| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
irion felpamy
Minmatar
HellJumpers Corp
   |
Posted - 2009.09.25 08:03:00 -
[181]
 Originally by: Yaay
Originally by: Irish Vixen
Not Supported. Your desire for "choice" does not outweigh the commensurate boost to sub-battleship pvp. Moreover, reducing the barriers for entry into pvp for new players and empire carebears is nothing but a plus.
New players don't desire frigate and cruiser sized warfare at t1 levels. It's merely a bridge to getting to better things. Most new players are in a battlecruiser in 3 weeks and a battleship in 5. I don't consider 3-5 weeks of gameplay justifiable for a complete change to the system.
There is and very well should be a graduated learning curve in this game. Learn the basics, then expand. You guys seem to want everyting thrown on the new guys at once. And that's not a practical choice. All it will do is overwhelm them with even more skills that they'll consider "necessary" and probably give them yet another reason to leave.
Entry to pvp is to use what you can and learn. That way, the more you add to it later, the bigger the bonus to coincide with your training. Rigs fall under an optional tag atm. Making them so cheap that they're mandatory is not a good option for newer players who are already overwhelmed with other task. I mean, how do you even gauge a draback to a ship if you've never had time to experience the options available in the first place without those drawbacks?
wow you really are out of touch are you not? 5 weeks for a new player to be PVPing in a BS. I think you have got new players mixed up with alts.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 12:29:00 -
[182]
The horse is dead. For the love of god, stop beating it.
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:56:00 -
[183]
Originally by: Yaay
When rigs were first introduced into this game, the idea was "would you be willing to pay for the extra ump?".
When this patch was first announced, I like the Idea because I and many others were under the impression that smaller rigs would be smaller bonuses for less cost. Instead, what we're getting is cheaper ways to fit smaller ships.
By doing this, not only are smaller ships going to be very easy to rig so much that it will be stupid not to rig them, But large rigs will likely drop in price drastically too because the demand on that grouping of rigs will drop heavily when frigs and cruiser will be using a different set for much lower cost.
I don't see a problem with the rig patch.
They simply balanced the build cost for rigs across ship classes.
Now the question "do I rig this ship or not" uses the same rig cost vs hull cost parameters that it did before for battleships.
Now, either, fitting rigs to battleships was a 'no brainer' before the patch, or it wasn't.
If it wasn't, then it's similarly not a 'no brainer' for smaller ships.
Also, there are differences in cost among rigs of the same ship class. So you might choose to go with an expensive CDF or go with cheaper resist rigs.
|
Jarna
Amarr
Eternal Frontier
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:36:00 -
[184]
Edited by: Jarna on 25/09/2009 17:37:08
Originally by: Oam Mkoll
When everyone has identical fitting everyone gets harder for me to kill.
Fixed. QQ some more.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with CCP making a move like this.
A good majority of modules have various sizes to fit various ships. It doesn't make sense that a rig that can fit on a Frigate can also fit on a Battleship. And the fact they all give the same returns should mean nothing because smaller ships have less to start with anyway.
15% of 100PG is 15 added PG. Oh NOES, that Frigate gained so much more PG. As if it makes such a huge difference. It's not like Frigates getting rigs means they can kill BS's now.
This option does add choice: choice to people who don't have all the money in Eve at their beck and call.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |