cristina ...and you can escape the SP loss, by ejecting.
Which means only inexperienced (dumb) / overly lagged players will be penalized. While I'm all up for one being taught a lesson by life now and then, I don't think it's fair that one's going to lose something by a factor that isn't under his control and doesn't belong to the game mechanics.
|
Gal'drea
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 22:02:00 -
[256]
Originally by: Khan Soriano
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.
I bolded the important part here. Nobody is saying these shouldn't be expensive, or risky ships to fly. Keep in mind they're still cruisers, and I seriously doubt CCP will make them solo wtfbbqpwm-mobiles.
These newer players should have the option to fly AND lose these ships like everyone else does. However, with the current mechanic, they will be ruining their characters future without realizing the real cost of that they're doing. I don't even mean a year old character, either. There are already so many skills in eve that it takes years to even approach mastery of a select few professions, and now you want to limit people ability to progress further with a sp-sink?
They need a different risk mechanic. Make it so you can't fly them for a week after losing one. Make it so they get better only when you're flying them (but normal SP generates as it should). Make the parts so impossible to get ahold of that the only people flying them are the ones that go get the parts themselves. Something, ANYTHING, is better than an SP loss.
ninja-edit: I'm probably going to spend the rest of the day thinking of things worse than SP loss... but until then I stand by this
|
Orange Faeces
Minmatar THE INTERNET. Goodfellas.
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 22:03:00 -
[257]
I'm wondering what happened to the heat bonuses that T3 ships were supposed to have? I was looking forward to that...
Also...
Originally by: Halycon Gamma None of this changes my reasons for being against SP loss.
Tech 3 isn't a new gameplay element. Why should you arbitrarily penalize someone for playing exactly how they've always played, except in a new shiny ship.
The people who can most afford the SP loss risk aren't PVP characters, its carebears who don't have to worry about dieing in a battle. We're rewarding carebears.
This isn't even a SP sink, its a TIME SINK. SP = TIME in eve. And please, someone, please tell me that eve already isn't the worlds largest MMO time sink. No other MMO requires half as much time, planning, thought, and care as eve. What other game nearly requires you to download a program like EveMon just to track time management. We don't need another time sink, we have more than enough of them with the current SP system, thanks.
While your argument may convince some that SP-loss isn't fair, there are some simple reasons why I think that's the wrong way to think about it. If you play eve for a while, you know that there are people out there who have unlimited ISK at their disposal. Yes, some of these people are carebears, but some of them had a friend leave the game with 30Bil isk to donate. Some of them are corp thieves and other scammers. Some of them bought isk on ebay or from a website! Think about it.
T2 costs nothing for them. Even faction battleships and deadspace mods are a pittance of their total wallet. Its high time CCP introduced a mechanic for solo play that you can't buy your way out of immediately. It will do something definite for people who actually enjoy having a dedicated pvp character.
See you in space...
oF
---
|
John McCreedy
Caldari Eve Defence Force Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 22:44:00 -
[258]
Originally by: Halycon Gamma None of this changes my reasons for being against SP loss.
Tech 3 isn't a new gameplay element. Why should you arbitrarily penalize someone for playing exactly how they've always played, except in a new shiny ship.
Because CCP want to decrease the gap between new players and Eve veterans. I personally think it's inspired. Rather than the same old "shoot ship until ship dies", now both parties have several new choices. For example:
1. I jump into a small gate camp and can't make it back to the gate. Do I try and fight my way out and risk loosing my ship and thus my skills or self destruct my ship so as to not loose skills?
2. I'm in a fight and the enemy is going down. Do I blow him up or do I offer him the chance to eject and gain myself a free ship and him/her the chance not to loose skills?
These are but two examples of whole new strategies that this policy opens up. All you have to do is think outside the box a little.
J Celebrating five years in Eve!
|
Gal'drea
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 23:05:00 -
[259]
Edited by: Gal''drea on 13/02/2009 23:06:50 This is to all those who support the "T3 isn't supposed to be popular" idea. Those that believe SP loss is a fine mechanic used to decrease the number of people willing to fly T3.
Is that the goal of CCP? Is that what we want them to concentrate on? New features for an ever decreasing crowd of people?
If so, why don't we just let devs play with all their powers? Spawn Titans, etc., fly invulnerable Jove ships. Fun!
Then we have few people (only devs) with a lot of power, and HUGE risk (when they do too much, people quit eve).
Here's an idea, why don't we develop new content everyone wants to use?
|
Kalib Stark
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 23:06:00 -
[260]
Originally by: Ron Bacardi 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.
Time to separate the bears from thar T3 ships!
Delicious Cake! will be served by knocking T3 ships into hull, and then pausing to let the pilot eject, and keep sacred SP god happy in return for a small T3 donation to the Wayward Prates Fund For the Betterment of the Security Status Challenged. This is why CCP give new scanning method to find juicy mission runners...
Now tell will T3 kills provide more than just Shinny KM and an extra helping of Grieffer Giggles(TM) over thought that victim has angered Sacred SP God?
T3 salvage? Some sections of the ship have chance to survive? [make your time] Or Components for building new base hulls?
Will all your ship parts belong to base hull? So base hull only mate with its own race ship-parts? If yes, how long till faction hulls allow race mixing?
will ship-parts be small enough to fit in cargo of modular ship so that I can Change On Da Fly(TM)...or do I have to make my way back to far far base station full of my stuff [crap] just as if I were changing entire ship?
will insurance be on Hull [keep'n it live] or will repackaging or trading ship-parts end my insurance? Will insurance ONLY cover The T1 value of my T3 ship? Like now with craptacular T2 ship insurance?
╚KS╝ |
|
Komen
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 23:44:00 -
[261]
Now that's a blog. A cruiser class ship with massive potential for reconfiguration even before you bolt on modules. I'm picturing an ECM droneboat...yep!
Thanks CCP! Big <3! |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 23:49:00 -
[262]
OMG omg Tomb AND tuxford. Now I beleive on those ships :)
But the question must be made.. who is holding the nerf bat.. and did anyone frapsed the fight for it? |
Josef Amerentev
Gallente E.M.P. Industries Malum Exuro
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 00:01:00 -
[263]
couple of things from me. I personally do not like the sp loss provision. Not something I would like to have. I *would* prefer not to train the same skill twice. I know that so far only cruisers are implemented. I remember that three levels were mentioned at one point: small/medium/large. Will apocrypha be limited to cruisers or will we wait until later for them?
|
Karrade Krise
Galatic P0RN Starz
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 00:31:00 -
[264]
Originally by: Gal'drea [Is that the goal of CCP? Is that what we want them to concentrate on? New features for an ever decreasing crowd of people?
?
The bolded part...uh....wtf are you talking about? Last I heard, EVE had hit the 50k mark just the other day...
Must be one of those "EVEISDYINGOMGOMGOMG!!111!!!11!eleven!!!" kind of people...
Apoctasy > unfortunately, Concord does not reimburse citizens for their own stupidity
|
Gal'drea
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 00:53:00 -
[265]
Originally by: Karrade Krise
Originally by: Gal'drea [Is that the goal of CCP? Is that what we want them to concentrate on? New features for an ever decreasing crowd of people?
?
The bolded part...uh....wtf are you talking about? Last I heard, EVE had hit the 50k mark just the other day...
Must be one of those "EVEISDYINGOMGOMGOMG!!111!!!11!eleven!!!" kind of people...
Genius. Can't believe I didn't read the front page. I forgot that everyone loves losing SP, and all the NEW eve players will be in T3. Thank you, so much. |
Hugh Hefner
Caldari Paxton Industries Paxton Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 01:16:00 -
[266]
I can but say: Thanks for this new PVE-ships CCP. |
Ranger 1
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 01:49:00 -
[267]
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 14/02/2009 01:52:32 Actually I think we will see a strong trend of people training 1 character specifically for T3 ships, if they enjoy them.
You see, massive amounts of skill points don't make you a more effective player (contrary to the opinions spewed forth in this thread). It doesn't take all that much time to get level 5 in all pertinent skills pertaining to your particular favorite class of ship, assuming you are wise in how you train your skills.
No, having massive amounts of skill points grants you "versatility"... the ability to be highly skilled in flying many types of ships. It won't take long before people realize that with these new cruisers you have a good measure of versatility built into that one ship. From that point of view, you don't have to have a huge SP buffer spread across a half dozen other ship classes to engage in a wide variety of combat scenarios (and possibly other activities).
I won't go into more philosophical realms by observing that the level of effectiveness you have in combat, let alone the amount of enjoyment you can derive from this game, has little to do with your skill point level. The very utterance of such a concept would have some peoples clones spinning in their vats.
===== * Now I know how George Washington felt when Napoleon bombed him at Pearl Harbor. - Beast Boy |
Spacy Cadette
The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 04:36:00 -
[268]
The concept of loosing skill points to a random "I flew though a gate and lagged out, cause it was Jita" will be a major detriment to flying of T3 ships. There is no way one can avoid such situations in this game. The number of times each and every one of us who has done any PVP experiences lag, to end up loosing a week of training, without any recourse or method of protection, is a FAIL.
I am sorry CCP. I was so excited about T3. This just killed it for me, as well as for the majority of people that I know. Unless these ships are Uber WTF PWN! machines right out of the box, I seriously doubt they will end up being used for much more than novelty right now. And if they are that powerful, the concept of balance has gone away.
Who, seriously, if the ships are balanced, would bother with this instead of learning a 2nd, 3rd or 4th racial class, or going towards capital ships?
My alt is a 20 mil SP all caldari toon, command ship specialist. I was going to put about 2 mil more skill points in, then I figured I had a decison, go for another race (amarr probably) or go for T3 ships. Decision has been made now, no questions. Not even close. When I hit that 100 mil point I might reconsider. Same with this industry toon - ya, I can fly an Arazu, but I will go for a carrier now instead of a T3 ship. I bet most people will make similar decisions.
Shame, T3 has such potential. ______________________________________________ Just becuase I did it doesn't mean it is a good idea. |
Halycon Gamma
Caldari The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 05:05:00 -
[269]
Originally by: Spacy Cadette The concept of loosing skill points to a random "I flew though a gate and lagged out, cause it was Jita" will be a major detriment to flying of T3 ships. There is no way one can avoid such situations in this game. The number of times each and every one of us who has done any PVP experiences lag, to end up loosing a week of training, without any recourse or method of protection, is a FAIL.
I am sorry CCP. I was so excited about T3. This just killed it for me, as well as for the majority of people that I know. Unless these ships are Uber WTF PWN! machines right out of the box, I seriously doubt they will end up being used for much more than novelty right now. And if they are that powerful, the concept of balance has gone away.
Who, seriously, if the ships are balanced, would bother with this instead of learning a 2nd, 3rd or 4th racial class, or going towards capital ships?
My alt is a 20 mil SP all caldari toon, command ship specialist. I was going to put about 2 mil more skill points in, then I figured I had a decison, go for another race (amarr probably) or go for T3 ships. Decision has been made now, no questions. Not even close. When I hit that 100 mil point I might reconsider. Same with this industry toon - ya, I can fly an Arazu, but I will go for a carrier now instead of a T3 ship. I bet most people will make similar decisions.
Shame, T3 has such potential.
The thing that makes tech3 so awesome sounding isn't k-space. The thing that really makes it awesome sounding is w-space, where you are limited to cruisers for any sort of gang over 8-9 people because of wormhole mass mechanics. Meanwhile you can fit 70-90 cruisers. The massively sweep in ways the ship can be configured means you can come up with some really odd messed up but powerful ship designs that allow you to both tank, for pve, and gank, for when you hit a PVP encounter. The ships should be able to work much better than current designs in a wide range of combat scenarios because of it. If there is a god, none of them will do its specific job better than the dedicated T2 ship, but does that job, and a wide range of other jobs well enough that it doesn't matter that its only "almost as good".
|
Daan Sai
Polytrope
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 06:20:00 -
[270]
Who else has noticed that by encouraging T3 pilots to eject or self-destruct (to save SP), that it is going to really annoy the pirates wanting a T3 killmail.
SDs could be more common, and they already annoy some folks.
Also Why are so mant people *obsessed* with their SP count? The skills to do the task at had are all that matters. A million or two SP in navigation makes you as good at flying as a 100 million SP dinosaur :) Okay they have more skills, but ig they aint using them at the time they just don't matter.
After a bit more than a year playing, a 4 day skill is less than 1% of your SP - not really a huge loss is it?
Bring on T3. (but limit respecs to just once per char).
|
|
Huan CK
Gallente GK inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 08:13:00 -
[271]
Quote: Ejecting or self-destructing does prevent the penalty, giving players an incentive to abandon ship from time to time.
I hope you KNOW what this means, CCP!!
You need: a) WAY shorter self destruction delays, so that self destruction actually is an option in combat, but finetuned so that it cannot be exploited to manipulate combat logs. b) A shortcut for both, eject and self destruct. If you are in combat and want to safe your skillpoints, this means you need the chance to actually get out before it blows. In the current state, this is how it would happen:
Quote: right-click ship -->eject "are you sure you want to do this y/n" --- "poof - your t3 ship blew before you were able to eject, byebye skillpoints"
|
Cergorach
Amarr The Helix Foundation
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 08:37:00 -
[272]
Originally by: Huan CK
Quote: Ejecting or self-destructing does prevent the penalty, giving players an incentive to abandon ship from time to time.
I hope you KNOW what this means, CCP!!
You need: a) WAY shorter self destruction delays, so that self destruction actually is an option in combat, but finetuned so that it cannot be exploited to manipulate combat logs. b) A shortcut for both, eject and self destruct. If you are in combat and want to safe your skillpoints, this means you need the chance to actually get out before it blows. In the current state, this is how it would happen:
Quote: right-click ship -->eject "are you sure you want to do this y/n" --- "poof - your t3 ship blew before you were able to eject, byebye skillpoints"
Self destruct should be shorter, but not so short that it is a replacement for ejecting. Ejecting should be relatively fast (I want to hit a big red button on my keyboard for ejecting!), so a shortcut should be good.
Ejecting should leave enough time for the aggressors to actually capture the ship, self destruct obviously not. I don't remember if self destruct stops if you eject after starting it, I think that shouldn't be allowed (people should be allowed to capture ships). |
Antimony Noske
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 09:13:00 -
[273]
I don't understand why so many people are so gosh-darned happy about having their skillpoints taken away.
What do we lose without this feature? Nothing! It doesn't provide any benefit to anyone but the hardest of the hardcore who absolutely must have that additional risk; and even THAT doesn't matter, because if anyone wanted MORE risk, they'd buy extra expensive modules, or use non-updated clones. [Do we actually see that happening? Not really.]
Amazingly, yes there will be people crying "Why can't I lose my skillpoints when I die, CCP???" if this feature is removed, but they're going to be in the minority compared to the people who Don't want this feature added. [And they can always decide not to update their clones in order to 'simulate' having this feature anyways.]
If the feature were removed right now, me and a lot of other players breathe a sigh of relief, and a select few opine how "those damn bastards got their way, those whiny *****es". Plus maybe a few threads about how CCP is caving in to 'carebears'. [The least effected by the skillpoint loss.] But then that's the end of it.
If the feature sticks around, CCP you're going to be risking subscriptions from those who, on principle, won't put up with that kind of game design, you're going to have people sticking around who completely refuse to use tech 3 out of the box, [40% of the playerbase refuses to use a brand new feature you spent months working on? IT COULD HAPPEN!] you're opening up a lot of problems with petitions, and you're going to drive away new players. For what? So we can have a little more risk when flying a ship, when that option is already there for those who want it?
Look at it from a PR point of view: "With the brand new Tech 3 ships, you can now spend weeks retraining skills over and over again!"
This is a sodding disaster in the making.
What if, in the future, CCP decides to add even more skillpoint loss mechanics? "Now Tech 3 modules incur skillpoint loss! Being killed in a station with WiS results in skillpoint loss! This or that new shiny feature results in skillpoint loss!" Sorry, that's when I pick up my ball and go home. THAT, is not the kind of game I want to play, and it is not the kind of game I originally subscribed to. It's not enjoyable, it's just masochistic punishment for giving CCP my money.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 09:37:00 -
[274]
Originally by: Spacy Cadette The concept of loosing skill points to a random "I flew though a gate and lagged out, cause it was Jita" will be a major detriment to flying of T3 ships. There is no way one can avoid such situations in this game. The number of times each and every one of us who has done any PVP experiences lag, to end up loosing a week of training, without any recourse or method of protection, is a FAIL.
I am sorry CCP. I was so excited about T3. This just killed it for me, as well as for the majority of people that I know. Unless these ships are Uber WTF PWN! machines right out of the box, I seriously doubt they will end up being used for much more than novelty right now. And if they are that powerful, the concept of balance has gone away.
Who, seriously, if the ships are balanced, would bother with this instead of learning a 2nd, 3rd or 4th racial class, or going towards capital ships?
My alt is a 20 mil SP all caldari toon, command ship specialist. I was going to put about 2 mil more skill points in, then I figured I had a decison, go for another race (amarr probably) or go for T3 ships. Decision has been made now, no questions. Not even close. When I hit that 100 mil point I might reconsider. Same with this industry toon - ya, I can fly an Arazu, but I will go for a carrier now instead of a T3 ship. I bet most people will make similar decisions.
Shame, T3 has such potential.
yes you can. I fly most of time for PVP in this game, mostly t2 cruisers, and last time I lost a t2 cruiser was in july 2008. Just use your brain and you won't loose more than 1 ship per month unless you are fighting in blobs. And at least on on each 3 times you will be able to eject to save your SP. So if at end of a full year you loose more than 7 days of training with t3 ships while pvping most of time you are a "sub standard pvper" |
Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 09:51:00 -
[275]
Originally by: Antimony Noske Edited by: Antimony Noske on 14/02/2009 09:17:23 I don't understand why so many people are so gosh-darned happy about having their skillpoints taken away.
What do we lose without this feature? Nothing! It doesn't provide any benefit to anyone but the hardest of the hardcore who absolutely must have that additional risk; and even THAT doesn't matter, because if anyone wanted MORE risk, they'd buy extra expensive modules, or use non-updated clones. [Do we actually see that happening? Not really.]
Amazingly, yes there will be people crying "Why can't I lose my skillpoints when I die, CCP???" if this feature is removed, but they're going to be in the minority compared to the people who Don't want this feature added. [And they can always decide not to update their clones in order to 'simulate' having this feature anyways.]
If the feature were removed right now, me and a lot of other players breathe a sigh of relief, and a select few opine how "those damn bastards got their way, those whiny b****es". Plus maybe a few threads about how CCP is caving in to 'carebears'. [The least effected by the skillpoint loss.] But then that's the end of it.
If the feature sticks around, CCP you're going to be risking subscriptions from those who, on principle, won't put up with that kind of game design, you're going to have people sticking around who completely refuse to use tech 3 out of the box, [40% of the playerbase refuses to use a brand new feature you spent months working on? IT COULD HAPPEN!] you're opening up a lot of problems with petitions, and you're going to drive away new players. For what? So we can have a little more risk when flying a ship, when that option is already there for those who want it?
Look at it from a PR point of view: "With the brand new Tech 3 ships, you can now spend weeks retraining skills over and over again!" [And there's more room for PR then the official channels, word of mouth goes a long way. People can and WILL make fun of/degrade Eve for having this feature.]
This is a sodding disaster in the making.
What if, in the future, CCP decides to add even more skillpoint loss mechanics? "Now Tech 3 modules incur skillpoint loss! Being killed in a station with WiS results in skillpoint loss! This or that new shiny feature results in skillpoint loss!" Sorry, that's when I pick up my ball and go home. THAT, is not the kind of game I want to play, and it is not the kind of game I originally subscribed to. It's not enjoyable, it's just masochistic punishment for me giving CCP money.
Even though your avatar is Female, I'm almost certain your a girl IRL.
BooHoo, a new--and completely seperate--feature requires SP loss and you're whining about it like your mascara has ran out, grow up and get a pair. ----------------- Friends Forever |
Antimony Noske
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 10:16:00 -
[276]
Edited by: Antimony Noske on 14/02/2009 10:18:35
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg Even though your avatar is Female, I'm almost certain your a girl IRL.
BooHoo, a new--and completely seperate--feature requires SP loss and you're whining about it like your mascara has ran out, grow up and get a pair.
Nice grasp of logic you've got there champ. I'm a girl, so therefore I'm wrong.
With an attitude like that, it's no wonder nobody's going to take you seriously. Maybe you could try again when you're intellectually capable of making arguments based on more than random insults and ad hominem attacks.
Edit: To put it in dumb for you: Attack and argue what I say. Not who I am. |
Deva Blackfire
coracao ardente
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 10:52:00 -
[277]
Originally by: Daan Sai Who else has noticed that by encouraging T3 pilots to eject or self-destruct (to save SP), that it is going to really annoy the pirates wanting a T3 killmail.
If you destroy ship w/o pilot you still get mail. And as its cruiser self-destruct will only save you from frigs. Most other cruisers will vaporize it within 1 (or was it 2?) minutes timeframe.
As for T3 and skill loss? ******ed. T3 and prices? from last calculations (on needed gases to build hull) guys on forums came up with 400m as being very cheap. So i guess t3 ships might cost even up to 700+mil.
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 10:59:00 -
[278]
Edited by: Pottsey on 14/02/2009 11:02:20 Antimony Noske said "I don't understand why so many people are so gosh-darned happy about having their skillpoints taken away." It has next to no impact for some of us. The carebares rarely if ever lose ships so they don't care. Some of the older players have ran out of useful skills to train and don't care about losing a few SP's. I don't really like the idea of SP loss but I don't worry about it as it's not going have any negative impact on me. It's mostly the lower SP/younger pilots who get the high negative impact from SP loss. The only thing I dont like about T3 is how easy it is to train to get into one. I was hopeing it would give some long term training goals.
EDIT: In a strange way it might even be a positive not a negative. A high SP player with nothing left to train is wondering what to train. He/she accidently loses the T3 ship and now has something worthwhile to train again. ____ Telltale sign of their presence is non-linear teleportation (www.eve-online.com/races/theodicy/Theodicy_All.pdf)
|
Deva Blackfire
coracao ardente
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 11:06:00 -
[279]
I wonder how people can run out of "stuff to train". Im 70mil SP atm (around 3-5m SP wasted on mining/production/research in newb days) and yet have skill que of another 20mil SP. Max drone skills (all lv5), max gunnery (all lv5). And thats with 3 races cruiser lv5 and only 1 race BS lv5.
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 11:26:00 -
[280]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 14/02/2009 11:06:11 I wonder how people can run out of "stuff to train". Im 70mil SP atm (around 3-5m SP wasted on mining/production/research in newb days) and yet have skill que of another 20mil SP. Max drone skills (all lv5), max gunnery (all lv5) still to train. And thats with 3 races cruiser lv5 and only 1 race BS lv5.
They run out of relevant skills to train. Some have trained the ships they fly to max and don't care about the rest. To continue training on such a character would just increase the cost of losing clones. I personally crosstrain, but in all honesty I propably only fly 3-4 different ships and don't really care about the rest. I continue training more for the possibility that I get bored and want to do something different(also for nerfbat immunity :P), than any actual need to train further. |
|
Cailais
Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 11:28:00 -
[281]
You teasing bas****@!"ú*O&(*&*YF!!!
YOURE CHANGING THE CONCEPT ART PICTURE!!!
