| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
|

CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
2130

|
Posted - 2013.07.03 11:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hello people,
As hinted there, we are in considering ways to revamp certificates and make player progression easier to grasp in general.
Something that came up early during our design process is that character skills have been added into various, more or less relevant groups as we introduced them over the years. As a result, some groups, Science in particular, have become dump places for all sorts of skills.
The goal is to make skills and their associated groups easier to find, classify and understand as a whole. This is done through the following 3 points:
- Renaming some individual skills
- Creating, or renaming existing skill groups and moving skills around
- Matching all changes of skill groups in the Market groups as well
RENAMING SKILLS
This is done in an effort to reduce confusion between the skill names themselves and the groups they belong to. Usually, a group name is to be as generic as possible since it usually contains more than just a single theme. On the contrary, Skill names need to be as specific as possible to let players know what effects they have without having to read their description.
- Electronics: has been renamed to GÇ£CPU managementGÇ¥ not to conflict with group names and be more explicit at what the skill actually does.
- Engineering: has been renamed GÇ£Power Grid managementGÇ¥ not to conflict with group names and be more explicit at what the skill actually does.
- Targeting: for the same reasons as above, this skill has been renamed "Multiple Targeting".
- Multitasking: has been renamed "Advanced Multiple Targeting" for the same reasons as above.
- Nanite Control: has been renamed "Neurotoxin Control" to make it clearer it's a booster related skill and not something tied with overheading (nanite repair paste comes to mind).
SKILL GROUP CHANGES
Armor: is a new skill group, that has all armor skills - the GÇ£mechanicsGÇ¥ skill group has been removed.
- Contains the Armor Honeycombing, Armor Resistance Phasing, Capital Remote Armor Repair Systems, Capital Remote Hull Repair Systems, Capital Repair Systems, EM Armor Compensation, Explosive Armor Compensation, Hull Upgrades, Kinetic Armor Compensation, Mechanics, Remote Armor Repair Systems, Remote Hull Repair Systems, Repair Systems and Thermic Armor Compensation skills.
Electronic System: is the old GÇ£electronicsGÇ¥ group. Now only contains offense EW related skills.
- Contains the Cloaking, Electronic Warfare, Frequency Modulation, Long Distance Jamming, Projected Electronic Counter Measures, Propulsion Jamming, Sensor Linking, Signal Dispersion, Signal Suppression, Signature Focusing, Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration, Target Breaker Amplification, Target Painting, Turret Destabilization and Weapon Disruption skills.
Engineering: now has all skills related with energy management and fittings in general.
- Contains the Advanced Weapon Upgrades, CPU Management, Capital Energy Emission Systems, Electronics Upgrades, Energy Emission Systems, Energy Grid Upgrades, Energy Management, Energy Pulse Weapons, Energy Systems Operation, Nanite Interfacing, Nanite Operation, Power Grid Management, Thermodynamics and Weapon Upgrades skills.
Missiles: itGÇÖs the old GÇ£missile launcher operationGÇ¥ group with no other change whatsoever.
Neural Enhancement: has all boosters, clone and implants related skills.
- Contains the Biology, Cloning Facility Operation, Cybernetics, Informorph Psychology, Neurotoxin Control and Neurotoxin Recovery skills.
Production: has all industry and manufacturing skills, including those that previously were in the GÇ£MechanicsGÇ¥ skill group.
- Contains the Advanced Mass Production, Battleship Construction, Capital Ship Construction, Cruiser Construction, Drug Manufacturing, Frigate Construction, Industrial Construction, Industry, Mass Production, Outpost Construction, Production Efficiency, Supply Chain Management skills.
Resource Processing: has all mining, harvesting skills and reprocessing skills.
- Contains the Arkonor Processing, Astrogeology, Bistot Processing, Command Center Upgrades, Crokite Processing, Dark Ochre Processing, Deep Core Mining, Gas Cloud Harvesting, Gneiss Processing, Hedbergite Processing, Hemorphite Processing, Ice Harvesting, Ice Processing, Industrial Reconfiguration, Interplanetary Consolidation, Jaspet Processing, Kernite Processing, Mercoxit Processing, Mining, Mining Upgrades, Omber Processing, Plagioclase Processing, Pyroxeres Processing, Refinery Efficiency, Refining, Salvaging, Scordite Processing, Scrapmetal Processing, Spodumain Processing and Veldspar Processing skills.
Ship Modifications: has all the skills related to rigs that previously were in the GÇ£MechanicsGÇ¥ skill group. Also contains all the Tech3 subsystem skills that previously were in the "Subsystems" group.
- Contains the Amarr Defensive Systems, Amarr Electronic Systems, Amarr Engineering Systems, Amarr Offensive Systems, Amarr Propulsion Systems, Armor Rigging, Astronautics Rigging, Caldari Defensive Systems, Caldari Electronic Systems, Caldari Engineering Systems, Caldari Offensive Systems, Caldari Propulsion Systems, Drone Rigging, Electronic Superiority Rigging, Energy Weapon Rigging, Gallente Defensive Systems, Gallente Electronic Systems, Gallente Engineering Systems, Gallente Offensive Systems, Gallente Propulsion Systems, Hybrid Weapon Rigging, Jury Rigging, Launcher Rigging, Minmatar Defensive Systems, Minmatar Electronic Systems, Minmatar Engineering systems, Minmatar Offensive Systems, Minmatar Propulsion Systems, Projectile Weapon Rigging and Shield Rigging skills.
Scanning: contains all skills tied with that theme (including PI scanning skills, probe scanning, hacking mini-game and survey skills).
- Contains the Advanced Planetology, Archaeology, Astrometric Acquisition, Astrometric Pinpointing, Astrometric Rangefinding, Astrometrics, Hacking, Planetology, Remote Sensing and Survey skills.
Science: now only contains "true" science / research / datacore skills.
- Contains the Advanced Laboratory Operation, Amarr Encryption Methods, Amarrian Starship Engineering, Astronautic Eng...
|
|

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
758
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
ok, works I guess. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |

Karsa Egivand
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
234
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:14:00 -
[3] - Quote
Hmm. |

Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion
601
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:16:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sweet :) |

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
2266
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
There's nothing wrong with the names of the Engineering and Electronics skills. They make for good base names, especially when you consider them as pre-reqs for other skills.
"CPU Management" as a pre-req for things like Long Range Targeting sounds too specific and perhaps a little odd.
Did someone need busywork or something?
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |

marVLs
206
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:31:00 -
[6] - Quote
Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better |

Rayzilla Zaraki
Tandokuno
77
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better
I'm with this guy.
"Spaceship Piloting" is a little too limp-wristed. Gate campers are just Carebears with anger issues. |

Nagarythe Tinurandir
Tormented of Destiny The Kadeshi
136
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:38:00 -
[8] - Quote
i dont know about weapon upgrades and AWU in engineering... while the latter might be placed rightly there, the former governs wether you can use dmg-mods or not, which is to me tightly connected to guns and the gunnery path.
.. however missiles..... meh dunno just seems weird.
if it helps getting your tiericide and rebalance along, why not. |

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1072
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:43:00 -
[9] - Quote
I think renaming electronics and engineering is a bit overkill but these changes are quite positive in general.
Maybe make it easier for new people to grasp what each skill does with having an information window pop up when you hover over the skill?
All in all great change. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |

Lyta Jhonson
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:44:00 -
[10] - Quote
Energy Emission Systems, Energy Grid Upgrades, Energy Management, Energy Systems Operation, Power Grid Management...
If I was a new player I'd be confused. Following proposed logic why not to rename Energy Management and Energy Systems Operations to Capacitor Management and Capacitor Systems Operations?
And +1 to keep Spaceship Command and Missile Launcher Operation - they sound much better. |

Crash Lander
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
46
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:47:00 -
[11] - Quote
This is good however what does this mean for the primary and secondary attributes of the skills? Previously it was possible to guess (mostly correctly) what remap you need for a bunch of skills by the virtue of what group it was under. as most skills under the same group had the same primary and secondary training attributes. Now that skills are getting mixed up in different categories it makes figuring out which remap you need more difficult (Yes I know there is evemon, but presumably the point of this is to improve in-game tools/interfaces/etc.) |

Rengerel en Distel
1666
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:48:00 -
[12] - Quote
Whatever it takes to fill up the patch notes i guess. Can't help but think all the 3rd party guys are wishing you would just stop it already though.
With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
|

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
172
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:49:00 -
[13] - Quote
besides a couple of typos .. (as usual) i can't seem to find where you have put the cyno field skill
Also when are you changing skills? i.e. nanite skills affecting AAR nanite paste usage and perhaps adding to rep amount.. missile skills should be reduced to 5% skills like gunnery guns needing lv5 of previous size makes no sense anymore
On top of that T2 modules should require lv5 skills but they don't atm ... Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767 Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Gareth Burns
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:51:00 -
[14] - Quote
Two Things:
1. I agree spaceship piloting sounds bad, stick with spaceship command!
2. Multiple Targeting does NOT flow. I don't like how it rolls off the tongue. Normally I try to come up with some sort of recommendation instead of just saying no... but all I can come up with is MTT Systems and AMTT Systems ( Multiple target tracking systems & advanced multiple target tracking systems ). But from the sounds of it you're trying to make things easier to understand and i don't think those help. Noblesse Oblige Gû¦ Gareth Burns |

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
1803
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:51:00 -
[15] - Quote
you forgot "Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing". It has nothing to do with ewar or even with the other interfacing skills, it adds drone control range. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |

Hosedna
FumbleFamily Corp
40
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:51:00 -
[16] - Quote
I really would have kept the old Planetology group intact. Now the planet skills are in 2 or 3 groups, which defeats the whole purpose of the rename pass imho ! |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
172
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:57:00 -
[17] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:you forgot "Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing". It has nothing to do with ewar or even with the other interfacing skills, it adds drone control range.
an opportunity to change the skill and split it into two here so- drone control range -buff to 5000m Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing - allows use of e-war drones and perhaps effectiveness .... which allows you too nerf e-war drones ecm drones come to mind.. perhaps add e-war drone bays to e-war ships
Also add drone tracking -5% drone tracking drone falloff skills - 5% falloff
Also increase drone shooting ranges too make sense atm (entity attack range) sentries - 250km -150km they rarely go over that range and ships often can't target that far anyway.. thats another issue to fix heavies - 5km - 10km medium - 4km - 8km lights - 3km -6km Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767 Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Elder Ozzian
Frozen Dawn Inc Arctic Light
67
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 13:03:00 -
[18] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Hello people, Ship Modifications: has all the skills related to rigs that previously were in the GÇ£MechanicsGÇ¥ skill group. Also contains all the Tech3 subsystem skills that previously were in the "Subsystems" group.
Subsystems in a subgroup under the Mechanics group or inline with the rigging skills?
Ps. You have a typo in your Har-Har-wiring ;-) I disagree! |

Paul Clancy
Korpu no Byakko
36
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 13:16:00 -
[19] - Quote
Please, while you are at it, check Navigation skill description
Skill at regulating the power output of ship thrusters. 5% bonus to sub-warp ship velocity per skill level.
Maybe name it as Engine Handling? |

Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium
57
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 13:22:00 -
[20] - Quote
Ohes noes, CCP has changed the names and grouping of skills that make my internet spaceship pixels have more oomph. I must emo rage about it!!1ONE11!!
 (There was a severe lack of emo rage in this thread so I had to add some even if it was fake. My only complaint is that Spaceship Piloting sounds "weaker" than Spaceship Command) CCP RedDawn: Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty...
|

Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies Joint Venture Conglomerate
194
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 13:31:00 -
[21] - Quote
Another thumbs down on Spaceship command new name.
I think the Subsystems group should stay as they are unique in that you can easily lose a level in them. Keeping them separate from regular skills makes this easier to understand. Also its the only group that moist sane pilots can will max out :)
How many groups will there be now? Fear God and Thread Nought |

Ravcharas
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
244
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 13:35:00 -
[22] - Quote
Quote:Electronic System: is the old GÇ£electronicsGÇ¥ group. Now only contains offense EW related skills. I'd name it Electronic Warfare Systems, then. And maybe rename the Electronic Warfare skill while you're at it. |

Ravcharas
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
244
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 13:36:00 -
[23] - Quote
Jackie Fisher wrote:I think the Subsystems group should stay as they are unique in that you can easily lose a level in them. This is a good point |

Paul Clancy
Korpu no Byakko
36
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 13:46:00 -
[24] - Quote
Also, will the attribute relevance of any of these skills be changed? Means, will there be, say, changes from char/int to int/mem or something around this idea? |

ChromeStriker
The Riot Formation Unclaimed.
557
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 13:59:00 -
[25] - Quote
GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+
Keep Electronics and Engineering names the same... might just be nestalgia but never heard they were a problem... seems quite straightforward to me.
Targeting - Target Acquisition
Multitasking - Advanced Target Acquisition
GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+ - Nulla Curas |

Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
612
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:07:00 -
[26] - Quote
when your doing this, any chance I can get mining 1 removed, ugly skill annoys me OMG when can i get a pic here
|

Bloodpetal
Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal The Mockers AO
1308
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:12:00 -
[27] - Quote
Don't change this ::
Spaceship Command - Keep it. We understand it. Unnecessary change. We are commanding a spaceship. Period, the end.
Please seriously Consider This
Targeting - Multiple Targeting sounds clunky. It needs another iteration. "Target Management" makes it sound like you can manage more targets, just as "CPU Management" lets you have more CPU.
Multitasking - I agree, bad name. "Advanced Target Management".
Other Thoughts
Electronics - CPU Management - I agree with a comment above, that it seems like it's a very broad underlying skill. However, I think clarity is more important in this case than anything else.
Nanite Control - I agree, has confused me many times when I'm looking for Nanite Repair skills.
Where I am. |

Hosedna
FumbleFamily Corp
41
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:20:00 -
[28] - Quote
Ravcharas wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:I think the Subsystems group should stay as they are unique in that you can easily lose a level in them. This is a good point
Indeed ! |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1173
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:24:00 -
[29] - Quote
back when i was in the rookie channel i remember the confusion between the industry skill and skillgroup was common, so this is a good change |

Sentient Blade
Walk It Off
963
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:30:00 -
[30] - Quote
Electronic Systems sounds vague. I think I'd much rather see the group called Electronic Warfare and the existing Electronic Warfare skill become Sensor Jamming.
Lumping Weapon Upgrades in with PG Enhancements seems odd, considering it's a perception / willpower branch and everything else is Int / Mem. |

Echo Mande
41
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:35:00 -
[31] - Quote
So so but needs more work.
Some commentary:
What is Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration doing in Electronic systems? Why did Industrial Reconfiguration end up in resource processing? Both of these skills really ought to be elsewhere. TLR probably belongs in Armor or Engineering (along with tactical weapons reconfiguration) and IR probably belongs in Production or Engineering.
As far as groups go, maybe armor and shield should be combined in 'Protection'.
I'm missing quite a number of skills (Cynosural field theory to name one) |

Avacore Estemaire
Private Alternative Industries
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:44:00 -
[32] - Quote
Please don't split the PI skills. Sure it's another group but they really don't have anything with the other skills to do. Especially scanning, they are in practice about as far away from scanning as you can get. |

Edward Olmops
Sirius Fleet Cerberus Unleashed
72
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:46:00 -
[33] - Quote
Echo Mande wrote: I'm missing quite a number of skills (Cynosural field theory to name one)
That Skill will be renamed to "Military Expert Knowledge". |

Sentient Blade
Walk It Off
963
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:56:00 -
[34] - Quote
A few other suggestions:
* Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration -> Triage Module Operation * Tactical Weapons Reconfiguration -> Siege Module Operation
Drones: * Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing -> Drone Control Range Enhancement
Electronics: * Electronic Warfare -> Sensor Jamming * Sensor Linking -> Sensor Link Efficency * Signature Focusing -> Target Painter Effectiveness * Signal Dispersion -> Advanced Sensor Jamming * Signal Suppression -> Sensor Suppression * Weapon Disruption -> Weapon Disruption Efficiency
and so on...
My suggestion would be that anything which doesn't grant an actual bonus to strength of something or another should be labelled with "Efficiency" or similar. For example, training weapon disruption from 2 to 3 makes me no better at weapon disruption, it only has a secondary effect of making it more efficient to use those modules. |

Mourning Souls
RvB - RED Federation
55
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:59:00 -
[35] - Quote
With the exception of "Spaceship Piloting" my opinion is just "meh, whatever". But "Spaceship Piloting" sounds terrible to me. |

Cameron Zero
Red Federation
194
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:02:00 -
[36] - Quote
Quote:Electronic System: is the old GÇ£electronicsGÇ¥ group. Now only contains offense EW related skills.
Contains the Cloaking, Electronic Warfare, Frequency Modulation, Long Distance Jamming, Projected Electronic Counter Measures, Propulsion Jamming, Sensor Linking, Signal Dispersion, Signal Suppression, Signature Focusing, Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration, Target Breaker Amplification, Target Painting, Turret Destabilization and Weapon Disruption skills.
Why not just call it Electronic Warfare or Offensive Electronics and be done with it? (Except for Cloaking, that's exactly what the skills in the group are for, isn't it?) "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. GǪ" |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10510
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:02:00 -
[37] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:i dont know about weapon upgrades and AWU in engineering... while the latter might be placed rightly there, the former governs wether you can use dmg-mods or not, which is to me tightly connected to guns and the gunnery path.
You could make the same arument that Weapon Upgrades should be in the Missiles group. You need Gravitics for Warp disruption field generators, should that be in Electronic Systems? And so on.
But their primary function is as fitting skills, so that's why the CSM agreed they should go into the "Engineering" group.
1 Kings 12:11
|

Azula Kishtar
Lonely among the Stars
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:05:00 -
[38] - Quote
I'm ok with most of this.
A few things:
1. Please keep Spaceship Command as it is. Or, to be exact, don't name anything Spaceship Piloting, because that sounds weird to me.
2. Please keep Electronics as it is. As there won't be a group called Electronics anymore anyway, it will not conflict with anything. CPU Management sounds too specific.
3. Maybe name the Electronic Systems group something more specific. If it is an E-War group now, it should reflect that.
4. Not sure what to think about the Engineering group. |

RoAnnon
Strategic Acquisitions Group Tactical Research Lab
97
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:06:00 -
[39] - Quote
I agree that keeping Spaceship Command is better than Spaceship Piloting.
A couple of other points:
ORE ships:
Venture = Mining Frigate Noctis = Ore Industrial Orca = Industrial Command Ships Rorqual = Capital Industrial Ships
I would say either add "ORE" to each of the skill names or rename ORE Industrial, perhaps Industrial Salvage Ships.
How about adding in some Ore Industrials and ORE Transports (in the later T2 industrial ship rebalance), and use the Ore Industrial skill as a parent for accessing those? :) So, you're a bounty hunter. No, that ain't it at all. Then what are you? I'm a bounty hunter. |

Alexander the Great
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
91
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:07:00 -
[40] - Quote
"Spaceship Piloting" and "Multiple Targeting" sound lame.
Why removing "Subsystems" group? It's better to leave it as it is.
Changing name for "Electronics" and "Engineering" is a bad idea because they are prerequisites for many other skills. I don't understand why do I have to train some "CPU management" in order to get "Amarr electronic systems" while it makes sense with current name. |

Zane Lowe
Friendship is Podding Test Alliance Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:18:00 -
[41] - Quote
Keep it as Spaceship Command, otherwise sounds great. |

Soden Rah
Rapier Industry and Technology Second Sun Rising
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:35:00 -
[42] - Quote
Gareth Burns wrote:Two Things:
1. I agree spaceship piloting sounds bad, stick with spaceship command!
2. Multiple Targeting does NOT flow. I don't like how it rolls off the tongue. Normally I try to come up with some sort of recommendation instead of just saying no... but all I can come up with is MTT Systems and AMTT Systems ( Multiple target tracking systems & advanced multiple target tracking systems ). But from the sounds of it you're trying to make things easier to understand and i don't think those help.
How about "Polly-Targeting" and "Advanced Polly-Targeting"?
Then we can use the nickname of "Parroting".
As in "As a Logi Pilot I have to do a lot of parroting to keep my squad alive..." |

RoAnnon
Strategic Acquisitions Group Tactical Research Lab
99
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:37:00 -
[43] - Quote
Soden Rah wrote: How about "Polly-Targeting" and "Advanced Polly-Targeting"?
Then we can use the nickname of "Parroting".
As in "As a Logi Pilot I have to do a lot of parroting to keep my squad alive..."
*facepalm*
I like both the Target Acquisition and Target Management suggestions...
So, you're a bounty hunter. No, that ain't it at all. Then what are you? I'm a bounty hunter. |

Soden Rah
Rapier Industry and Technology Second Sun Rising
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:41:00 -
[44] - Quote
RoAnnon wrote:Soden Rah wrote: How about "Polly-Targeting" and "Advanced Polly-Targeting"?
Then we can use the nickname of "Parroting".
As in "As a Logi Pilot I have to do a lot of parroting to keep my squad alive..."
*facepalm* I like both the Target Acquisition and Target Management suggestions...
Hey I was kidding...
And I agree that "Target Acquisition" and "Target Management" are both better suggestions.
EDIT: Also adding my vote to keeping Spaceship Command as piloting just sounds naff. |

Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
1818
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:51:00 -
[45] - Quote
No offense to you Ytterbium, but as long as somebody else handles the spelling and grammar, I'm all for these changes. Ch+½j+ì Katrina Oniseki ~ (RDC) Chief Operations Officer ~ [I-RED] Sub-Director of Public Relations |

Deornoth Drake
Black Hole Squadron
32
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:52:00 -
[46] - Quote
RENAMING SKILLS ... my suggestions
- Targeting: for the same reasons as above, this skill has been renamed "Basic Targeting".
- Multitasking: has been renamed "Advanced Targeting" for the same reasons as above.
SKILL GROUP CHANGES ... my 2 cents
- Armor: Mechanics is a bit strange in there, regarding the name only
- Ship Modifications: I would split rig skills and sub-system skills into two different groups. They have nothing to do which each other
- Scanning: I would recommend to keep the PI group as it is right now and only move the scanning to into this group.
- Spaceship Piloting: no, please stick to Spaceship Command ... and rename the skill to Basic Spaceship Command
And ... when changing primary & secondary attributes be sure to grant skillpoints or bonus remappings (non-exclusive, feel free to grant both). |

Atomic Option
Taggart Transdimensional Virtue of Selfishness
61
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:59:00 -
[47] - Quote
A few spelling mistakes aside, this is great!
Biology should probably be renamed "Neural Biochemistry" so that it correctly refers to the study of how boosters change the chemistry and biological functioning of neurons. Biology includes plants, animals, bacteria and archaea so it's much too broad for "how boosters affect capsuleers".
Multiple Targeting should be Multi-targeting or Target Management to sound less awkward. |

Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
517
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 16:20:00 -
[48] - Quote
The new names are extremely bland, boring and un-SciFi.
But I have further suggestions to make it even more newbie-friendly: "Navigation" is renamed to "Align-time reduction" "Shield Management" becomes "MOAR shield" "Shield Operation" now "MOAR shield FASTER" "Electronics Upgrades" becomes "Useless skill you need however to get into a Cov Ops"
For the newbies! . |

Sentient Blade
Walk It Off
966
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 16:36:00 -
[49] - Quote
Terrorfrodo wrote:But I have further suggestions to make it even more newbie-friendly: "Navigation" is renamed to "Align-time reduction"
Higher max speed = Typically slower align, which is based on agility, mass and acceleration to reach 75% speed. |

Michal Jita
Lords Of The Universe Exiled Ones
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 16:42:00 -
[50] - Quote
Subsystem skill group should stay.
On other hand what is going to happen with attributes requirements for each skill group, are they are going to be adjusted given that some skills will change groups, or will each individual skill keep their attribute requirements? Currently we have a clear cut on some groups having very specific requirements and some are mixed, will this get sorted? Please advice asap will we get some extra remaps to compensate if any changes do occur in requirements.
|

Kirtar Makanen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 16:54:00 -
[51] - Quote
Although the proposed changes categorize skills more closely by function, I would note that it also decreases the amount of organization by attribute since for the most part skills in the same group currently have the same primary/secondary. Given that the attribute system can also confuse new players, I'm not sure how I feel about the regrouping. |

MrZany
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
55
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:04:00 -
[52] - Quote
Dislike "space ship piloting" please keep " spaceship command"
navigation could be changed to "engine tuning" or "engine overcharge" |

Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
366
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:27:00 -
[53] - Quote
"Spaceship Piloting" sounds odd to me. Better keep the old name.
Not sure about Command Center Upgrades and Interplanetary Consolidation in the resource group either.
Besides that it looks like a very decent change. CCP Ytterbium: You got it wrong people, you're not supposed to be happy!
You're supposed to riot! Set things on fire with the flame wars! Start the threadnaught! Fire ze missiles! Rage! Let the anger consume you! |

Noriko Mai
881
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:37:00 -
[54] - Quote
I think "Spaceship Command" should stay, too. "Spaceship Piloting" sounds like something that little boys do.. big boys command!
"Subsystems" should stay. It is about the special subsystems and has nothing todo with modifications like rigs. And if you change the market groups and move subystems together with rigs it will be a mess. This are two totaly different things.
CPU-/Powergrid Grid management sounds not very nice and is imho somehow immersion breaking (and immersion is one of your favourite buzzwords at the moment).
Stay with "Electronics" so we have "Electronics" and "Electronic Systems". Stay with "Engineering" and change the new" Engineering" to Engineering Systems".
Maybe "Targeting" should be changed to something that reflects the sensor skills.
"Missile Launcher Operation" sounds far better than simply "Missiles".
Maybe change "Gunnery" to "Turret Operation".
"Shield" should be "Shield Operation". And "Armor" somthing like "Armor Management". This adds immersion!!!!111  |

Yourm Ammy
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:51:00 -
[55] - Quote
Sounds great, nice work...
.... BUT.... please, leave the subsystems alone. The group should be kept. |

Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY The Nightingales of Hades
485
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:59:00 -
[56] - Quote
Hmm good.
Now make custom certificates. :) Please read these! > New POS system > New SOV system |

Jin Yuen
Aperture Harmonics K162
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:04:00 -
[57] - Quote
marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better
Some other poor ******* pilots a ship, we COMMAND SPACESHIPS of doom!!
|

Kyt Thrace
Lightspeed Enterprises Fidelas Constans
208
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:14:00 -
[58] - Quote
MOVE the Anchoring Skill, it DOES NOT belong under Corporation Management. :P R.I.P. Vile Rat |

Alexila Quant
Strategic Acquisitions Group Tactical Research Lab
89
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:24:00 -
[59] - Quote
Please do not combine the subsystems group with the rigs group. They are not the same thing and adding 20 skills to the already long rig skill list will be counterproductive. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:27:00 -
[60] - Quote
how about renaming hull upgrades to armour integrity so it actually explains that it improves your armour HP and same with mechanics becoming structural integrity.
maybe split hull upgrades into its own skill because of the other mods that use it still.
Also it begs the question why do Assault frigs need mechanics lv5 as a prereq? .. weapon upgrades lv4 perhaps instead Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767 Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:34:00 -
[61] - Quote
Alexila Quant wrote:Please do not combine the subsystems group with the rigs group. They are not the same thing and adding 20 skills to the already long rig skill list will be counterproductive.
Please do NOT separate the PI skills into different places. It's counterproductive.
perhaps have a rig section on its own and leave the PI section .. it makes more sense you need to reduce the amount of skills in each section really.. Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767 Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Throktar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
29
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:34:00 -
[62] - Quote
+1 to most of this.
Keep Spaceship Command...I command, I do not "pilot"
Keep Planetary Interaction as is...its all there and what else do you do with it?
Keep Sub-Systems as is...same as above |

Hashi Lebwohl
Oberon Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
30
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:36:00 -
[63] - Quote
The game should not encourage new players to train immediately a skill that will be useless to them.
When you redo the certificate can I suggest that you move all the shield compensation skills from Shield reinforcement basic to shield reinforcement elite.
These skills were gutted to apply solely to passive hardeners and there are no really decent passive hardeners until you get to faction modules. Its ok for armor compensation skills to be in a basic certificate requirement because there are decent passive options for the new player - the default energized adaptive nano membranes for example.
There are no fully passive shield fits that would be recommended to new, and not so new, player - these fits are normally highly specialised fits on tech II ships or supers and there location in the certificate plan should reflect this.
|

Isara Aulx-Gao
GAO Industrials
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:40:00 -
[64] - Quote
Whoa never change a running system. why .... tell me why we need new names for the skills?? This is EVE, a harsh place to live, and not Hello Kitty in Space, let the new Player learn the old Names.
Damm next time comes the win button for new Players, because they can-¦t fly a Titan in 5 Days.
NO Mainstream **** |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:44:00 -
[65] - Quote
Hashi Lebwohl wrote:The game should not encourage new players to train immediately a skill that will be useless to them.
When you redo the certificate can I suggest that you move all the shield compensation skills from Shield reinforcement basic to shield reinforcement elite.
These skills were gutted to apply solely to passive hardeners and there are no really decent passive hardeners until you get to faction modules. Its ok for armor compensation skills to be in a basic certificate requirement because there are decent passive options for the new player - the default energized adaptive nano membranes for example.
There are no fully passive shield fits that would be recommended to new, and not so new, player - these fits are normally highly specialised fits on tech II ships or supers and there location in the certificate plan should reflect this.
Shield Resistance Amplifiers need a buff they use up too much cpu where as Armour Resistance Plating uses no cpu .. granted shield amps are better than the armour versions but still ... Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767 Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Obunagawe
157
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:52:00 -
[66] - Quote
Only name changes or will there be primary/secondary attribute changes to go with the changed groups... |

Dersen Lowery
Laurentson INC StructureDamage
585
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 19:01:00 -
[67] - Quote
+1 to keeping "Spaceship Command." Targeting could become "Target Acquisition" and Multitasking "Advanced Target Acquisition" if you wanted to change them (I can tell you that the name "Multitasking" confused the heck out of me when I started--I thought it controlled the number of targets you could shoot!).
The rest of it is good enough. I don't understand why "Energy Systems Operation" and "Energy Management" doing become "Capacitor Operation" and "Capacitor Management" instead, though. If you're going to go there, go all the way. Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables. |

PinkKnife
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
364
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 19:52:00 -
[68] - Quote
I'm all for these changes. I've had so many new players get pissed off because in order to use a light missile launcher you need the unlock skill before the improvement skill. It makes sense in Dust, but not in EVE because there is no tree, just an arbitrary list with arbitrary names.
obfuscation for the sake of "sounding sci-fi" or "immersion" is crap, and ruins the game. It isn't dumbing down the game to not make it a labyrinthine pain in the ass just to train skills. Accessibility != ease.
"Wait you mean there's an electronics skill, and an electronics group"? ****, I've been playing this game for 3 years and I still get confused on what is in engineering and what is in electronics.
New names are awesome, look what changing them did for the implants, It is SO much easier to understand what the game is conveying now. You don't need to read 7 books of lore to figure out what implants do what.
As for the skill attributes, the idea of keeping things organized by remap plans is pretty weak. Almost all remapping plans use third party clients that map everything out for you. CCP has no in game remap/skill planning tools, so it makes no sense to keep these the same based on third party options, that already organize things based on skills priority/attribute/user preference.
Also, Is there plans to update the certificates in general? A few of those are awfully out of date. |

Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
182
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 20:09:00 -
[69] - Quote
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better I'm with this guy. "Spaceship Piloting" is a little too limp-wristed.
Spaceship piloting really is limp-wristed, to me it suggests taking a spaceship from A to B and nothing else. Commanding the spaceship includes such satisfactory experiences as blowing other spaceships up. Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene. |

Zetrick
Resurrection Ninjas. That Escalated Quickly
31
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 20:34:00 -
[70] - Quote
I have a suggestion.
Leave it.
If it aint broke don't fix it |

Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
237
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 21:21:00 -
[71] - Quote
As long as you proper case everything and get your singulars and your plurals all together, sounds good. |

Qestroy
Bio-Tech Research Tribal Band
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 21:57:00 -
[72] - Quote
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better I'm with this guy. "Spaceship Piloting" is a little too limp-wristed. This and This. And the Engineering and Electronics points people have raised, they sound good, they are pre-reqs for basically everything, everyone has them at 5 super quickly and promptly forgets their existance.
You're Fixing It. It Ain't Broke.
Don't Fix It. It Ain't Broke! |

Taoist Dragon
The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing
486
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 22:58:00 -
[73] - Quote
Echoing the 'Keep Spaceship Command' skill group.
We command our ships not pilot them! This isn't some twitch shooter THIS IS EVE! A deep complex space beheamoth that is generally awesome.
Also keep the PI skills as they are 'Scanning' ?! Pfft!
Subsystems are probably unique enough to warrant their own group as is. Especially since you can lose SP in these pretty easily.
Other than that probably a good change for newer players but will just frustrate older players for a short while until they adapt to it. (I'm still not used to the bloody dock button's new position!!) That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything. |

Aramis Defranzac
Wild.Stallions
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 23:08:00 -
[74] - Quote
+1 for keeping "Spaceship Command"
busy work indeed, put a toilet in my pilot house, I mean captain's quarters  |

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
593
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 23:12:00 -
[75] - Quote
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better I'm with this guy. "Spaceship Piloting" is a little too limp-wristed.
Not empty double-quoting. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
364
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 23:19:00 -
[76] - Quote
+1 for keeping Spaceship Command.
As to the rest... I'll get used to it. I've learned over time what everything is and where it goes, but recently I have gotten my wife to start playing, and she is confused as all hell. So I can definitely see this as removing an unneccessary (that being the key) barrier to entry for new players.
Please note, that I am all for barriers to gameplay for newbies, no one should get things handed to them. But like the scanning mechanics of the (ancient) past, this was just over complicated, for no good reason. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
241
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 23:45:00 -
[77] - Quote
More dumbing down it seems. You asked for advice about certificates and come back with this **** when no one to my knowledge has ever complained about the skill names or descriptions.
I do not want eve to be welcoming and easy to understand for noobs. The fact that it is hard to understand and requires some intellect is where we the community get our quality control from.
This is not hello ******* kitty online. The day it starts to resemble it is the day you will lose your hardcore player base. We eve players are a cut above the players of other mmos, were all elite players even the noobs that decide to stick with eve because it's unique and beautiful and hard to master. Tiericide is tiers by another name. |

Edward Olmops
Sirius Fleet Cerberus Unleashed
74
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 23:53:00 -
[78] - Quote
A few comments.
CCP should really make an effort to make EVE more beginner-friendly, no doubt. Some skills like Multitasking and Nanite Control ought to be renamed, because the name is utterly misleading. But.
You are going way to far with this concept.
As many before me have already stated, many of the proposed name changes are uninspiring. Space Ship Command should really be spaceship command. Really, what's the point?
Also: Every name change that you do also has a NEGATIVE impact on the playability. Simply because all ressources on the web will be outdated. I have experienced that over and over again with previous renamings (e.g. Auto-Targeting Missiles). Maybe a newbie didn't get what a F.O.F. missile was. But a newbie with some minimum cleverness managed to throw that expression into Google and whoa - here we go. But try to find something if the name has changed during the last two years... I am really sad about what happened (not) to Evelopedia. I used that A LOT, that was one of my primary ressources when I was a noob. But now it's utterly useless, because each and every single ship and item has been rebalanced. That should of course not imply that you stop rebalancing because of Evelopedia - God forbid! But it shows the effect. There should be only things renamed when it'S REALLY necessary. And maybe it would also be noob-friendly to update Evelopedia.
That said, I for example always thought it was good that some skills (Electronics, Engineering, Social...) had the same name as their category. That way I would always know which one was the "basc" skill in the category which I needed to train first. The one that has the most impact on what I was doing. Compare Electronics (+5% CPU) to Target Breaker Amplification (+?% weird nonsense). Anything that makes it more likely that new players put their energy into the important skills to let them get into the game faster is a good thing.
|

Salpad
Carebears with Attitude
345
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 23:54:00 -
[79] - Quote
Thumbs up to these changes.
As someone who has played EVE for well over 6 years, name changes are always very confusing, and I'm still struggling with the module renamings you guys did a year or two ago, but I have the ability to step out of my own personal situation and view things objectively, and when wieved this way, it is an improvement. It will make EVE a better game, make it more friendly and accessible for new players, without dumbing it down. |

Taya Greathame
Snuff Box Urine Alliance
73
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:12:00 -
[80] - Quote
As someone else has said, fix things stop changing things.
Rebalancing was annoying, giving tech one ships tech style roles. what fun can i have in a osprey now?
Dumb the game down, hope to increase subscription figures and playerbase.
gna start saving to buy my skillpoints.
Ps, EA gonna ruin you. |

Danhiil Xadi
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:14:00 -
[81] - Quote
I'll just throw my support behind keep Spaceship Command, It's much better. I'll also +1 the suggestion for Biology to change to Neural Biochemistry oh and Planetary management is fine as a category. Other than that I approve. |

Thandra Thul
Section 8. Fatal Ascension
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:15:00 -
[82] - Quote
My gripes are:
1) Spaceship Command should stay 2) Planetary Interaction skills are scattered all over the place. (very unhappy with this one) 3) Multiple Targeting is a bad name
Other than those 3 I have no complaints. |

Sofia Roseburn
True Slave Foundations Shaktipat Revelators
45
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:16:00 -
[83] - Quote
Don't fix what isn't broken. If only we had more people like Launette Vylier. |

Just Lilly
99
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:20:00 -
[84] - Quote
The new skill structure, have the touch and logic of a 12 year old to them 
Should atleast be a little easier for new players to wrap their heads around.
Maybe. Powered by Nvidia GTX 690 |

Grarr Dexx
Snuff Box Urine Alliance
197
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:34:00 -
[85] - Quote
What the **** was wrong with Spaceship Command? |

AnarchoCap Ahashion
The Riot Formation Unclaimed.
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:41:00 -
[86] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Nanite Control: has been renamed "Neurotoxin Control" to make it clearer it's a booster related skill and not something tied with overheading(nanite repair paste comes to mind). SKILL GROUP CHANGES
All the other skills groups (Corporation Management, Drones, Gunnery, Leadership, Navigation, Scoial, Trade) stay the same, except for skills that were moved out of them into one of the new groups mentioned above.
Implants > Skill Harviring: sorted harwiring implants to match the groups above.
The ones that are like so are incorrect.
- overheating
- Social
- Hardwiring
|

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:47:00 -
[87] - Quote
ChromeStriker wrote:GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+
Keep Electronics and Engineering names the same... might just be nestalgia but never heard they were a problem... seems quite straightforward to me.
Targeting - Target Acquisition
Multitasking - Advanced Target Acquisition
GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+
Changing electronics and engineering while not necessary the proposed renames are better.
Target Acquistion doesnt necessarily bring additional targets to mind, it brings to mind improvement in lock time or lock distance and not the number of ships you can lock.
same for your Adv. Target Acquisition idea. |

Galphii
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
159
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:51:00 -
[88] - Quote
Excellent. I'm sure veterans will be perturbed by these changes, but it's better for the game in the long term. My brother recently started playing and complained about the lack of a 'skill tree', so that newer players could get an idea of skill progression in the game. I pointed him at the certificates section, which sort of does that, but I think it'd be good to clean it up a bit  X |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:52:00 -
[89] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:Don't change this ::
Spaceship Command - Keep it. We understand it. Unnecessary change. We are commanding a spaceship. Period, the end.
Please seriously Consider This
Targeting - Multiple Targeting sounds clunky. It needs another iteration. "Target Management" makes it sound like you can manage more targets, just as "CPU Management" lets you have more CPU.
Multitasking - I agree, bad name. "Advanced Target Management".
Keep the subsystems group. They're unique and are the only group you can lose skillpoints in. Mixing them with the riggings isn't a good idea.
Other Thoughts
Electronics - CPU Management - I agree with a comment above, that it seems like it's a very broad underlying skill. However, I think clarity is more important in this case than anything else.
Nanite Control - I agree, has confused me many times when I'm looking for Nanite Repair skills.
Have to disagree here, Multiple targeting gets right to the point in no uncertain terms, while the more vague 'management' could mean almost anything really.
Same for Adv. target mgmt idea, too vague a title.
|

Danhiil Xadi
Hedion University Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:52:00 -
[90] - Quote
Okay I've had a little time to think and here's what I've come up with:
Firstly echoing what everyone else is saying "Spaceship Command" is way better don't you dare change it. (I also think it's more lore friendly as the larger ships have crews you need to command, you wouldn't be flying them yourself. Most people want to play Kirk not Sulu)
Engineering/ Electronics -> CPU/Power-grid Management
Okay in theory however the existing skill descriptions talk about your skill at operating the relevant system so I'd say that CPU/Powergrid Optimisation fits a bit better.
Targeting / Multitasking -> Multiple targeting / Advanced multiple targeting
Just no that sounds really dumb. I'd agree they need changing but I'd suggest Targeting systems operation / Advanced targeting systems operation
Nanite control -> Neurotoxin Control
Yes, Nanite control sounds like it should be to do with repair paste, Neurotoxin Control still doesn't make it obvious what it does though. I'm struggling to think of anything better the closest I can come up with is "Side effect Mitigation" but that's really clunky.
I'm okay with the groups as a whole but I'd say keep PI as it's own group and rather than "Resource processing" use "Resource Harvesting" as processing isn't a logical place to find mining skills.
Keep up the good work |

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1259
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 00:59:00 -
[91] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote: Have to disagree here, Multiple targeting gets right to the point in no uncertain terms, while the more vague 'management' could mean almost anything really.
Same for Adv. target mgmt idea, too vague a title.
this is eve online, where we fit Alumel Omni ECCM Sensor Array to our ships. a little less clarity in the name of a skill is a fair price to pay for not feeling like an idiot while talking about it. multiple targeting sounds like multiple sclerosis and has to go away.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |

Soren Chelien
Invicta Animas
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:05:00 -
[92] - Quote
"Spaceship Piloting" sounds a bit off, now "Space Command" is a name with power to it. |

Darth Kilth
Silver Guardians Fidelas Constans
130
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:11:00 -
[93] - Quote
Am I the only one who kind of prefers the skills/skillgroups sounding a bit more in-universe? |

Systems Online
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:12:00 -
[94] - Quote
I do not like a skill name starting with an acronym. Pronouncing "SEE PEE YOU" Management. is just awkward.
I suggest "Processor Management" "Electronics Management" "Electronics Systems Operation" or something like that.
+1 for KEEPING "SPACE SHIP COMMAND" there is NO reason to change this.
+1 for Target Management instead of "Multiple Targeting" |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:13:00 -
[95] - Quote
Quote:Engineering: now has all skills related with energy management and fittings in general.
Contains the Advanced Weapon Upgrades and Weapon Upgrades skills [snipped for space].
1. Weapon Upgrades has always been a vague title so it needs changed (same with Adv. Wpn. Upgrades).
2. Moving Weapon Upgrades to Engineering really doesn't work as someone else pointed out, a better solution would be to divide the skill into a turret and missile variants with appropriate refund for those skilled into it already.
3. Minmatar often don't need weapon upgrades but do need Advanced Weapon Upgrades and skilling up to 5 in a skill you dont need is painful, please rename both weapon upgrades and Adv. weapon Upgrades and then remove weapon upgrades as a prerequisite for Advanced weapon upgrades as they have nothing to do with one another, completely different aspects of fitting weapons.
whereas the semantics of naming wpn upgrades and adv. wpn upgrades and where they ultimately end up in the skill tree is relatively unimportant in the grand scheme of things, the third suggestion to unhook wpn. upgrades as a prerequisite for adv. wpn. upgrades is absolutely vital. |