C.
|
TorTorden
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 11:33:00 -
[282]
Originally by: Rivqua
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf
- Skillpoint loss will result is lack of use
- Lack of use will result in low prices
- Low prices will result in little profit for related material acquisition, research, and production
- Lack of profit will lead to lack of use of these features
- Lack of use pretty much invalidates the primary content of the entire expansion
While some are willing to risk SP loss (and be the clusters first called primary and favorite suicide-gank-4-lulz target) we're talking about a relatively small market, these ships aren't for everyone for many their SP are precious being the only way to truly improve your character over time. If this follows through we'll end up with a whole lot of features that may as well not exist due to lack of use.
The whole SP loss system massively benefits those players with SP levels well beyond those gathered by the average player in their 7 month average (?) time in the game. Splitting it racially makes it worse as those with high SP will have three other races worth of t3 ship skills to fall back on. This all means that the older a character is the less they have to lose.
Combine the subsystem skills and provide a separate SP pool for subsystems to maintain the high level of risk (losing a level IV/V will still be significant) or drop the SP loss idea.
Either way the increased risk promotes empire use while punishing PvP use, promotes blobbing while punishing riskier styles of play and ejecting removing the penalty effectively makes it a punishment solely for those with high latency or suffering from lag, a genuinely terrible idea.
Other than all the SP related stuff the concept looks fantastic, as do the models. Im just glad Im not the one responsible for balancing it.
I think you underestimate the pvp mind. I would guess they will one day equal the number of Command ships sold per race on the market.
/Riv
And with these skills being rank 1, for most people with their learning skills done that means traning a lvl 4 to lvl 5 would take aproximatly four days. Not exactly completely cripling loss lvl 3-4 aprox 17 hours. that would let you lose a ship, log off for the night, go to work, and come back and go out an lose it again. The only change the aspect of losing a skill lvl might change is to make the eject from ship function actualy usefull. (Pirates rejoice) |
Miniturret
Amarr Mining Under the influence of Sugar Pals
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 14:56:00 -
[283]
Edited by: Miniturret on 14/02/2009 14:59:09 What has caused the "the sudden rift in the symbiotic ship relationship"? What is the backstory behind this thinking? You are developing an mmoRPG emphasis on the RPG part what reason do you have to implement this other than [sarcasm] well shucks we dun need moar risk so we gonna punish them for flying this here ship. [/sarcasm]
Seriously though it's a ROLE PLAYING game, what reason do you have for this other than more risk?
I would like to know since we already have that relationship with current ships (one person controlling a carrier, dreadnought, battleship etc.) so if the "symbiotic ship relationship" has a rift in it is it going to expand to inculde T1 and T2 ships as well? since hey there's not enough risk to fly those either.
Also I look forward to the first person to fly one through highsec and get popped by a ganker. I hope it's one of the ones that doesn't mind the SP lose. that's not pvp you didn't have time to SD or eject, or even return fire most times. you'll jump into system and next you know your in your pod and short a few days training. sitting there going WTF just happened?
Another question I have since the ships are modular is there a chance for the ship parts to drop as loot as the modules do?
So to recap my questions for the dev's
1) What has caused the "rift with the symbiotic ship relationship"? 2) What is the backstory / reason for the rift? (goes hand in hand with question 1) -=Edit=- 3) Will the rift expand further to include T1 and T2 ships as well? 4) Do the ship parts have a chance to drop as normal modules do when the ship explodes or are they blown up 100% of the time?
|
xOm3gAx
Caldari Stain of Mind
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 16:06:00 -
[284]
/me chants *TomB TomB TomB TomB TomB TomB*
wait wtf happened to your pic TomB you used to be one sick looking jove and i mean that in a good way lol
Originally by: CCP Abraxas Her boyfriend's way hot, too; tall and tanned. And I say this as a very hetero male who doesn't ever dream of the man on cold, dark nights.
|
Deviana Sevidon
Gallente Panta-Rhei Guardian Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 22:02:00 -
[285]
I hope all Subsystems Ships and Bonuses are added soon.
All Cruisers require extensive testing and balancing and the time until march the 10.th is already growing short.
|
Graw Rayes
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 03:28:00 -
[286]
HOW ABOUT A NEW learning skill
that reduces the sp loss at the point of death by 10%
Say subsystem memorization or someting similiar.
|
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 11:08:00 -
[287]
Tbh, I can't guess what CCP thought about when they considered the SP loss.... Perhaps it's a pre-nerf to ensure demand for these ships will not be high.
It basically ensures that these ships will only be used very rarely in PvP, probably only in solo PvP and for sure not in gang/fleet.... In any kind of gang/fleet fight, they're sure to be primaried!
They'll have to provide MASSIVE advantages to overcome this, and it doesn't sound like they do...
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Glarion Garnier
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 15:00:00 -
[288]
Well one thing that is sure to happen. Most ppl will train advanced learning skills to 5 _________________________________ -be vary of the men behind the curtain-
|
Hunter GlobaGateways
Caldari The Edge Foundation Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 16:02:00 -
[289]
WTF !
Quote: Skills
The Tech 3 entry level will be very similar to the Tech 2 one, only requiring fairly basic skills to pilot. Of course, additional skills will be required to fully utilize the different subsystems.
Each race will have a set of 5 subsystem skills as well as a ship skill. The subsystem skills have very basic requirements and are only "rank 1". These affect the subsystem bonuses. Don't think we decided to have them rank 1 just to be cordial though; they don't function like other skills when it comes to ship loss. This is important: Due to the sudden rift in the symbiotic ship relationship that exists between a pilot and a Tech 3 ship, losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills. The penalty is one level off the top. Observe that whether that is a downgrade from, say, level 2 to 1 on your underdeveloped electronics or a painful fall from level 5 to 4 on the spit-polished offensive subsystem, is entirely dependent upon lady luck. Ejecting or self-destructing does prevent the penalty, giving players an incentive to abandon ship from time to time.
|
Akor Flandres
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 19:32:00 -
[290]
Originally by: Miniturret Edited by: Miniturret on 14/02/2009 14:59:09 What has caused the "the sudden rift in the symbiotic ship relationship"? What is the backstory behind this thinking? You are developing an mmoRPG emphasis on the RPG part what reason do you have to implement this other than [sarcasm] well shucks we dun need moar risk so we gonna punish them for flying this here ship. [/sarcasm]
Seriously though it's a ROLE PLAYING game, what reason do you have for this other than more risk?
I would like to know since we already have that relationship with current ships (one person controlling a carrier, dreadnought, battleship etc.) so if the "symbiotic ship relationship" has a rift in it is it going to expand to inculde T1 and T2 ships as well? since hey there's not enough risk to fly those either.
Also I look forward to the first person to fly one through highsec and get popped by a ganker. I hope it's one of the ones that doesn't mind the SP lose. that's not pvp you didn't have time to SD or eject, or even return fire most times. you'll jump into system and next you know your in your pod and short a few days training. sitting there going WTF just happened?
Another question I have since the ships are modular is there a chance for the ship parts to drop as loot as the modules do?
So to recap my questions for the dev's
1) What has caused the "rift with the symbiotic ship relationship"? 2) What is the backstory / reason for the rift? (goes hand in hand with question 1) -=Edit=- 3) Will the rift expand further to include T1 and T2 ships as well? 4) Do the ship parts have a chance to drop as normal modules do when the ship explodes or are they blown up 100% of the time?
You fail at understanding. T3 ships are made from Sleeper technology reverse engineered. Sleeper technology having a big part in the symbiosis stuff.
|
|
Kadriel
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 20:04:00 -
[291]
I like what I'm reading about the upcoming expansion (wormholes, new fitting, tech II, etc..). However, one thing bothers me.
losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills.
I think this is utter ******ation at its finest. The only way this would make sense was if the skills were a 0.01 multiplier or something. Losing skillpoints because of a ship loss makes no sense in eve. You can explain away how the quality of the clone affects your 'backup' of skill training. How would a ship loss make you forget something you trained? I mean, the 'knowledge' is in your head, losing a physical object not connected to your mind doesn't make sense.
Let me go play baseball... oh wait, I lost my bat, therefore, I have no knowledge of how to play the game of baseball anymore. Same line of thinking goes into losing skillpoints because of a ship loss. Its kinda dumb.