Lockefox
Koshaku Gentlemen's Agreement
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:13:00 -
[96] - Quote
Really glad to see skills getting a once-over for understandings sake.
One feature I think was missed here though is balancing this reorganization against skill attributes.
Far and away, the current system is attributes are grouped by skill group:
Mechanic: Memory/Intelligence Weapons: Perception/Willpower Science: Intelligence/Memory ... etc
And with the current grouping we're crossing a lot of streams. PI skills do not have the same attribute pairs as scanning (Command Center Upgrades/Interplanetary Consolidation have Charisma/Intelligence). Weapon Upgrades does not have the same pairing as the rest of the fitting skills...
I think it might be worth while to evaluate the attribute pairs as well in this pass. If players can already pick skills in groups that make sense, shouldn't it be a priority to enable them to balance their attributes with those goals?
Second: There are a lot of skills that are kind of ambiguous in their bonuses and use. Pairs like Energy Management and Energy Systems Operation can be somewhat confusing to newer players. Is there any consideration being paid to either changing the skill names, or pairing down/combining some skills? Personally, I'd love an attention to re balancing skills/ranks/attributes of the same magnitude as the recent T1 ship balances, but that's fiddling with the backbone of EVE.
Outside of those two points, I think this is an excellent change! Less overhead and confusion is better for everyone! |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:20:00 -
[97] - Quote
Echo Mande wrote:So so but needs more work.
Some commentary:
What is Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration doing in Electronic systems? Why did Industrial Reconfiguration end up in resource processing? Both of these skills really ought to be elsewhere. TLR probably belongs in Armor or Engineering (along with tactical weapons reconfiguration) and IR probably belongs in Production or Engineering.
As far as groups go, maybe armor and shield should be combined in 'Protection'.
I'm missing quite a number of skills (Cynosural field theory to name one)
"Protection" is a vague term as ECM is also a form of protection.
Keeping Armor and Shields separated is appropriate i dont want to look through a huge list of armor skills as a shield pilot. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:30:00 -
[98] - Quote
removed as poster retracted his statement. |

Defiant Blessings
United Miners Inc. Wrath.
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:36:00 -
[99] - Quote
- Spaceship Command +1
- Target Acquisition / Advanced Target Acquisition +1
- Subsystem skills independent category +1
- Planetary Interaction skills independent category +1
My personal thoughts: Thanks alot, I just started a video series using all these old names.  Eve Business Insider Dedicated to all things passive, our new series focuses on showing younger players the tools required to effectively manage wealth and build financial stability! http://www.youtube.com/user/EveBusinessInsider |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
540
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:38:00 -
[100] - Quote
every third party dev dealing with skills just slit their wrists @pmchem on twitter || GARPA || Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:40:00 -
[101] - Quote
Isara Aulx-Gao wrote:Whoa never change a running system. why .... tell me why we need new names for the skills?? This is EVE, a harsh place to live, and not Hello Kitty in Space, let the new Player learn the old Names.
Damm next time comes the win button for new Players, because they can-¦t fly a Titan in 5 Days.
NO Mainstream ****
Next time just type:
SBVP
(Standard Bitter Vet Post) |

Yazzinra
Scorpion Ventures Rim Worlds Protectorate
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:41:00 -
[102] - Quote
spaceship command, not piloting.
keep the PI tree together. seriously, less booze when discussing changes.
also, who wants to start the pool on how many skills you currently have at 5 end up at 0, or not showing up at all. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:45:00 -
[103] - Quote
Zetrick wrote:I have a suggestion. Leave it. If it aint broke don't fix it 
Becoming used to a broken system doesn't fix the system, change is needed. |

Allianc
Novatech Armada Against ALL Authorities
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:46:00 -
[104] - Quote
lets keep the Spaceship Command and Missile Launcher Operation groups. They sound nice. |

Sirran The Lunatic
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:47:00 -
[105] - Quote
Yazzinra wrote:spaceship command, not piloting.
Agreed.
Sounds 85% lamer when placed with "Piloting"... |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:52:00 -
[106] - Quote
Edward Olmops wrote:A few comments.
CCP should really make an effort to make EVE more beginner-friendly, no doubt. Some skills like Multitasking and Nanite Control ought to be renamed, because the name is utterly misleading. But.
You are going way to far with this concept.
As many before me have already stated, many of the proposed name changes are uninspiring. Space Ship Command should really be spaceship command. Really, what's the point?
Also: Every name change that you do also has a NEGATIVE impact on the playability. Simply because all ressources on the web will be outdated. I have experienced that over and over again with previous renamings (e.g. Auto-Targeting Missiles). Maybe a newbie didn't get what a F.O.F. missile was. But a newbie with some minimum cleverness managed to throw that expression into Google and whoa - here we go. But try to find something if the name has changed during the last two years... I am really sad about what happened (not) to Evelopedia. I used that A LOT, that was one of my primary ressources when I was a noob. But now it's utterly useless, because each and every single ship and item has been rebalanced. That should of course not imply that you stop rebalancing because of Evelopedia - God forbid! But it shows the effect. There should be only things renamed when it'S REALLY necessary. And maybe it would also be noob-friendly to update Evelopedia.
That said, I for example always thought it was good that some skills (Electronics, Engineering, Social...) had the same name as their category. That way I would always know which one was the "basc" skill in the category which I needed to train first. The one that has the most impact on what I was doing. Compare Electronics (+5% CPU) to Target Breaker Amplification (+?% weird nonsense). Anything that makes it more likely that new players put their energy into the important skills to let them get into the game faster is a good thing.
Leaving a messed up system of naming and hierarchy because 3rd party application producers will have to do some work isnt a valid reason for keeping things the same, if we use that logic then CCP would have to freeze all development on EVE as any development would have 3rd party app. builders doing rework.
If a 3rd party app producer cannot keep up with the game as it changes perhaps they need to stop developing apps and do something else with their time.
|

Taleden
North Wind Local no. 612
45
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:53:00 -
[107] - Quote
A lot of folks have been asking about attributes, but only in terms of preserving the current scheme of primary/secondary attributes affecting training time and having consistent patterns of those attributes across skills within a group.
I'd like to take that discussion a step further and ask whether attributes' effects on skill training time are really a game mechanic you want to keep, or whether it's time to let them go. The upside of that system is that it allows people to feel like they're tailoring their character toward what they want to do -- combat pilots can remap to per/wil to train almost all ship command and weapons skills, while industry characters can remap to int/mem to train science and production skills.
But the system has significant downsides as well -- it encourages people to *not* train skills that they could use in the short term, simply because training against their current remap would be "less efficient" than waiting until they can remap attributes. This is especially bothersome for brand new combat pilots who need lots of int/mem support skills to go with their per/wil combat skills. Those pilots must make a lame choice: train "inefficiently" in order to get all the skills they need, or use up bonus remaps or wait over a year before they can be combat-effective.
I'm not sure the upsides really outweigh the downsides at this point. You made a similar conclusion about the Learning skills years ago, and I think that was the correct one, but I think it's time now to make the next step and do away with attributes affecting skill training time.
The simple fix is to just remove attributes entirely, but that would be frowned on by everyone who's invested in expensive implants. Another possible alternative is to let attributes grant some slight amplification of the skills they affect, rather than a training time bonus. So, for example, remapping to per/wil grants an extra +5% amplifier to all skills which are governed by per/wil (i.e. Surgical Strike grants +3% turret damage per level if you're remapped to int/mem, but +3.15% per level if you're mapped per/wil).
Regardless, I'd love some discussion of whether the skill training time optimization mechanic via attributes and remaps is really an interesting enough game mechanic to be worth the un-fun waiting-to-train or training-inefficiently gameplay that it brings along with it. |

Bob Shaftoes
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
17
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 01:54:00 -
[108] - Quote
I too wish to know what effect this is going to have on skill attributes
Right now they are all grouped into pairs of attributes which are basically given via what skill category you are in.
Spaceship command and gunnery are per / will and electronics / engineering are always int / mem
Will all this shifting around change the attributes of the skills as defined by the category or will they stay the same?
|

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 02:01:00 -
[109] - Quote
Taya Greathame wrote:As someone else has said, fix things stop changing things.
Rebalancing was annoying, giving tech one ships tech style roles. what fun can i have in a osprey now?
Dumb the game down, hope to increase subscription figures and playerbase.
gna start saving to buy my skillpoints.
Ps, EA gonna ruin you.
1. They are fixing a broken system. 2. Off topic references aren't helpful to the current topic of discussion. 3. See also: Standard Bitter Vet Post (SBVP)
|

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 02:12:00 -
[110] - Quote
Sofia Roseburn wrote:Don't fix what isn't broken.
Exactly !
But do fix a very broken skill naming structure and heirarchy:
example: weapon upgrades which affects missiles is listed under turrets and i personally took a month to realize it was there, probably would have been longer if i wasn't an avid help channel watcher.
Just one of many changes that are currently needed. |

Alpheias
Euphoria Released Verge of Collapse
2203
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 02:28:00 -
[111] - Quote
If you are going to change Spaceship Command to something, go with Starship Control. :p
Something else I'd look at it is to combine the two specialization skills for each gun type in the gunnery tree into something resembling what you find in the missile tree, like heavy missile specialization. Allow me to be frank. You will not like me. You will not like me now, and you will not like men++ a good deal less as we go on. |

Mirel Dystoph
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
75
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 02:30:00 -
[112] - Quote
This whole idea is one of the worst since the item renaming thing.
Just don't touch it.
Or maybe just touch what is broken. (Hint: Not everything is broken) "Nothing essential happens in the absence of noise."-á |

Draconic Slayer
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
29
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 02:51:00 -
[113] - Quote
ChromeStriker wrote:GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+
Keep Electronics and Engineering names the same... might just be nestalgia but never heard they were a problem... seems quite straightforward to me.
Targeting - Target Acquisition
Multitasking - Advanced Target Acquisition
GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+
Yes.
Sentient Blade wrote:Electronic Systems sounds vague. I think I'd much rather see the group called Electronic Warfare and the existing Electronic Warfare skill become Sensor Jamming.
Lumping Weapon Upgrades in with PG Enhancements seems odd, considering it's a perception / willpower branch and everything else is Int / Mem.
Yes.
Harvey James wrote:how about renaming hull upgrades to armour integrity so it actually explains that it improves your armour HP and same with mechanics becoming structural integrity.
maybe split hull upgrades into its own skill because of the other mods that use it still.
Also it begs the question why do Assault frigs need mechanics lv5 as a prereq? .. weapon upgrades lv4 perhaps instead
Yes.
Also, keep Planetary Interaction skills in their own independent category along with Spaceship Command the same. |

MItchell Jensen
Gravit Negotii Northern Associates.
27
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:08:00 -
[114] - Quote
Some of those names are really... boring. They don't really sound that science fictiony.
I mean seriously, Spaceship Piloting?
You're giving skills for adults to fly kilometer long ships that have the capability of putting a hole in the crust of a planet and you're making our skills sound like we're still in the 8th grade.
I know my disagreement will not be recognised (I'm also convinced that only 2 people will read this) but all in all I'm a bit disappointed with this naming change. CCP Dropbear: rofledit: ah crap, dev account. Oh well, official rofl at you sir. |

Sarkelias Anophius
Strange Energy Gentlemen's Agreement
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:16:00 -
[115] - Quote
These changes are moronic and cater to people too illiterate and incapable to be playing this game to begin with. I do not approve of any of these changes and hope they are withdrawn.
This smells of the homogenization and nerfing that has sent every other MMO into the dirt. This game is what it is because it requires attention and some reading skills. I do not want to lose this to the crybaby masses. |

Brother Mercury
Fire on the Mountain
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:17:00 -
[116] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: ...things...
Okay, I guess.
Now go spend your time doing something important. |

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
5402
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:18:00 -
[117] - Quote
Sounds mostly fine, but I really don't like spaceship piloting. It's meh to start with and sounds like many of the navigation skills could/should belong in it. Spaceship command sounds better and is much more clearly separated from the actual navigation of a spaceship. |

Lord Jita
Lord Jita's Big Gay Corp
76
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:30:00 -
[118] - Quote
Multiple Targeting -----> Multi Targeting |

Domanique Altares
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
484
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:35:00 -
[119] - Quote
Good to see that your team is hard at it changing fields in the database.
What are you guys going to do for the other 364 days of the coming year? Rifterlings Corporation is now recruiting pilots for faction warfare solo & small gang frigate PvP. Visit our website at www.rifterlings.com or join our in game channel weflyrifters to speak to a recruiter. |

Rena Monachica
Capital Hot Rods
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:35:00 -
[120] - Quote
looks ok
I could live without the change, but whatever floats your boat
anyway, keep Spaceship Command. Piloting just sounds lame |

Balmer Banshot
Strange Energy Gentlemen's Agreement
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:35:00 -
[121] - Quote
I think some CCP employees have too much time on their hands. How about spending it on something besides name changing? There are plenty of in-game mechanics that need looked at, lots of additional features that your playerbase has been looking for....and you pull out Thesaurus 101. gg ccp. |

Kumduh
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:36:00 -
[122] - Quote
I would leave Weapon Upgrades and AWU in Gunnery since their primary/secondary stats are more in line with that group. They would be the only ones in the new Engineering group that would be Perception/Willpower. |

Branorr
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:46:00 -
[123] - Quote
All the skill names are just so confusing. You should really dumb everything down such that there is no imagination or flavor involved anymore. New player confusion will be immediately fixed this way. Suggestions:
Frequency Modulation -> EW Falloff Improvement Sensor Linking -> Sensor Module Capacitor Use Signal Dispersion -> ECM Strength Energy Pulse Weapons -> Smartbombs Tactical Shield Manipulation -> Low Shield Armor Protection AWU -> Weapon Powergrid Usage Controlled Bursts -> Turret Capacitor usage Gunnery -> Turret Damage Sharpshooter -> Turret Optimal Range Surgical Strike -> Advanced Turret Damage
I could keep going, but you get the idea. Dumb everything down to take the flavor out.
Also, I suggest changing all ship names to their ship class and a number, it's way too hard to remember all those ships. for example, Amarr Frigate I, II, III. Or you could do Amarr Light Cruiser, Amarr Heavy Cruiser, Amarr EW Cruiser. This would help a lot.
Remember, the goal is to prevent any confusion or learning for new players. Gotta focus on that.
|

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:54:00 -
[124] - Quote
Sarkelias Anophius wrote:These changes are moronic and cater to people too illiterate and incapable to be playing this game to begin with. I do not approve of any of these changes and hope they are withdrawn.
This smells of the homogenization and nerfing that has sent every other MMO into the dirt. This game is what it is because it requires attention and some reading skills. I do not want to lose this to the crybaby masses.
Stomping your feet and crying 'I want 10 years ago", doesn't seem to separate you much from those crybaby masses you so seem to hate.
1. it takes a lot of money to properly develop a video game long term, CCP has failed at this and that is why this game feels so "10 years old", when other games have done a much better job of keeping up with the times because they have the financial resources to do it.
2. As CCP brings in outside management talent i can assure you it isn't because they felt like they were on the right path with their past development ideology and resultant cash flow problem and small player base (no, i dont have access to CCPs financial records but i do understand the concept of 'lost opportunity costs' and CCP has lost out on millions if not tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars they could have used to keep this now antiquated game current).
3. The only hope this game has for a better tomorrow doesn't lie in the hands of players or developers that would shun casual players so stomp your feet and huff and puff all you like but we casuals will win because there are more of us in the gaming world and we have a lot more money to offer CCP if it plays to our desires and in the final analysis investors don't care if you like the changes or not they care about their quarterly profits and that is precisely what we casuals will give them. |

Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
1348
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 03:56:00 -
[125] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:this is eve online, where we fit Alumel Omni ECCM Sensor Array to our ships. a little less clarity in the name of a skill is a fair price to pay for not feeling like an idiot while talking about it. multiple targeting sounds like multiple sclerosis and has to go away.
QFT.
I can't get too worked up about these changes because they aren't that big a deal but I can't shake the feeling that this is a lot of effort that could have gone into things that are actually broken. |

Sarkelias Anophius
Strange Energy Gentlemen's Agreement
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:13:00 -
[126] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Sarkelias Anophius wrote:These changes are moronic and cater to people too illiterate and incapable to be playing this game to begin with. I do not approve of any of these changes and hope they are withdrawn.
This smells of the homogenization and nerfing that has sent every other MMO into the dirt. This game is what it is because it requires attention and some reading skills. I do not want to lose this to the crybaby masses. Stomping your feet and crying 'I want 10 years ago", doesn't seem to separate you much from those crybaby masses you so seem to hate. 1. it takes a lot of money to properly develop a video game long term, CCP has failed at this and that is why this game feels so "10 years old", when other games have done a much better job of keeping up with the times because they have the financial resources to do it. 2. As CCP brings in outside management talent i can assure you it isn't because they felt like they were on the right path with their past development ideology and resultant cash flow problem and small player base (no, i dont have access to CCPs financial records but i do understand the concept of 'lost opportunity costs' and CCP has lost out on millions if not tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars they could have used to keep this now antiquated game current). 3. The only hope this game has for a better tomorrow doesn't lie in the hands of players or developers that would shun casual players so stomp your feet and huff and puff all you like but we casuals will win because there are more of us in the gaming world and we have a lot more money to offer CCP if it plays to our desires and in the final analysis investors don't care if you like the changes or not they care about their quarterly profits and that is precisely what we casuals will give them. 4. btw, this response is appropriate to about 10 other respondents that are wondering why CCP cannot seem to keep up with necessary changes to their game, its simple EVE has been mismanaged and until the management starts making some serious changes CCPs financial constraints will have this game falling farther and farther behind other games in terms of its development.
masterfully trolled. Or searingly ignorant. Either way, you go, girl.
Edit: Or possibly much too aware of the truth and not interested in trying to change the course of things. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:21:00 -
[127] - Quote
Branorr wrote:All the skill names are just so confusing. You should really dumb everything down such that there is no imagination or flavor involved anymore. New player confusion will be immediately fixed this way. Suggestions:
[SBVP]
Remember, the goal is to prevent any confusion or learning for new players. Gotta focus on that.
We could also focus on players that refuse to evolve along with a game. The irony of an advanced civilization game where a huge chunk of the player base cannot seem to evolve along with the game just kills me. |

Ilaister
Task Force Proteus
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:24:00 -
[128] - Quote
Defiant Blessings wrote:- Spaceship Command +1
- Target Acquisition / Advanced Target Acquisition +1
- Subsystem skills independent category +1
- Planetary Interaction skills independent category +1
My personal thoughts: Thanks alot, I just started a video series using all these old names. 
Nail and head. Right there.
Emphatically no.1. Brings this to mind : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091059/ ...not the understanding, commanding, maintaining, and maneuvering of multiple-kilometre dimensioned starships of increasing complexity and size.
|

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:27:00 -
[129] - Quote
Sarkelias Anophius wrote:
masterfully trolled. Or searingly ignorant. Either way, you go, girl.
Edit: Or possibly much too aware of the truth and not interested in trying to change the course of things.
1. Thanks for the edit, that was quite decent of you.
2. I don't post troll, if i post it i believe it to be true (although you are entitled to disagree as you see fit)
3. um....why am i a girl?
4. I am very keenly interested in changing the face of EVE, just not in the direction you apparently prefer. |

Techno36
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:38:00 -
[130] - Quote
Multiple targeting and spaceship piloting sound dumb. |

Geminimixer
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:40:00 -
[131] - Quote
Yeah,,, do not want. Old system is fine |

Celedris
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:43:00 -
[132] - Quote
I would rename the Electronic System group to Electronic Warfare
Then change the electronic warfare skill to "Counter Measure Harmonizing" or something else which sounds ECM-specific.
I would also move cloaking out of this group and put it in to either engineering or scanning, as cloaking clearly doesn't belong with the rest of the offensive electronic warfare skills. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:47:00 -
[133] - Quote
Kumduh wrote:I would leave Weapon Upgrades and AWU in Gunnery since their primary/secondary stats are more in line with that group. They would be the only ones in the new Engineering group that would be Perception/Willpower.
The problem with them remaining where they are under gunnery is that WU and AWU both apply to missiles as well and as someone that started the game as a missile pilot i didnt know these skills even existed until one day someone asked a question about them in English help chat, really a player shouldnt have to rely on help chat to find missile skills when there is a category dedicated to missiles.
One possible solution would be a skill split with WU-turrents, WU-missiles, AWU-turrets and AWU-missiles but as a CSM pointed out they are actually fitting skills and he argued that made them fit best under engineering, so perhaps they will just have to change the supporting stats if they go with their current idea. |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10522
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:52:00 -
[134] - Quote
There is no rule that says all skills in a group have to have the same stats. In the groups we have now, spaceship command, subsystems, science, corporation management - allow have variation in stats.
1 Kings 12:11
|

Bardos Skylifter
Solarise Flares Get Off My Lawn
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:58:00 -
[135] - Quote
"Spaceship Command" is much more aligned with the lore, for as a capsuleer, you are not piloting the ship in the traditional sense. Instead, you're actually controlling it will your will, you literately command the vessel with your mind.
Also, Missile Launcher Operation sounds better |

Brie DeMarllene
University of Caille Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 05:09:00 -
[136] - Quote
Branorr wrote:All the skill names are just so confusing. You should really dumb everything down such that there is no imagination or flavor involved anymore. New player confusion will be immediately fixed this way. Suggestions:
Frequency Modulation -> EW Falloff Improvement Sensor Linking -> Sensor Module Capacitor Use Signal Dispersion -> ECM Strength Energy Pulse Weapons -> Smartbombs Tactical Shield Manipulation -> Low Shield Armor Protection AWU -> Weapon Powergrid Usage Controlled Bursts -> Turret Capacitor usage Gunnery -> Turret Damage Sharpshooter -> Turret Optimal Range Surgical Strike -> Advanced Turret Damage
I could keep going, but you get the idea. Dumb everything down to take the flavor out.
Also, I suggest changing all ship names to their ship class and a number, it's way too hard to remember all those ships. for example, Amarr Frigate I, II, III. Or you could do Amarr Light Cruiser, Amarr Heavy Cruiser, Amarr EW Cruiser. This would help a lot.
Remember, the goal is to prevent any confusion or learning for new players. Gotta focus on that.
I've heard all employees at CCP have switched to drinking Coors Light as well. |

Sarkelias Anophius
Strange Energy Gentlemen's Agreement
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 05:18:00 -
[137] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Sarkelias Anophius wrote:
masterfully trolled. Or searingly ignorant. Either way, you go, girl.
Edit: Or possibly much too aware of the truth and not interested in trying to change the course of things.
1. Thanks for the edit, that was quite decent of you. 2. I don't post troll, if i post it i believe it to be true (although you are entitled to disagree as you see fit) 3. um....why am i a girl? 4. I am very keenly interested in changing the face of EVE, just not in the direction you apparently prefer.
It's true, I don't prefer it. I enjoyed WoW for awhile and then this happened to it and ruined the elitist aspects I personally find most enjoyable. It's only natural that I would react defensively.
I do see that you're interested in changing the face of the game. As I said I don't like it, but my opinion isn't likely to be relevant in the end. I'm keenly aware of it.
Also, you're a girl because it's a churlish and petty way of being offensive on the internet, obviously. Or in grade school. They're the same thing, anyway.
|

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 05:40:00 -
[138] - Quote
Sarkelias Anophius wrote:
It's true, I don't prefer it. I enjoyed WoW for awhile and then this happened to it and ruined the elitist aspects I personally find most enjoyable. It's only natural that I would react defensively.
I do see that you're interested in changing the face of the game. As I said I don't like it, but my opinion isn't likely to be relevant in the end. I'm keenly aware of it.
Also, you're a girl because it's a churlish and petty way of being offensive on the internet, obviously. Or in grade school. They're the same thing, anyway.
Perhaps we are both asking for to much, how about we split servers, you guys keep tranquility and we casuals migrate to Carebear Candyland. |

Nick Ahashion
In Exile. Imperial Outlaws.
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 05:49:00 -
[139] - Quote
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better I'm with this guy. "Spaceship Piloting" is a little too limp-wristed.
Although Spaceship Piloting makes sense, I feel the same way. I Attribute Spaceship Command to the inherent nature of eve, to be bold, to be brave, and to Push every ship I fly beyond its limits. Not simply pilot it.
Everything else looks great, keep up the good work CCP. |

Daenna Chrysi
Omega Foundry Unit Shadows Of Betrayal
38
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 06:05:00 -
[140] - Quote
its about time the skill tree gets some love but the names....
"multiple targeting" nah, keep it as "Targeting" multiple makes it just sound ********. for "multitasking" calling it "Advanced Targeting" would sound better and give the idea that this extends the targeting skills just like advanced lab operations extends the number of labs.
"Spaceship piloting" that just doesnt work, makes it sound like we are just doodling around with the ships, "Spaceship Command" is more fitting for the immortal demigods we are commanding the most powerful machines ever built =)
|

Vanchelon
Aurum Aquila
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 06:17:00 -
[141] - Quote
Defiant Blessings wrote:- Spaceship Command +1
- Target Acquisition / Advanced Target Acquisition +1
- Subsystem skills independent category +1
- Planetary Interaction skills independent category +1
 Agreed with the above! |

Ugly Eric
Fistful of Finns Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 06:19:00 -
[142] - Quote
basis are good, but why rename spaceship command to piloting? Its just ******** for old players, as anyone keep talking of it as spaceship command in anycase. Why change missile launcher operation to missiles?
But even more I keep this as a waste of time, as there would be much more important things to do. The corp management skills are outdated really badly. Starbase defence management having to have anchoring V as prereq, the skill itself being x7, it giving control to only 1 gun per level. They may have been good in the ye old days, but in modern eve, when ppl siege a pos, you need to have control of LOT of guns to be any use at all.
also the attributes certain skills require are bit .. interesting atleast. Once again I mention the starbase defence management as charisma skill, the lack of training to full year in the times of remapping for example navigations, leaderships, drones to mention few. |
|

Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
8801
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 06:25:00 -
[143] - Quote
I hope you can give us a SDE of the final structure before it actually goes live so we can make the needed changes...
|
|

Radgette
New Eden Renegades
37
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 06:45:00 -
[144] - Quote
Not only does this confuse matters, some of the names just sound really dumb.
Spaceship Command is much better than piloting don't change it. Also Missile Launcher Operation is a much better name.
This is almost as stupid as when you changed Akemons 8% armoUr implant to a Noble Upgrades as if it was common and normal.
The current skill groups are separated in the most part by what attributes you need to train them.
This change completely jumbles that up and lumps per/will skills in the same sub section as int/mem.
You might not be "dumbing" the game down by changing all these names BUT and this is a big BUT your taking all the falour out of it.
The idiosyncracies and weird stuff ADDs to the game not detracts and taking 2minutes to read the "show info" tab if you dont know what a skill does is a GOOD thing |

Ottersmacker
Genos Occidere
383
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 06:45:00 -
[145] - Quote
"You are about to become what all men should fear. You will roam the heavens, commanding the most powerful machines ever built."
*commanding* them machines, screw piloting -.- i just locked an open door.. strange, yet symbolically compelling. |

Vigilanta
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
28
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:02:00 -
[146] - Quote
I may be in the distinct minority here, hell probably am,
Do you really hate your long time subscribers this much? Alot of the changes you have done in the last year year and a half have been pretty good, but the renaming of stuff is getting a bit nuts. The game is literally becoming more confuseing because alot of us have learned to expect thiss name, and/or this skill to be here under this group. The undock button to be on this section of the screen ect. You are literally going agianst in some peoples cases 10 years of muscle memory.
If you want to reorganize some of the stuff thats clearly in the wrong category ./ make new ones and move a few skill in there the clean up the skill tree okay, but renaming skills and categories is so MEH.
I know this is a big whine but, this time around i felt like sharing.
EDIT: Also agreeing 100% Spaceship Piloting sounds incredibly gay, like even a dude from san fransico that was EXTREMELY flamboyant would be like, oh you got to be kidding me. Stick with Spaceship Command, which sounds authoritative |

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
194
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:04:00 -
[147] - Quote
- Spaceship Piloting sounds lame. Revert it to Spaceship Command.
- Leave Targeting skill as is and rename Multitasking > Adv. Targeting. - Leave Engineering and Electronics skills as is. + Nanite Control > Neurotoxin Control is a reasonable change. Having base skill of a group same name as group name makes it easy to understand for new players.
* Name of Guided Missile Precision skill makes no sense anymore because of recent changes. Suggestion: Rename it to either Missile Precision or Missile Detonation Precision (the latter makes it easy to understand function of this skill). * Also Armor Honeycombing skill sounds silly and not sci-fi-ish while Armor (Plating) Management/Distribution will be much better imo. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
1976
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:13:00 -
[148] - Quote
- Armor - Seems good, but how about calling it "Armor and Hull Systems".
- Electronic System - How about calling it "Electronic Systems" and leaving the "Electronics" skill alone. Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration seems out of place here.
- Engineering - How about calling it "Engineering Systems" and leaving the Engineering skill alone.
- Missiles - Seems okay.
- Neural Enhancement - I like!
- Production - How about calling it "Manufacturing"
- Resource Processing - How about calling it "Material Processing"
- Ship Modification - I don't like subsystems being in this group.
- Scanning - How about calling it "Exploration". I don't like the planet skills moving here; keep them on their own, or move them into manufacturing (see above).
- Science - How about renaming it "Research".
- Shields - How about calling it "Shield Systems"
- Spaceship Piloting - PLEASE OH PLEASE DON'T CALL IT THIS!
- Targeting - Seems okay.
I'd be tempted to rename "Gunnery" group to "Turrets". |

Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate
1168
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:14:00 -
[149] - Quote
I would say... it's logical |

Nix Anteris
Bite Me inc Bitten.
64
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:20:00 -
[150] - Quote
Missiles -> Missile Command
Have to chime in with the resounding chorus of "If it aint broke, don't fix it". You're trying to make it more newbie friendly, and at the same time confusing your existing players. Not really a good trade-off in my opinion.
If it's really going ahead, agree with most of the above.
- Keep Spaceship Command
- Keep Missile Launcher Operation
- Keep PI skills together
- Keep Subsystems in their own group
- Electronics -> Electronic Warfare makes more sense.
- Pick better names for targeting and multitasking
- Rename Biology as people are suggesting
- Don't mix up skills with different attribute requirements - this adds much more confusion.
|

Legion40k
ZOMBIEBEACHPARTYPATROL Circle-Of-Two
14
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:30:00 -
[151] - Quote
IMO, Multiple Targeting is gonna get confused with Multitasking a bit..maybe a little differently worded such as Target Management and Adv. Target Management.
And Spaceship Piloting sounds 'meh' compared to Spaceship Command > why change this?
Gotta agree with Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris that Guided Missile Precision needs to get an updated name like the suggested Missile Detonation Precision, much clearer to understand
Armor Honeycombing..... > Armor Plating Compensation/Efficiency??? im unsure on this one, it's just weird to begin with 
thats about it really :s |

Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
1976
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:35:00 -
[152] - Quote
Legion40k wrote:Gotta agree with Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris that Guided Missile Precision needs to get an updated name like the suggested Missile Detonation Precision, much clearer to understand Guided Missile Precision -> Detonation Radius Control Target Navigation Prediction ->Detonation Velocity Control |

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
194
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:44:00 -
[153] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Legion40k wrote:Gotta agree with Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris that Guided Missile Precision needs to get an updated name like the suggested Missile Detonation Precision, much clearer to understand Guided Missile Precision -> Detonation Radius Control Target Navigation Prediction ->Detonation Velocity Control Missile Projection -> Missile Velocity Control Missile Bombardment -> Missile Flight Time Control Warhead Upgrades -> Detonation Damage Yield While it is new player friendly it breaks sci-fi game immersion at the same time imo. Putting skill effects into names (ex. suggested CPU management / PG management) will make game bland. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
242
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:45:00 -
[154] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Isara Aulx-Gao wrote:Whoa never change a running system. why .... tell me why we need new names for the skills?? This is EVE, a harsh place to live, and not Hello Kitty in Space, let the new Player learn the old Names.
Damm next time comes the win button for new Players, because they can-¦t fly a Titan in 5 Days.
NO Mainstream **** Little Dragon Khamez wrote:More dumbing down it seems. You asked for advice about certificates and come back with this **** when no one to my knowledge has ever complained about the skill names or descriptions.
I do not want eve to be welcoming and easy to understand for noobs. The fact that it is hard to understand and requires some intellect is where we the community get our quality control from.
This is not hello ******* kitty online. The day it starts to resemble it is the day you will lose your hardcore player base. We eve players are a cut above the players of other mmos, were all elite players; even the noobs that decide to stick with eve because it's unique and beautiful and hard to master. Next time just type: SBVP (Standard Bitter Vet Post)
Thanks for trolling and contributing absolutely nothing to the debate. +1 Tiericide is tiers by another name. |

SubStandard Rin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:45:00 -
[155] - Quote
First off I like the new changes!
but here is a few remarks
* SpaceShip Piloting sounds wrong ... Spaceship Command just sounds better and is i think still better name?
* Why not rename biology that skill name is weird?
* PI skills i would still recomend that they are keep separated (its easer to find them that way)
* im not convinced that putting subsystem in to spaceship piloting ... it sounds good but that group is already LARGE and putting in an additional 20 skills in it isn't making it bigger instead I suggest that you move the strategic cruiser skills to the Subsystem group and renaming it to something better.
* Electronic / Mecanical/ are the name change really necessary ?
*How about skill stats, now that the skills get moved around are they going to get there stats (int,Per,Wis, etc) updated to be same in the entire group?
|

Sephira Galamore
Inner Beard Society
126
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 07:58:00 -
[156] - Quote
Just stopping by to pitch in:
Please keep Spaceship Command. We don't actually _pilot_ a ship, except from maybe a frigate. We command it / the crew to "warp to", "align" and they make it so. That's commanding a spaceship! |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
242
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 08:02:00 -
[157] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:
- Armor - Seems good, but how about renaming it "Armor and Hull Systems".
- Electronic System - How about renaming it "Electronic Systems" and leaving the "Electronics" skill alone. Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration seems out of place here; put all 3 reconfig skills into "Engineering Systems" see below.
- Engineering - How about renaming it "Engineering Systems" and leaving the Engineering skill alone.
- Missiles - How about renaming it "Missile Weapon Systems".
- Neural Enhancement - I like!
- Production - How about renaming it "Manufacturing". One produces movies, not spaceships.
- Resource Processing - How about renaming it "Material Processing"
- Ship Modification - I don't like subsystems being in this group.
- Scanning - How about renaming it "Exploration". I don't like the planet skills moving here; keep them on their own, or move them into manufacturing (see above).
- Science - How about renaming it "Research" or "Research and Technology".
- Shields - How about renaming it "Shield Systems"
- Spaceship Piloting - PLEASE OH PLEASE DON'T RENAME IT THIS!
- Targeting - How about renaming it "Targeting Systems".
I'd be tempted to rename "Gunnery" group to "Turret Weapon Systems". Note the common usage of the word "Systems" throughout.
+1 anything that keeps the sci fi flavour is a good thing. Tiericide is tiers by another name. |

Mwaheed S0n
Be Right Back Ltd
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 08:06:00 -
[158] - Quote
I also vote for keeping Spaceship Command.
I also cringe at seeing the Planetary Interaction skills mixed across groups even though two of them are technically "scanning" skills, but they really should stay in their own group.
+1 to Tau Cabalander's suggestions for naming schemes and placement as well.
o7 |

anishamora
Atelierele Grivita
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 08:09:00 -
[159] - Quote
I'll add what most people already pointed out, maybe CPP will get the drift:
- "Spaceship Piloting" is unanimously considered gay. We understand that you don't want to give us a crew per-se, but we're still spaceship commanders goddamnit!
- PI stuff should remain in its own group especially if at some point (hopefully) you'll expand more on this area
- Subsystems should remain in their own group, newb-friendliness is not a good enough reason, T3 stuff is not newb stuff.
- Electronics as "CPU management" is bad and doesn't make any sense anymore as pre-requisite for several skills.
|

Debir Achen
Makiriemi Holdings
54
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 08:16:00 -
[160] - Quote
For most of the skill groups, the group seemed to be named after a single base skill that was a pre-req for most of the other skills in the group. While there is some opportunity for confusion, this always made perfect sense to me. So I'm not in favour of general renaming of these base skills or the groups.
That said, there's certainly room to split out some of the skills into new groups. Electronic Warfare and Jury Rigging come to mind.
I'd also support splitting the R&D "science" skills out from the rest, maybe under "Research" since that seems to be a base skill for most of them. Aren't Caldari supposed to have a large signature? |

Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Yulai Federation
105
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 08:27:00 -
[161] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: Spaceship Piloting: is the old Spaceship Command group, no change except with the name.
That's ... well, i can't find a PC word for it. Just name it "Pony Riding" if you're going to change the current name, which is absolutely okey as it is.
|

joan scholar
Cripples Bastards and Broken Dreams
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 08:28:00 -
[162] - Quote
changing the names is not gonna help. the whole skill tree system needs a overhaul.
the current system is old and outdated and a hindrance for new players.
if you really want to "clean up" skills revamp the whole system. something like Dust514 skills tree would be much better and less confusing. skill trees in any game should really have a hierarchy system. you should not have to search a module to see which skill you need to train for it.
this looks so much better IMO, now i dont mean it should look exactly the same because this was designed for controllers in mind.
Dust 514 Skill Tree
yeah its a lot of work to re design a UI but if you really want to do it, do it right the first time.
|

Chamile Eonic
The Church of MDAMC
19
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 08:35:00 -
[163] - Quote
Looks good.
When I first started it was pretty hard working everything out. This doesn't dumb down the game, it makes it better |

Vaihto Ehto
20
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 08:41:00 -
[164] - Quote
Please don't change Spaceship Command to Spaceship Piloting. I want to manly 'command' my internet spaceships not 'pilot' them like a little girl. Why would you not use an alt to post on the forums? |

Creepy Brutor
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:00:00 -
[165] - Quote
I like it all apart from "spaceship piloting" |

Aprudena Gist
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
47
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:06:00 -
[166] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:i dont know about weapon upgrades and AWU in engineering... while the latter might be placed rightly there, the former governs wether you can use dmg-mods or not, which is to me tightly connected to guns and the gunnery path.
You could make the same arument that Weapon Upgrades should be in the Missiles group. You need Gravitics for Warp disruption field generators, should that be in Electronic Systems? And so on. But their primary function is as fitting skills, so that's why the CSM agreed they should go into the "Engineering" group. The CSM saw these stupid ******* names and agreed? wow you guys are even worse then the last bunch. |

thee lous3
Bite Me inc Bitten.
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:29:00 -
[167] - Quote
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better I'm with this guy. "Spaceship Piloting" is a little too limp-wristed.
It's not even limp wristed. Maybe I'm incorrect, but capsuleers aren't even pilots. Sure, they would know how to pilot the ship, but I've always imagined them in more of a admiral's role; making Spaceship Command more suitable.
Think aircraft carrier top dog, rather than commercial aircraft captain. |

Nagarythe Tinurandir
Tormented of Destiny The Kadeshi
136
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:31:00 -
[168] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:i dont know about weapon upgrades and AWU in engineering... while the latter might be placed rightly there, the former governs wether you can use dmg-mods or not, which is to me tightly connected to guns and the gunnery path.
You could make the same arument that Weapon Upgrades should be in the Missiles group. You need Gravitics for Warp disruption field generators, should that be in Electronic Systems? And so on. But their primary function is as fitting skills, so that's why the CSM agreed they should go into the "Engineering" group.
if you had quoted my complete post you may have seen that i recognised BCUs belonging to missiles. i see were these changes are coming from and they make sense. somewhat. but renaming is a tricky thing and i sincerely want to avoid a naming scheme as the TEST dude on page 7 or 8 (i refuse to quote it...) suggested. accessibility for new players is all good but imho it is desirable to retain some sci-fi flavour. quirky names included.
as well: please keep spaceship command
|

Liafcipe9000
Smeghead Empire
7405
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:31:00 -
[169] - Quote
marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better this  You may gain the knowledge, but you will lose your belief, with all its mystery and comfort. If there was proof, absolute and certain, there is an afterlife, why not quit this life, and be done with it? Ponder about these things all your life, and you're a philosopher. Compress these ponderings into a couple of pages, and you'll go mad. |

Chauvelleir
420 Enterprises. Universal Paranoia Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:35:00 -
[170] - Quote
Seriously, you're spending time on this?
My thoughts,
Keep spaceship command
Agree with your other renaming proposals
Keep PI skills together
And whatever you do with the categories for goodness sake implement something like eve-mon within the client
The biggest barrier to new players is a lack of a skill planning system unless they download another program and spend time learning to use it as well as getting to grips with the api system, this is time that the could be spending in your client getting a feel for eve and being immersed in the game.
|

Titus Tallang
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:49:00 -
[171] - Quote
My thoughts on the matter:
- I'm not sure if renaming for the sake of simplicity is good. Opening a skill's description, then reading what it does makes the skill system seem more in-depth than if you simply go through a group and see "Tracking efficiency", "CPU management", "Multiple Targeting".
- Really, is it that much effort to read the description of a skill? When I started playing and created my first skill plan, I took the time to go through the list of all skills in EVEMon and read up on what they do. It may not be in-game, but doing so was still a tremendous sense of discovery for me. I feel like scrolling down a list and knowing what each skill does without clicking on it would've made this experience a lot more bland.
- In other words, learning what all the different skills do is simply another "road block", if you may, that EVE throws at you, and overcoming that block will give a new player a sense of gratification and knowledge. I feel like oversimplifying skill names would really dampen this effect a lot.
- Also, skill names give EVE a certain sci-fi "feel". I understand that you feel the need to make them more understandable, but hope that, if you really feel you need to go through with these changes, they could at least be achieved without any skills losing their distinctive names for a generic "X management" or "X efficiency".
On to singular changes:
- "Multiple Targeting" seems odd. "Target Management" is more in line with what the error message states ("You are already managing X targets, as many as you have the skill to.")
- "Spaceship Piloting" sounds a lot less awesome than "Spaceship Command". We're commanders of the ship, not merely pilots. I'd strongly prefer if you kept the old name.
- Subsystems should stay their own separate group. This makes it easier to grasp that these are the skills you will lose SP in if you die in a T3 ship.
- I prefer "MIssile Launcher Operation" over "Missies". They both obviously state what they are, and, well, the former just sounds better to me.
- I agree with you that "Nanite Control" is indeed confusing. Also, "Neurotoxin Control" does not really lose any of its "sci-fi feel". This is a change I can definitely get behind.
|

Number One Everything
Icanhazcheezburger
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:52:00 -
[172] - Quote
If its fine, don't fix it. Spaceship Command vs piloting is a no-brainer. Leave it as command. It sounds better, and if someone is too stupid to know that spaceship command means piloting a ship, they are too stupid to play EVE.
Splitting up PI to the four corners is the exact opposite of the intent of this cleanup. Leave it alone!
I agree for the most part with the skills being split up based on their primary/secondary attributes. Yes, there are a few variations within them now, but anyone that's played EVE for 6 months should have most of the groups memorized based on the group its in. Scattering skills from their attributes won't make it easier, it will just make people rely even more than they do already on 3rd party tools like EVEmon.
Lastly, and for me, the most important thing, is that no skill attributes are changed. I expect after this patch all the attributes for all the skills will be the same as they have been for years, otherwise 1.1 better come with a bonus remap. Many people, myself included, have year long plans.
Off topic, maybe remaps could be changed to 6 months instead of a year? A lot of recent changes to EVE have tried to make it easier to use, and more flexible. Lowering the remap timer to 6 months isn't game breaking, but it gives twice the flexibility as we have now. |

sytaqe violacea
State Protectorate Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:05:00 -
[173] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:RENAMING SKILLS This is done in an effort to reduce confusion between the skill names themselves and the groups they belong to. Usually, a group name is to be as generic as possible since it usually contains more than just a single theme. On the contrary, Skill names need to be as specific as possible to let players know what effects they have without having to read their description.
- Electronics: has been renamed to GÇ£CPU managementGÇ¥ not to conflict with group names and be more explicit at what the skill actually does.
- Engineering: has been renamed GÇ£Power Grid managementGÇ¥ not to conflict with group names and be more explicit at what the skill actually does.
- Targeting: for the same reasons as above, this skill has been renamed "Multiple Targeting".
- Multitasking: has been renamed "Advanced Multiple Targeting" for the same reasons as above.
- Nanite Control: has been renamed "Neurotoxin Control" to make it clearer it's a booster related skill and not something tied with overheading (nanite repair paste comes to mind).
I'm against this.
When I was a newbie, I could't understand what "(1x)" imply. But I could realize that Engineering skill is basic skill of Engineering group, that Electronics skill is basic skill of Electronics group, owing to their name. Then I started learning the shape of skill tree with clicking "show info" again and again. When this idea are executed, I doubt that new player can identify "CPU management" as a basic skill of Electronics, identify "Power Grid management" as a basic skill of Engineering. I think this change will confuse new player.
Those change should be fixed like this:
Electronics has been renamed to "Basic Electronics" Engineering has been renamed to "Basic Engineering" Targeting has been renamed to "Elementary Targeting"
Skill is not stand-alone. It's a part of tree. |

gramafon
Sacred Temple Darkness of Despair
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:16:00 -
[174] - Quote
Can you please make sorting not alphabetically ! ! !
             