Previous rant aside, I think all of you are doing an awesome job.
|
Kadriel
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 20:06:00 -
[292]
Originally by: Graw Rayes HOW ABOUT A NEW learning skill
that reduces the sp loss at the point of death by 10%
Say subsystem memorization or someting similiar.
How about 20% per level. Sounds peachy to me.
|
Akor Flandres
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 20:07:00 -
[293]
Originally by: Kadriel I like what I'm reading about the upcoming expansion (wormholes, new fitting, tech II, etc..). However, one thing bothers me.
losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills.
I think this is utter ******ation at its finest. The only way this would make sense was if the skills were a 0.01 multiplier or something. Losing skillpoints because of a ship loss makes no sense in eve. You can explain away how the quality of the clone affects your 'backup' of skill training. How would a ship loss make you forget something you trained? I mean, the 'knowledge' is in your head, losing a physical object not connected to your mind doesn't make sense.
Let me go play baseball... oh wait, I lost my bat, therefore, I have no knowledge of how to play the game of baseball anymore. Same line of thinking goes into losing skillpoints because of a ship loss. Its kinda dumb.
Previous rant aside, I think all of you are doing an awesome job.
Because it is sleeper technology. Without a mechanic like this, T3 is just what? This adds an extra edge. Boo hoo you lose a level from a rank 1 skill in a random specific Tú category of skills. People will live with it.
|
Learol
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:36:00 -
[294]
loved the pic of that Min-SCruiser... 6 turret slots... Mmmmmmmmmm |
Kadriel
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:13:00 -
[295]
Edited by: Kadriel on 16/02/2009 00:13:33
Originally by: Akor Flandres Mindless talk
Without this mechanic its what? Exactly, just like the rest of eve. Why should it be a different way of doing things than the rest of eve? Sure, T3 is new, but its to add to the eve experience, not differ from eve we all know and mostly love.
How about you giving up a level of battleship next time you go pop? Just sayin...
|
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:27:00 -
[296]
Originally by: Akor Flandres Because it is sleeper technology. Without a mechanic like this, T3 is just what? This adds an extra edge. Boo hoo you lose a level from a rank 1 skill in a random specific Tú category of skills. People will live with it.
Actually, I don't think people will..... Or rather, they'll live with it like in 'Not using T3 for PvP'....
Losing a level doesn't sound too serious, but then when you're talking about losing a level EVERY time your ships gets blown up, it's an entirely different matter....
Say you have a mixture of L4 and L5 in the skills, and lose maybe 2 days on average.... Once you've lost 15 ships, you've lost a MONTH(!) worth of training!
So... T3 will be great for empire PvE, but not used much other than that.... That'll of.c. also affect the demand for it, and affect the attractiveness of actually looking for T3 materials etc.
If this is a pre-nerf to limit uptake, fine, but IMHO I think it'll more or less kill T3 before it has even started....
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 09:36:00 -
[297]
Exactly, so only those who are able to do risk-management will be flying T3.
|
Mana Sanqua
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 11:54:00 -
[298]
I am very disappointed by the skill loss mechanic. I for one won't be flying the ships or training them, but I guarantee they will be primary on sight.
|
Miniturret
Amarr Mining Under the influence of Sugar Pals
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 14:58:00 -
[299]
1) What is the backstory / reason for the rift? 2) Will the rift expand further to include T1 and T2 ships as well much like an infection? 3) Do the ship parts have a chance to drop as normal modules do when the ship explodes or are they blown up 100% of the time? 4) Will a learning skill be introduced to limit the effect or negate the sp lose?
|
Athene
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 23:36:00 -
[300]
Im not sure about the sp loss. I do however see one nice detail in it.
Those that use their brains, and fight smart, gets to keep their sub skill levels, and thus able to fight on. Those that dont, dont get to just hop into another pre-fitted ship right away and go at it again.
It ads sort of an exstra dimension to the game, and might actually make a difference in small gang skirmishes, as noone would be interested in blob wars where you loose all exit options if called primary, or somet.
|
|
Tamar Kaiz
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 00:51:00 -
[301]
I pay 13M for a new SP clone everytime I get podded. That is enough of a loss in addition to the ship. Why take skill training time. This little aspect of Tech III is the most rediculous thing you can do CCP. These ships will always be called primary just to take more than isk from someone. Most PVP pilots will not use them.
|
Kucs Macuvue
Caldari The Edge Foundation
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 07:15:00 -
[302]
Thats it. I'm officially turning pirate.
|
Ravenal
The Fated E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 14:42:00 -
[303]
Quote: losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills.
Right, no doubt bashed at before - just typing my objections to this and I also want to provide an alternative.
Instead of giving a skillpoint loss give the pilot a penalty similar to booster side effects. Time factor might depend on the level of attachment (skill level) the pilot has to the ship.
Skill point loss is a bad bad bad idea. BAD . |
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 16:06:00 -
[304]
Originally by: Miniturret 1) What is the backstory / reason for the rift? 2) Will the rift expand further to include T1 and T2 ships as well much like an infection?
It should be pretty easy to figure that out based on what we know about the sleepers. They are a race that master the virtual realities and cryogenic sleep, and their ships probably reflect this.
Thus it is not far-fetched to assume that flying a T3 ship requires you to be immersed to such a degree, that being forcefully ejected due to ship destruction causes brain damage of sorts. We do after all know that untrained humans that attempt to use a pod neural interface lose their ability to control their bodies after being disconnected.
|
Issaries Valran
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.18 00:47:00 -
[305]
Edited by: Issaries Valran on 18/02/2009 00:51:00 Edited by: Issaries Valran on 18/02/2009 00:50:30 Edited by: Issaries Valran on 18/02/2009 00:49:37 Edited by: Issaries Valran on 18/02/2009 00:49:09 Edited by: Issaries Valran on 18/02/2009 00:47:32 I havenÆt seen a response from one of the devs working on T3 in here for a few days, ether they realize a large segment of the population isnÆt happy with the SP lost and arenÆt paying attention to what is going on in here or they are rethinking it or donÆt really care and are putting it in anyways.
My question if I can get a response is why did the team think SP lost was necessary on these new ships? Did they really think SP lost would go by without the unruly mob lynching them? Why did you put this nasty hair wart on these beautiful ships?
Are they really that much better or going to be that much of a disruption, by being WTFBBQPAWNing everything including titans, or are going to taking over the market where everyone and their grandmother will be flying one and only T3?
Can you explain the need for SP lost, can you explain the need for this high of a risk on one ship type and what the reward is that makes it necessary?
Is this SP lost mechanic a cleverly concealed endless SP training treadmill for the old cranky 5 year veteran players that every once in awhile complain they have nothing left to train for so youÆre giving endless training. Seems to me these ships are all risk and little reward similar to low sec and will be treated the same. AS E-peen that rarely leaves the station mostly seen in high sec and hardly used in pvp, sure they will be used in pvp by some I predict a small few. But with an SP lost I see another faction ship thatÆs mostly just purity to look at and neat to zip around in high sec with. But doesnÆt see much combat, kind of defeats the purpose of adding this new combat ship to the game to me but thatÆs just me maybe.
If you donÆt know yet IÆm against the SP lost as I have understood it being implemented at this time, I can see away of having SP lose in the game if developed in a different way but not as it is being put in now. If you are curious I can elaborate on my idea but IÆm mostly sure that as it has been written now will most likely be the way it gets set in stone.
Please explain this necessity that is SP lose IÆd love to hear what it is. Thanks SP lose hater
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.02.18 01:48:00 -
[306]
I would like to put in an order for five or six of these.
Or more.
This is ultracool --Vel
There is no right or wrong way. There is only what works and what leaves you waking up in a clone vat. |
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.02.18 01:48:00 -
[307]
Edited by: De''Veldrin on 18/02/2009 01:48:03 Edited for double post. Stupid buttons --Vel
There is no right or wrong way. There is only what works and what leaves you waking up in a clone vat. |
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.18 04:16:00 -
[308]
Originally by: Issaries Valran My question if I can get a response is why did the team think SP lost was necessary on these new ships? Did they really think SP lost would go by without the unruly mob lynching them? Why did you put this nasty hair wart on these beautiful ships?