From smaller to bigger class of "pvp" ships, then
For example, Spaceship command group:
{general skills for T1 ships and ORE}: - Spaceship command - Advanced spaceship command - Capital ships - Mining frigate - Mining barge - Exhumers - ORE Industrial - Industrial command ships
{Racial skills}
- Minmatar frigates - Minmatar destroyers - Minmatar cruisers - Minmatar strategic cruisers - Minmatar battlecruisers - Minmatar battleships - Minmatar dreadnoughts - Minmatar carriers - Minmatar titan - Minmatar Industrial ships - Minmatar freighter {repeat this for all races)
{General skills for T2 ships, from smaller to bigger}
- Interceptors - Electronic attack frigates - Assault frigates - Covert ops
- Heavy assault cruisers - Heavy Interdiction cruisers - Recon ships - Logistics - Transport ships
- Marauders - Black Ops
{maybe T2 minig barges should be in this group}
               
Beause current sorting is very difficult for new players. I think they should see ships skills as tree, as in EVEmon, and this could be perfect if you want to take your time in skills |

Aijle Mijleroff
Infernal laboratory Infernal Octopus
25
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:20:00 -
[175] - Quote
CCP spends time on a completely idiotic things pretending to work! Maybe you already start working on really pressing problems?
PS waiting for new bugs.....  |

Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
59
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:26:00 -
[176] - Quote
Does this mean you will also rename all the related hardwirings so that the EE-family will now be CU- or something, EG- becomes PG- and so on? |

Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
6832
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:34:00 -
[177] - Quote
Talk about dumbing it down CCP,
the only one I agree with is the Neurotoxin Control skill, that was badly named on your part, the rest, well, they were fine. |

Iq Cadaen
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
32
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:38:00 -
[178] - Quote
Some pretty bad Engrish in there. Some suggestions for improvement:
- "Multiple Targeting" sounds ridiculous, change to "Multi-Targeting" and "Advanced Multi-Targeting".
- "Electronic System" group should be "Electronic Systems" or, even better, "Electronic Warfare [Systems]".
- "Missiles" might be better as "Missile Systems" or just keep it as is.
- "Shields" and "Armor" to "Shield Systems" and "Armor Systems".
- "Spaceship Piloting" should just stay "Spaceship Command", there's just no way "Piloting" would sound good there.
- "Targeting" to "Sensors & Targeting"
|

OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
60
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:47:00 -
[179] - Quote
Why? Just tell me why? There's a lot of more necesare and utile things that need to be fixed. What should i presume now? That CCP has a such lack of activity that they started to think renaming skills is actually work, and does benefit somehow the game? It worked fine, and it also works fine in this very moment when i write this. Noone complained, or had problems with the damn names. You know, it reminds me of the communist politrucs in the Eastern EU Block. No matter how stupid things they did, those needed to be put up because it was a precise "somebody" wich's work needed to be put up to fill a statistic necesare to him, for leveling up in party hierarchy. *** Get a job, gentlemen. A real one. |

Kekminator
Loktar Ogar Co.
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:13:00 -
[180] - Quote
Some of the changes are for the better: Neural Enhancement, Production, Resource processing, Scanning, new Science, Shields, Armor. Grouping CPU and PG skills and throwing WU and AWU in there is OK too.
Some changes are definitely bad:
- Spaceship Command, as everyone said.
- PI skills should stay together, they serve a single purpose.
- Subsystem skills should stay separate from rigs - ideally forever, or at least until skill loss on ship loss is removed.
- Targeting skill : "multiple targeting", while specific, sound really bad. I support "Target Management" suggestion.
Also, I agree that "CPU Management" sounds a bit awkward, and Electronic Systems should have an "s" as bolded. There were several other good proposals in the thread, won't list everything. |

Keras Authion
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:15:00 -
[181] - Quote
I'll throw in my 0.02 isk.
Electronics, Engineering, Targeting and Multitasking are more obvious but feel bland. It might be a matter of taste but I think something in line with Multilple Target Aquisition would be better.
The skill groups look good except the planetary interaction has been split into several ones. Later down the road you might run into trouble with that many skills in ship modification if you ever get to releasing more tech 3 ships and need new skills for them. This post was rated "C" for capsuleer. |

Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
3080
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:15:00 -
[182] - Quote
Cool stuff, what about the drone fixes?
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |

Kekminator
Loktar Ogar Co.
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:15:00 -
[183] - Quote
sytaqe violacea wrote: Those change should be fixed like this:
Electronics has been renamed to "Basic Electronics" Engineering has been renamed to "Basic Engineering" Targeting has been renamed to "Elementary Targeting"
How about "Targeting for Dummies?"  |

tasman devil
Pangalactic Punks n' Playboys HUN Reloaded
30
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:21:00 -
[184] - Quote
I know I will be probably ignored but I just cannot let this go past without me saying my mind about it.
The whole refurbishing of the skill groups sounds nice, but...
BUT!
Let us have a look at what my problems with this reorganisation is: Armours Shields Electronic Systems Engineering Ship Modifications Targeting Scanning Are all related to ships and ship fitting one way or another. Plus PI has already its own group, but now they will be a part of another skill group GÇôread: they just dump PI into another group while at the same time clearly stating that they want every one of those groups to have a ground of their own GÇô sounds either hypocrite or not really thought out for me, youGÇÖll be the judge on that! :P
So what SHOULD we do? If you dig deep, really deep down there are three core elements of the skill sets: 1: Productions one way or another (production/invention/exploration, etc) 2: Ship commands one way or another (pvp/pve) 3: Character managements one way or another (implants, leadership, /corp/ally management, etc.) So how can we benefit from this? - By enabling sub-categories to emerge! It is really not a difficult thing but would enable to have a logical build-up of skills:
Spaceship Command ALL T1 ship command skills Gö£ Advanced Ships (Tech 2 ship command skills) Gö£ Armour Management (Armour skills) Gö£ Drone Management (Drone skills) Gö£ Electronic Systems Management (CPU skills) Gö£ Electronic Warfare Management (EW / Anti-EW skills) Gö£ Engineering Management (PG skills) Gö£ Gunnery (Gunnery skills) Gö£ Missiles (Missile skills) Gö£ Navigation Management (Navigation skills) Gö£ Shield Management (Shield skills) Gö£ Ship Modifications (Rigs and T3 subsystems skills)
Pilot Enhancement (Clone skills) Gö£ Corporation Management (Corporation stuff(NO POS!)) Gö£ Neural Enhancement (Implants and boosters) Gö£ Leadership Enhancement (Leadership skills) Gö£ Social Relations (Social skills)
Science (Generic Science skills) Gö£ Production (Manufacturing skills) Gö£ Research (Invention, hacking, salvaging) Gö£ Planetary and Personal Production (PI and POS skills) Gö£ Resource Processing (Reprocess) Gö£ Resource Harvesting (Mining) Gö£ Trade Management (Trade skills)
I try to clear the dust a little:
Ship Commands: Everything related to ships (read: skills that affect ship properties when trained), basic command and module enabling skills go into here (odd one out for example: bubbles as they require anchoring which will be in Science in this new order)
Pilot Enhancements: Everything related to having a better performing character and cross-character relations. Implants, boosters, corporations skills, social standing. (read everything that affects the CHARACTER and/or the player GÇô and the player relations)
Science: Here goes everything related to acquiring stuff. (read: building stuff, erecting stuff (POS, Station), mining stuff, looting stuff, trading stuff etc).
I don't belive in reincarnation I've never believed in it in my previous lives either... |

Luscius Uta
Unleashed' Fury Forsaken Federation
44
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:21:00 -
[185] - Quote
What is the reason for this, Microsoft taking over CCP? |

Janeway84
Masters Of Destiny Pride Before Fall
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:32:00 -
[186] - Quote
sounds like ok changes to me, except starship command should stay like it is. Star ship piloting sounds to me like it could be navigation skills and not starship command skill. Besides Starship command sounds more epic than piloting  |

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
196
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:34:00 -
[187] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:What is the reason for this, Microsoft taking over CCP? Probably hired some new devs that had hard time to understand the game and felt the need to dumb game down for personal convenience. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Reikoku Ao
High Seas Empire
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:45:00 -
[188] - Quote
"Iq Cadaen" wrote:Some pretty bad Engrish in there. Some suggestions for improvement:
"Multiple Targeting" sounds ridiculous, change to "Multi-Targeting" and "Advanced Multi-Targeting". "Electronic System" group should be "Electronic Systems" or, even better, "Electronic Warfare [Systems]". "Missiles" might be better as "Missile Systems" or just keep it as is. "Shields" and "Armor" to "Shield Systems" and "Armor Systems". "Spaceship Piloting" should just stay "Spaceship Command", there's just no way "Piloting" would sound good there. "Targeting" to "Sensors & Targeting"
This.
Especially Multiple Targeting and Spaceship Piloting, they sound so wrong I'm considering actually opening my eyes (see portrait) and taking a closer look at this to prevent a disaster from falling upon New Eden. |

Daedra Blue
Atomic Biohazard
52
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:54:00 -
[189] - Quote
While i do applaud the take on this and i think there should be some work done let's not get over ourselves and turn this naming into Teletubbies. Seriously Spaceship Piloting? What are we 5?
Come on it's a SCI-FI MMO, we don't have to dumb it down THAT MUCH! If its confusing to a 5 year old then that's fine!
Make some corrections to the namings but don't turn them all into 1 word bonanza. |

The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
116
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 12:20:00 -
[190] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Targeting: for the same reasons as above, this skill has been renamed "Multiple Targeting".
Multitasking: has been renamed "Advanced Multiple Targeting" for the same reasons as above.
I think "Multitargeting" and "Advanced Multitargeting" would be easier to use, if you explain people what skills they need on voice. I do appreciate the name changes, since I always get a headache if I need to explain to people what a skill named Multitasking does and why they need it for specific things, like flying Logistics. Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
|

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
935
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 12:30:00 -
[191] - Quote
This change is good.
Will be a lot easier for new players to identify skills and what they do.
Hope this will also impact in game items and ships prerequisites description so noobies can easily look at and say "yeah I need to learn this to x and that to y"
Awesome, keep the good work. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |

anishamora
Atelierele Grivita
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 12:46:00 -
[192] - Quote
tasman devil wrote:I know I will be probably ignored but I just cannot let this go past without me saying my mind about it. The whole refurbishing of the skill groups sounds nice, but... BUT! Let us have a look at what my problems with this reorganisation is: Armours Shields Electronic Systems Engineering Ship Modifications Targeting Scanning Are all related to ships and ship fitting one way or another. Plus PI has already its own group, but now they will be a part of another skill group GÇôread: they just dump PI into another group while at the same time clearly stating that they want every one of those groups to have a ground of their own GÇô sounds either hypocrite or not really thought out for me, youGÇÖll be the judge on that! :P So what SHOULD we do? If you dig deep, really deep down there are three core elements of the skill sets: 1: Productions one way or another (production/invention/exploration, etc) 2: Ship commands one way or another (pvp/pve) 3: Character managements one way or another (implants, leadership, /corp/ally management, etc.) So how can we benefit from this? - By enabling sub-categories to emerge! It is really not a difficult thing but would enable to have a logical build-up of skills: Spaceship Command ALL T1 ship command skills Gö£ Advanced Spacehip Command (Tech 2 ship command skills) Gö£ Armour Management (Armour skills) Gö£ Drone Management (Drone skills) Gö£ Electronic Systems Management (CPU skills) Gö£ Electronic Warfare Management (EW / Anti-EW skills) Gö£ Engineering Management (PG skills) Gö£ Gunnery Management (Gunnery skills) Gö£ Missiles Management (Missile skills) Gö£ Navigation Management (Navigation skills) Gö£ Shield Management (Shield skills) Gö£ Ship Modifications (Rigs and T3 subsystems skills) Pilot Enhancement (Clone skills) Gö£ Corporation Management (Corporation stuff(NO POS!)) Gö£ Neural Enhancement (Implants and boosters) Gö£ Leadership Enhancement (Leadership skills) Gö£ Social Relations (Social skills) Science (Generic Science skills) Gö£ Production (Manufacturing skills) Gö£ Research (Invention, hacking, salvaging) Gö£ Planetary and Personal Production (PI and POS skills) Gö£ Resource Processing (Reprocess) Gö£ Resource Harvesting (Mining) Gö£ Trade Management (Trade skills) I try to clear the dust a little: Ship Commands: Everything related to ships (read: skills that affect ship properties when trained), basic command and module enabling skills go into here (odd one out for example: bubbles as they require anchoring which will be in Science in this new order) Pilot Enhancements: Everything related to having a better performing character and cross-character relations. Implants, boosters, corporations skills, social standing. (read everything that affects the CHARACTER and/or the player GÇô and the player relations) Science: Here goes everything related to acquiring stuff. (read: building stuff, erecting stuff (POS, Station), mining stuff, looting stuff, trading stuff etc).
I really like this, intuitive and organized in a logical manner. CCP should really take this advice/idea. |