There's always a mob out to lynch CCP. Also there's a large part of the players that think this is the best thing since sliced nano.
|
Nicholas Barker
Black Nova Corp KenZoku
|
Posted - 2009.02.18 16:34:00 -
[309]
I don't see why having your expensive tech3 cruiser blow up isn't bad enough? ------
|
Deviana Sevidon
Gallente Panta-Rhei Guardian Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.19 11:10:00 -
[310]
Will the T3 Ships receive a hardwired Bonus, no Ship Bonus at all, or will the Bonus be decided by the Subsystems?
What exactly do the Subsystem-Skills? Are they just a requirement for the Subsystems to fit or are there advantages for training them to L5?
|
|
cianide pro
|
Posted - 2009.02.19 11:19:00 -
[311]
All depends on what rank those subsystems skills are and how uber those t3 ships are with these maxed out so its worth the time learning these to lvl5 or not. I wonder which attributes these subsystems have.
Prices of them will be high as its always like that with any new ship ingame but that changes a bit on the speed these ships can be produced, how fast we can get the materials we need to build them.
Cant wait for them to be ingame :)
|
JinMei Fighter2
|
Posted - 2009.02.19 14:59:00 -
[312]
It's been debated back and forth enough.
SP loss is a BAD idea. My corp mates and I are just going to boycott the use of Tech3 ships.
If you agree, don't use them either. CCP spent enough time and effort into this, maybe they will change their minds if no one uses them.
|
Deviana Sevidon
Gallente Panta-Rhei Guardian Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.19 16:01:00 -
[313]
Originally by: JinMei Fighter2 It's been debated back and forth enough.
SP loss is a BAD idea. My corp mates and I are just going to boycott the use of Tech3 ships.
If you agree, don't use them either. CCP spent enough time and effort into this, maybe they will change their minds if no one uses them.
All Subsystem Skills are only of Rank 1, this about day training to L4 and less then a week to L5. Since the price will likely be very high for T3 ships, due to complicated manufacturing and components that are not that easy to get, losing your Cruiser, will likely hurt more then a few hours of training.
|
John Hollow
Minmatar Afterisk
|
Posted - 2009.02.19 23:25:00 -
[314]
Originally by: Ravenal
Quote: losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills.
Right, no doubt bashed at before - just typing my objections to this and I also want to provide an alternative.
Instead of giving a skillpoint loss give the pilot a penalty similar to booster side effects. Time factor might depend on the level of attachment (skill level) the pilot has to the ship.
Skill point loss is a bad bad bad idea. BAD
I'm a fan of the skill point loss idea. Mainly because it's the first thing to give SOME advantage to ejecting from your ship. However, this side effect idea sounds even better! CCP, give this man a beer and include this instead. I'd bet MORE people would complain about this though, but I would love it. Another reason I like the extra penalties is because it will instill fear into more people when flying these. Right now there are billionaire pilots out there that could loose 50 ships a day and not care. This penalty will make it scary to get blown up for the rich as well as the poor. (Scary is good)
|
CLOT SUK
|
Posted - 2009.02.20 07:29:00 -
[315]
all I can say is that it looks like tech 3 is going to be reserved for players who have been playing years and years. and its going to cost more than its ****ing worth. waste of time. I might get tech 3 if you ever come out with a tech 3 frigate, but I'd be shocked if tech 3 ships weren't at least as expensive as a HAC... and those don't take overnight to save for. great job guys. thanks for producing something even more esoteric and time consuming.
|
CLOT SUK
|
Posted - 2009.02.20 07:35:00 -
[316]
and skill point loss? man you guys are more out of touch with consumers of your product than george lucas. WTF? why would I bother saving for something that might cost 150mil and up, where if it gets blown up I lose SP too? seems to me that you are putting a ton of time into creating something that only people who essentially live in EVE are going to use. whats in it for people who just like to have fun? the more I read about this package the more it ****es me off
|
CLOT SUK
|
Posted - 2009.02.20 07:59:00 -
[317]
Originally by: Kucs Macuvue
Thats it. I'm officially turning pirate.
hear, hear
|
CLOT SUK
|
Posted - 2009.02.20 08:08:00 -
[318]
*** and lastly, seriously, if you guys are going to pull crap like this then you really need to improve cash flow generated by missions/mining/whatever. Tech 3 is going to be the Bourgeois BattleCruiser.
|
Night Doc
Orekaria
|
Posted - 2009.02.20 13:02:00 -
[319]
Skil: the ability, coming from one's knowledge, practice, aptitude, etc., to do something well
Maybe losing skills fits into the definition of skill (though I would say that losing a ship is earning skill) but...
If someone loses skills, other one has to get it.
Otherwise this is not a skill, if other thing, and, maybe, will not go to the char skills but to other place. - Target analysis - Fit EVE to screen - EFT setup sort |
Kerr AVON
Gallente FUN Industries Unaffiliated
|
Posted - 2009.02.20 23:44:00 -
[320]
Originally by: CLOT SUK all I can say is that it looks like tech 3 is going to be reserved for players who have been playing years and years. and its going to cost more than its ****ing worth. waste of time.
Surely the point of T3 is that it is cutting edge, and something that you aspire to. If everyone could jump into one straight away, what would be the point of T1 and T2?
And I hope CCP don't buckle about the skillpoint loss. It makes it interesting and sorts out the men from the boys (or women from the girls). Stay strong to your beliefs for the game and keep it as it is CCP. I know I can count on you ! _____________________
Questions are a burden to others; answers a prison for oneself.
|
|
Noveron
Caldari Long Live Me
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 01:35:00 -
[321]
***start rant** Will ever CCP leave something to be discovered by the player. Why are there no misteries left to when a patch is released? Why is the fricking game so hyperbalanced and boring to hell!!? ***end rant***
Keep it up guys! ---
|
Etaine Minerva
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 17:06:00 -
[322]
Originally by: Kerr AVON
Surely the point of T3 is that it is cutting edge, and something that you aspire to. If everyone could jump into one straight away, what would be the point of T1 and T2?
And I hope CCP don't buckle about the skillpoint loss. It makes it interesting and sorts out the men from the boys (or women from the girls). Stay strong to your beliefs for the game and keep it as it is CCP. I know I can count on you !
your opinion doesn't hold much weight mr 2003 player.
anyone with less than 25 mil sp will painfully feel the effects of any SP loss. SP isn't replaceable like ISK is.
I doubt T3 ships will be used for anything more than lvl 4 missions.
|
yoni
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:06:00 -
[323]
kudos on the ship designs!!!
What a HUGE step forward from CCP's old, often ridiculous, ugly, or overly asymmetric ships that wouldn't be able to fly a straight line in space.
There is one more thing you should really pay attention to in texturing: believable Scaling for those texture details players will likely interpret as windows.
We all like to imagine we're sitting somewhere inside that ship, even if we only get to see them from the outside. Now if the textures make the scaling look totally off, it breaks immersion. (unless you're a min-maxer player who is only interested in winning or loosing a fight, and would be happy to do it in ships consisting of 20 pixels total) In the coming ambulation expansion, EVE's existing scaling mistakes will be even more disturbing than they are now. Look to the devs of homeworld in this regard, as they have meticulously maintained believable scaling across all ships in the game, in addition to every ship's purpose being immediately obvious by its design.
CCP lucked out on some badly needed better design talent! While you're at it, could someone finally fix system wallpapers, so they don't look like atmospheric clouds instead of nebulae in space? Please?
The new fitting screen:
very nice piece of work! visually and functionally a big upgrade in every way.
Just one problem... the right side of the fitting screen overlaps the station panel, including people's merged hangar window. Since it is not possible to move the new fitting screen, you should find a way to place the station panel, so that the fitting screen can't overlap the hangar window, preventing you from fitting your ship without an extra hassle we never had to deal with previously.
|
Kayn Otar
Samurai Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:14:00 -
[324]
Originally by: Etaine Minerva
Anyone with less than 25 mil sp will painfully feel the effects of any SP loss. SP isn't replaceable like ISK is.
SP is replaceable almost exactly as ISK is. A 25mil SP player will make some amount of ISK per hour running missions, and some amount of ISK per hour skill training. If anything, SP is MORE easily replaceable than ISK because you can do it offline. (Traders can make ISK offline, which makes the systems even more similar.)
Somebody with so few skill points to feel the effect of a single level of a single tier-1 skill will *certainly* be hurt badly by the loss of a 200-400mil ship! (If they could afford to fly one at all.)
|
yoni
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:15:00 -
[325]
Originally by: CLOT SUK WTF? why would I bother saving for something that might cost 150mil and up, where if it gets blown up I lose SP too?
150 mil? I think these things are going to cost easily as much as Marauders, and 2x to 3x that in the beginning after release.
|
Kurai Amaro
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 08:06:00 -
[326]
If this ship type is coming lots of players will focus on a pirate career. Just to kill players in these ships. Good idea from CCP in my eyes to aid pirates life in EVE. But the idea of loosing SP...well well well, project nice...implementation incondite.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.23 03:36:00 -
[327]
Yeah, good luck with that.
===== * Now I know how George Washington felt when Napoleon bombed him at Pearl Harbor. - Beast Boy |
Moraguth
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.23 15:40:00 -
[328]
Edited by: Moraguth on 23/02/2009 15:43:52
Originally by: Ravenal
Quote: losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills.
Right, no doubt bashed at before - just typing my objections to this and I also want to provide an alternative.
Instead of giving a skillpoint loss give the pilot a penalty similar to booster side effects. Time factor might depend on the level of attachment (skill level) the pilot has to the ship.
Skill point loss is a bad bad bad idea. BAD
This is one of the best ideas I've seen to get rid of the SP loss. They could make it last long enough that people won't just sit in a station while their timer runs out (4-6 hours for the low level penalties, maybe a day or two for the high level ones?), but minor enough that it won't make people think they can't fly their ships at all while the timer is still going.
That type of balancing is for people smarter than myself, but I like it more than losing 5 days of skill training any time I lose a ship that i've tried to max out my skill training for. I know it won't happen, but like the guy above me, i feel the need to pipe in with my .02 isk worth too.
EDIT:: The post above me is my dad! HI DAD! I got a free day, don't have to fly again for 2 days, so I got a laptop from a friend and got all caught up on all this new T3 stuff!!!! Hi to everyone from the Middle East. Deployed atm. good game
Hoc filum tradit - This thread delivers.
|
Sidrat Flush
Caldari Life is Experience Rally Against Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.23 15:47:00 -
[329]
I don't think people realise that the skill(s) that could be degraded by ONE level is restricted to the sub-system skills on the Tech 3 ships.
I doubt at least in the short and possibly medium term that there will be the inventory available to keep replacing lost T3 ships the same day or two, so that time COULD (if you wish) be used to get that level back up and try to learn what it was that went wrong and how to avoid that situation again.
Retreat IS a valid tactic in warfare.
-------------------------- Life is about memories the more the better.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.23 22:08:00 -
[330]
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 23/02/2009 22:09:47
Originally by: Moraguth Edited by: Moraguth on 23/02/2009 15:43:52
Originally by: Ravenal
Quote: losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills.
Right, no doubt bashed at before - just typing my objections to this and I also want to provide an alternative.
Instead of giving a skillpoint loss give the pilot a penalty similar to booster side effects. Time factor might depend on the level of attachment (skill level) the pilot has to the ship.
Skill point loss is a bad bad bad idea. BAD
This is one of the best ideas I've seen to get rid of the SP loss. They could make it last long enough that people won't just sit in a station while their timer runs out (4-6 hours for the low level penalties, maybe a day or two for the high level ones?), but minor enough that it won't make people think they can't fly their ships at all while the timer is still going.
That type of balancing is for people smarter than myself, but I like it more than losing 5 days of skill training any time I lose a ship that i've tried to max out my skill training for. I know it won't happen, but like the guy above me, i feel the need to pipe in with my .02 isk worth too.
EDIT:: The post above me is my dad! HI DAD! I got a free day, don't have to fly again for 2 days, so I got a laptop from a friend and got all caught up on all this new T3 stuff!!!! Hi to everyone from the Middle East. Deployed atm.
Actually, I agree. As alternative options go, this one is by far the best.
However, I think CCP wants a little more "risk" involved in the "risk vs. reward" balance for these things.
Although it should be said that if this were implemented instead people would be far more likely to lose multiple ships (of the T1, T2, and T3 varieties) while under the influence of this penalty than they would be under the currently proposed system. So while that would actually make things riskier in some ways (thus helping to achieve the necessary balance ratio mentioned above), I think in practice people would hate it even more than the current proposal.
I suppose time will tell.
PS: Son, just keep your mind on coming home in one piece. I can handle the forum whoring until you get back to the states.
===== * Now I know how George Washington felt when Napoleon bombed him at Pearl Harbor. - Beast Boy |
|
Terail Zoqial
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 12:18:00 -
[331]
No T3 for industrialists or scientists.
*sigh*
Waits for t4
|
Eisbrecker
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 16:25:00 -
[332]
Originally by: Tmarte Edited by: Tmarte on 12/02/2009 16:02:57 Glad to see the subsystems will be the only skills that you could lose by flying one of the ships. Also glad it's going to stay as a Rank 1 skill, so even if you lose Caldari Defense Subsystem V or whatever arbitrary skill it might be, it's only going to be a 4 day jaunt to relearn it at most.
Looks good so far!
CCP stop punishing us for playing your game.
Great idea on the T3 cruisers but there you go again with your limits!
If you build it they will play, give us the tools and lets us have fun, these gimmics don't keep us paying you any longer than we want to, in fact it's becoming so skill intensive to compete in the galactic arena that some people are giving up before they start.
And for those of you that believe their reasoning is to make it more costly for "rich" players...well that simply dosen't make sense, if you know anything about your game you have to know that money is everything and those that are rich put the most time and money into the game anyhow this does absolutely nothing but make it harder for your casual players to compete with the hardcore.
|
Roto Rooter
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 09:43:00 -
[333]
Originally by: JinMei Fighter2 It's been debated back and forth enough.
SP loss is a BAD idea. My corp mates and I are just going to boycott the use of Tech3 ships.
If you agree, don't use them either. CCP spent enough time and effort into this, maybe they will change their minds if no one uses them.
Same here. We will not be going anywhere near T3 ships. SP loss is one of the most stupid ideas we've seen come out of CCP.
|
Xindi Kraid
Cerulean Sky Fire Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 06:51:00 -
[334]
Edited by: Xindi Kraid on 28/02/2009 06:52:53 While I love the concept of modular ships, I'd rather not have it to be some high tech super expensive stuff. We have modular everything now and it's not particularly more advanced than non modular stuff.
Don't get me wrong, I always thought tech 3 would be awesome to have, but I had though what would happen would be more specialization branching for example
Tech 1: Hybrid cannons Tech 2 blasters, railgun spec (2 separate skills 2 separate guns) Tech 3: Higher damage blasters (same range), Longer range blasters (same damage), higher damage railguns, longer range railguns. (4 gun types 4 skills to train.)
Mind you this was for specialized equipment, I didn't even consider ships, but I think Tech 3 might be a bit too high of a price, since a tech 3, though it can be reconfigured, will end up being reconfigured for the roles already covered by the T2 versions, and I can only imagine that the decrease in skill training required to step into one (same prereqs as an AF + cruiser V) will be overcompensated for by a price that leaves T3 ships as little more than an e*****, since flying one into battle will most likely be a waste of resources and time.
One thing that I like though is the skill loss, it will force people to eject, which would add another layer of piracy: ship theft.
Also I'd love to try this out, but sadly the test server won't let me buy anything. :( FIX IT NAO PLZ -Xindi Kraid: Delivering acerbic wit and scathing comments with just a dash of 'stab you in the eye' |
Kannatta Saan
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 07:50:00 -
[335]
Okay so the skill loss sucks.
Do I intend to fly them? Of course.
Do I intend to train any of those system specific skills above 3? Ever? No.
Do I know what they're good for? I have to blindly assume they're twice as good as a Cruiser, (T2 Cruisers being 1.5 times better) If they can tank like a Myrmidon and can have gun bonus's like a Phantasm then they could be good for 0.0 ratting.
Am I going to jump into Low-Sec in one? Good lord, no.
Would I sulk anymore over a lost Strategic Cruiser then I would for a rigged Battleship? I somehow doubt that.
|
JimBob Leeroy
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 08:59:00 -
[336]
ok, been on sisi a bit, even played with the new t3's, and seen i will not be flying them. they are basically a new hac, yea you can change them some, harder tank with less hp, 4 guns instead of 5, but get some drones,but this hac you lose sp and they can not compete with the price of t2 cruisers because of all the steps needed to make them., and with them failing, WH's will too, can't see any one wanting this for anything other than collections, and if no one wants them then the stuff from WH's will be useless, so as to be all risk, no reward.
when the first blogs for the WH's came out, i was one of the few that were realy looking forwards to this, but after trying the ships, and doing the only wormhole i could get in to, and seeing 2.5+bil isk flush and we could just tank till DT so no reward.scan system looks fairly good, but is been nothing but bugged, and now you can't get probes to even scan.the wormhole channel one dev refers ppl to go to try worm holes has not seen a dev in it any of the many hrs i've been trying to scan one down .but if you have friends in the big allys, then you can get in. devs tend to set things for this game monsters, not the normal ppl.so basically, this seams to be just another join a mega ally, or just find some dribbles, stay in high sec, and let all the ppl that are upset you will not come down so they can slaughter you cry.
/me hart breakes
once again good idea, but devs listen to only the mega ally's that are causeing the problems they want to get rid off. this will have to change or you have an epic fail in your future
|
Dane Brasten
|
Posted - 2009.03.01 06:02:00 -
[337]
Up front. I do not like the idea of SP loss for having a T3 ship explode out from under you. Skipping the PvP issues, as PvP already brings up the possibly of being POD-kill and loosing your clone if you weren't paying attention and keeping it up to date.
I am far more concerned about loosing a T3 ship from NPC fire due to real world network glitches. CCP already does not cover network problems that 'they can't confirm,' or in others words anything that isn't inside their server network. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has run into problems on this front. I would not be please at all to loss a T3 ship and the time spent on the skill rank due to an 'unconfirmable' glitch. Will CCP be able to guarantee a more robust method for tracking network traffic between Client machines and the severs to insure that Non-Game problems will not impact a character's SP? Without such an assurance I don't see how this system is reasonable to include.
Better still should CCP include a sub-insurance system for these skill points. I saw the suggestion of using Implants that 'burn-up' instead of SP. Perhaps a new set of Implants that take the SP hit for you when a T3 ship explodes? I just want to see some kind of safety net available when Non-Game problems arise (and they will).
|
Katana Seiko
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.03.02 06:28:00 -
[338]
Okay... I lost a tech3 ship in WH space... However, it doesn't show any change in the subsystem skills.
Oh, and by the way, skills are buggy alltogether on SiSi right now... --- "Multiple exclamation marks are a sure sign for a diseased mind." -Terry Pratchett |
Contagonis
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 08:10:00 -
[339]
After reading this mess, I did note one person who touched upon, what I believe, is the true crux of the T3 skill loss argument.
SP loss is a big dent in the minds of many. And the mechanic behind it seems illogical.
Frankly, I'm all for it, but some form of implant loss, some required implant for interfacing to this new tech, seems more sensible. I don't believe the current game structure addresses the proper answer.
Implants = ISK and SP = time. I feel some hybrid of these needs to exist. It's 5 days from release... So clearly, no changes coming soon.
Being able to eject to avoid the loss, nullifies the punishment and consequence of this feature. If you were forced to use some kind of hybrid implant that PHYSICALLY connected you to the ship, AKA, not in a pod anymore when you use T3, that makes much more sense to me. Like some kind of 'brain adapter' that you actually plug your head into the T3 ship, not you -> pod -> ship. It could fit the story-line well too, as using the Sleeper's tech requires some direct VR brain plug magical whatever.
Being directly connected to the ship makes the SP loss sensible. Some kind of neural feedback destroys what you learned, etc. And you can't eject to avoid the consequence. Being able to eject just makes it too easy.
The people complaining about SP loss of a rank 1 skill are just not PvPers. It's unlikely these people would ever undock in a faction ship, much less a T3. T3 is a "vertical market" for a select few. Nothing wrong with that. If you're rear is too tight to take the ****ing, then it's not for you. It's your attitude that makes the content 'off limits,' not CCP.
|
Rookie Info
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 20:58:00 -
[340]
Originally by: Contagonis SP loss is a big dent in the minds of many. And the mechanic behind it seems illogical.
Frankly, I'm all for it, but some form of implant loss, some required implant for interfacing to this new tech, seems more sensible. I don't believe the current game structure addresses the proper answer.
Implants = ISK and SP = time. I feel some hybrid of these needs to exist. It's 5 days from release... So clearly, no changes coming soon.
Being able to eject to avoid the loss, nullifies the punishment and consequence of this feature. If you were forced to use some kind of hybrid implant that PHYSICALLY connected you to the ship, AKA, not in a pod anymore when you use T3, that makes much more sense to me. Like some kind of 'brain adapter' that you actually plug your head into the T3 ship, not you -> pod -> ship. It could fit the story-line well too, as using the Sleeper's tech requires some direct VR brain plug magical whatever.
I like Contagonis' ideas. I would like to submit another option: Offer an escape pod subsystem -- or a variety of them. That way, players can choose their own flavor of hemlock. They can go all out hardcore, or sacrifice some t3 subsystem functionality for less risk of SP loss. Please add a hot link to Rooki Info in your bio. |
|
Aliena Soseki
|
Posted - 2009.03.13 06:28:00 -
[341]
/me looks at stats of Strategic Cruisers
Why is everyone whining?
1. rank 1 level V skill = a day of training on an account with lvl 4 learning skills(honestly, everyone should have learning trained high)
2. 5 bonus' for your ship, i find it very worth it(and im a pvp'er)
3. Hopefully once everyone saw the ships for themselves they thought "wow, i was such an idiot", seriously.
|
john roe
Children of Gjallarhorn
|
Posted - 2009.03.20 20:47:00 -
[342]
"This is important: Due to the sudden rift in the symbiotic ship relationship that exists between a pilot and a Tech 3 ship, losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills"
hahahha... running out of ideas, are we, cccp?
stupid idea, plain and simple.
peace
|
Daftny Litchinova
Minmatar ComStar Security M - I - T - E
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 21:02:00 -
[343]
SP loss will only be for subsystem skills...rank 1 skills btw. and only 1 level.
My main concern here, is the ridiculously high price these ship will worth 'cause they are so hard and riskfull to put together ( I saw a 3 run BPC of the Loki for 1,5 billion on contract) so, what will be the use of a so costy ship? showing off in Jita? I wouldn't like to see that ship go boom...and not because I care about a couple of SP: BECAUSE THEY WILL BE TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE so only the rich as hell eve players (and thoses who buy isk) will have the right to fly them for their real purpose; PvP witch I don't do. So my only request for CCP: please do BC and BS T3 and consider the fact that this whole WH gathering process to make these ships is too risky for non-PVP'ers witch is unfair, should be all players type opportunity. Too many Skills - Not enough time! |
Admiral Foxy
|
Posted - 2009.03.26 02:19:00 -
[344]
well all this jive about the t3 cruisers yet can u buy 1 on the market ???? the answer to that is no so why go on and on that from the download we just had that we could then be useing them to fly around yet we cant fly them we cant buy them even if u have the isk for them this sucks realy badly i think u all that make this game need to think about how ur doing this as u say oh yes from such and such a day we will all be able to use them yet its been a few weeks now and still no joy plz make them available to buy on market for those who want to actualy try them
fox
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: [one page] |