Caleb Ayrania
TarNec Invisible Exchequer
183
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 12:54:00 -
[193] - Quote
Fixing skill groups.. Awesome..
New trend of dumbing down names, to make things easier.. STOP IT.
Make better wiki entries. Make links in the item info that use IGB and take us directly to WIKI.
Also make SSO + IGB to WIKI so we can create and edit directly and with our Character as editor. That way SO many new options and things can emerge!
|

Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
446
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 13:23:00 -
[194] - Quote
I can't find information about these details:
Doomsday Operation -> you put this inside the gunnery? Jump Portal Operation -> you put this inside the Navigation group?
Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration ??? Test 1, 2, 3... |

Vesan Terakol
Sad Face Enterprises
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 13:24:00 -
[195] - Quote
Guys, how about you make the skills less of a pain to navigate through by giving us a visually better menu for them. Like the one for DUST - showing visually how skills are connected - instead of arbitrarily bunching them together (rigs and subsystems or PI resource band resolution and scanning in same groups, lol) or trying to come up with a stupid names (won't even start it, people before me said it clear enough).
While I support the general idea of redoing the skills organization, what is the most confusing thing for a new player are not the names - the old names sound cool (most of the times). Engineering and electronics are excellent as they are, because as a new player, still caught by the excitement of just starting to play, you feel like you're training something meaningful - you can obviously both the chief engineer and the science officer of your ship! (Would love to make a Star Trek reference, but i haven't watched the series/movies enough to remember the names). Remember, you're dealing with either people that love to immerse themselves in Sci-Fi worlds and actually find the names cool, or people that are smart enough to make sense of the skill names, even if they don't care. Some name changer were good tho, as some names are ambiguous at best.
Anyway, the point I want to make is that its not the names, but the presentation that confuses people. It is a long list, that will give you a headache the first time you see it. It will continuously haunt you, as understanding the connections between those skills will require you to memorize every single entry.
What i suggest is having something like radial (or more like sphere in order to allow the visualization of the sometimes complex skill interaction) skill web, that could possibly integrate both the skill list and the certificate list - imagine the skill web being like the branches of a simplified tree and the certificates - like the foliage, that grows around those branches. And please, don't say its too complex - surely a bunch of experts in programing can make sense of interconnecting systems.
Your "improvement" has the right spirit, but is nowhere near what you should do about the skills and certificates - its an excuse, and you can spend your time on something more meaningful. |

Rob Crowley
State War Academy
90
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 13:34:00 -
[196] - Quote
Good changes:
- Nanite Control
- Multitasking
- splitting up some overloaded skill groups
Bad changes:
- Spaceship Piloting: this sounds cheap and childish
- Multiple Targeting: sounds odd, there were several better ideas in this thread
- Subsystems should stay alone in their group because they are special snowflake skills of which you can lose SPs, also the groups of subsystems and rigs are already large enough on their own without combining them
- Missiles: sounds too simple, kinda like if you'd rename Gunnery to Guns, at least call it Missile Systems or something like that
- Electronics and Engineering were good names really, they don't need more descriptiveness in their name and the new overspecific names don't really fit for such basic skills and their use as prereqs for many different things
- I'm not entirely sure what to think about splitting up PI skills, their new locations make some sense, but then again PI is really its own minigame and you'll want all the relevant skills for it or none at all.
Noriko Mai wrote:And if you change the market groups and move subystems together with rigs it will be a mess. Good morning! Subsystems have shared a market group with rigs for as long as they exist.
pmchem wrote:every third party dev dealing with skills just slit their wrists I'm a third party dev dealing with skills (quite possibly we have more skill related functionality than any other third party tool) and I don't think I'll have to resort to wrist slitting. All these changes should not require any work except including the new SDE. Skill trees are generated automatically and whenever a specific skill is required for something it should be identified by typeID, not by name. |

Danny Centauri
Silver Octopus Infernal Octopus
81
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 13:40:00 -
[197] - Quote
Awesome change, makes me wonder why it has been so cryptic in the past. No longer do I have to go digging for battleship construction skill forgetting what it comes under. Only confusing thing is that to build rigs you need skills from ship modification and production.
Not sure how you would handle skills falling under primary and secondary categories but 99.99% sure it will be out of scope of the task you've been given.
Think it would help new players in long run integrating a basic version of EVE mon into the client, then agents as rewards can give them their early skill plans. Really need to do a lot more to educate the don't bother joining a corp masses to keep them in game and funding cool stuff for everyone. EVE Manufacturing Guide - Simple guides to manufacturing in EVE for both beginners and more experienced players. |

Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
446
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 13:45:00 -
[198] - Quote
First impression looks good, but you are completely ignoring industry importance and specificity by mixing some industry skills in where they should not be (I'm referring to PI stuff) and not separating mining from refining activities.
Industry could get more love and be clearly separated in this skill re-shifting.
Industry
+ Production (good change)
Advanced Mass Production, Battleship Construction, Capital Ship Construction, Cruiser Construction, Drug Manufacturing, Frigate Construction, Industrial Construction, Industry, Mass Production, Outpost Construction, Production Efficiency, Supply Chain Management skills
+ Research (new name instead of Science)
Advanced Laboratory Operation, Amarr Encryption Methods, Amarrian Starship Engineering, Astronautic Engineering, Caldari Encryption Methods, Caldari Starship Engineering, Defensive Subsystem Technology, Electromagnetic Physics, Electronic Engineering, Electronic Subsystem Technology, Engineering Subsystem Technology, Gallente Encryption Methods, Gallentean Starship Engineering, Graviton Physics, High Energy Physics, Hydromagnetic Physics, Laboratory Operation, Laser Physics, Mechanical Engineering, Metallurgy, Minmatar Encryption Methods, Minmatar Starship Engineering, Molecular Engineering, Nanite Engineering, Nuclear Physics, Offensive Subsystem Technology, Plasma Physics, Propulsion Subsystem Technology, Quantum Physics, Research, Research Project Management, Reverse Engineering, Rocket Science, Science, Scientific Networking, Sleeper Technology, Takmahl Technology, Talocan Technology, Yan Jung Technology
+ Resource Harvesting (Mining only skills)
Astrogeology, Deep Core Mining, Gas Cloud Harvesting, Ice Harvesting, Mining, Mining Upgrades, Salvaging,
+ Resource Processing (Reprocess only skills)
Arkonor Processing, Bistot Processing, Crokite Processing, Dark Ochre Processing, Gneiss Processing, Hedbergite Processing, Hemorphite Processing, Ice Processing, Industrial Reconfiguration, Jaspet Processing, Kernite Processing, Mercoxit Processing, Omber Processing, Plagioclase Processing, Pyroxeres Processing, Refinery Efficiency, Refining, Scordite Processing, Scrapmetal Processing, Spodumain Processing and Veldspar Processing
+ Planetary and Moon Interation (PI and POS skills)
Command Center Upgrades, Interplanetary Consolidation, Advanced Planetology, Planetology, Remote Sensing, Anchoring, Starbase Defense Management
+ Trade
Accounting, Broker Relations, Contracting, Corporation Contracting, Daytrading, Margin Trading, Marketing, Procurement, Retail, Trade, Tycoon, Visibility, Wholesale Test 1, 2, 3... |

Geairt Annok
Born Crazy
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 13:55:00 -
[199] - Quote
Please leave Subsystems in their current category separate from the rigging skills. Currently they are alll together for each race and easy to navigate. If you mix them with the rigging skills they will be separated less easy to navigate.
You can also leave the targeting skills alone they make sense and those new names are weak. Keep any mind any cahnge you ake we will continue to call them by the old name anyway and it will only confuse new players who talk to the old ones. |

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
936
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:04:00 -
[200] - Quote
Rob Crowley wrote:Bad changes: [list]
Spaceship Piloting: this sounds cheap and childish
Indeed
How about "Space Craft Credentials" ? *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |

Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
446
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:11:00 -
[201] - Quote
Just to clarify since I don't see any CSM saying nothing against it, the CSM agrees with this change: Spaceship command -> Spaceship Piloting ?
really?
explain
Edit: Can a CSM post here the official CSM position about those changes, now that the cat is out I would like to hear a official word about the people that represent me about this proposal. Test 1, 2, 3... |

Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:15:00 -
[202] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium i can see why those group changes will help. Also the name changes of some Skills like (Spaceship command, Engineering and Electronics) werent necessary but i can live with that.
Now what makes me worry is that the old skills were grouped in the matter of the Attributes u needed mapped to train them the fastest. So now the Skill Tree in your character and the training queue atleast need 2 columns with primary attrib and secondary attrib so that u can see directly (like the groups before) what effects the training time. (Also it may help to add that to the market too but i dont know how precisly).
-1 as long as the attrib problem isnt solved. if it is solved +1
EDIT: also be able to sort skills alphabetical by primary skill or secondary attrib. if sorted by attrib do a secondary sort alphabetical |

M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
128
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:19:00 -
[203] - Quote
I'm fine with all of it except for "Spaceship Piloting", it sounds like something out of a videogame for 10 year olds. Spaceship Command sounds more futuristic/more like EVE, so that one should stay.
Also, Subsystems and Rigs should be in different groups. They are two different ship modifications and having a "Subsystem" category isn't confusing, its quite self explanatory. Having "Ship Modifications" complicates things more so than having a "Subsystems" and "Rigs" category.
Other than those two things, some really good changes in here, like putting the armor skills and probing skills in their own categories.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan Turing Tested
591
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:22:00 -
[204] - Quote
Why not just call it Piloting?
What else are we going to Pilot except spaceships?
Also
Arent we commanders?
Has the concept of crew finally been eradicated? " Ramona McCandless, you're my hero." - Domanique Altares, Rifterlings, Point Blank Alliance
Tell The Others |

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
198
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:24:00 -
[205] - Quote
Jeanne-Luise Argenau wrote:Now what makes me worry is that the old skills were grouped in the matter of the Attributes u needed mapped to train them the fastest. So now the Skill Tree in your character and the training queue atleast need 2 columns with primary attrib and secondary attrib so that u can see directly (like the groups before) what effects the training time. (Also it may help to add that to the market too but i dont know how precisly).
-1 as long as the attrib problem isnt solved. if it is solved +1 Its not like you're making plans without 3rd party tools, and those cant care less about skill groups in EvE. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
446
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:26:00 -
[206] - Quote
after a second reading a couple of last comments:
Quote:Electronic System: is the old GÇ£electronicsGÇ¥ group. Now only contains offense EW related skills.
Cloaking... is offense, who I'm attacking when I cloak?
??? really ??? OMG why? what was wrong with the old name?
Quote:Weapon Upgrades in the Engineering group.
I know that this is a cpu / weapon fitting skill, but it sounds like is out of place, please review/rename this, I look at it and always get a felling that doesn't belong there
"Scanning: contains all skills tied with that theme (including PI scanning skills, probe scanning, hacking mini-game and survey skills).
Contains the Advanced Planetology, Archaeology, Astrometric Acquisition, Astrometric Pinpointing, Astrometric Rangefinding, Astrometrics, Hacking, Planetology, Remote Sensing and Survey skills."
First comment is why PI stuff is here. Second is that I get the feeling this group existence was forced because of hacking and archaeology seam to homeless, because PI had a home and the Astrometric skills fit very well in the Navigation Folder. My recomendation, Put the PI stuff back, put the Astrometric in the navigation and move the Hacking and Archaeology to the Electronic System folder. If it has cloaking it can also have these 2 inside. Test 1, 2, 3... |

Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:26:00 -
[207] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Jeanne-Luise Argenau wrote:Now what makes me worry is that the old skills were grouped in the matter of the Attributes u needed mapped to train them the fastest. So now the Skill Tree in your character and the training queue atleast need 2 columns with primary attrib and secondary attrib so that u can see directly (like the groups before) what effects the training time. (Also it may help to add that to the market too but i dont know how precisly).
-1 as long as the attrib problem isnt solved. if it is solved +1 Its not like you're making plans without 3rd party tools, and those cant care less about skill groups in EvE.
i use 3rd party tools like evemon but i plan by using the groups so that i directly know what attribs r needed and by mixing the groups that becomes a pain in the ass |

Nightshade Mary
Sarz'na Khumatari The Unthinkables
18
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:27:00 -
[208] - Quote
Well I know one thing, I'll miss the old names.
There's nothing wrong with the old names; some of the suggestions that CCP makes are scary steps down the WoW street.
Seriously.
EvE is complex, it's not a game for your average gamer, please don't turn it into some empty shell of itself.
Next thing you know we'll be able to have a parrot in our captain's quarters...
-Frank |

Ransu Asanari
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union The Predictables
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:31:00 -
[209] - Quote
Quote:Do you hear that sound? It's as if millions of Wiki searchers suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.
- EVE University
|

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan Turing Tested
591
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:32:00 -
[210] - Quote
Nightshade Mary wrote:Well I know one thing, I'll miss the old names. There's nothing wrong with the old names; some of the suggestions that CCP makes are scary steps down the WoW street. Seriously. EvE is complex, it's not a game for your average gamer, please don't turn it into some empty shell of itself. Next thing you know we'll be able to have a parrot in our captain's quarters...  -Frank
Yup parrots dont exist in space games only in fantasy as they arent real animals >.< " Ramona McCandless, you're my hero." - Domanique Altares, Rifterlings, Point Blank Alliance
Tell The Others |

Hottspitta jR
Knights of Azrael Circle-Of-Two
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:33:00 -
[211] - Quote
marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better
I'm with this guy as well.
I think the idea behind the group change is good. However finding names to change because your bored is not cool. Not only are you making it harder on more of the experienced players to teach newer guys but your giving us a headache by needing to rename things that never needed a name change in the first place.
If it doesn't need fixing don't fix it! With that in mind awesome group change proposals but stop with the idiotic name changes that don't change the way we think of something other then its looks. Hottspitta jR / Harbinger'of'Life |

Atlanti IV
Apex Nebula Ventures
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:35:00 -
[212] - Quote
Defiant Blessings wrote:- Spaceship Command +1
- Target Acquisition / Advanced Target Acquisition +1
- Subsystem skills independent category +1
- Planetary Interaction skills independent category +1

All of these then I'm behind the changes
|

Daenna Chrysi
Omega Foundry Unit Shadows Of Betrayal
38
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:42:00 -
[213] - Quote
how about "Neurotoxin Tolerance"? |

Ketplunk
Boris Johnson's Love Children
15
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:46:00 -
[214] - Quote
Quote:Implants > Skill Harviring: sorted harwiring implants to match the groups above.
Two typos there just so you know.
Otherwise, the changes aren't anything special, nothing exactly game breaking (hopefully!). |

Evanova Android
Traquenard Labs
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:57:00 -
[215] - Quote
pmchem wrote:every third party dev dealing with skills just slit their wrists
I admit I had a thought there. But then, how am I going to write code without wrists? |

Jerick Ludhowe
trolllolcorp
476
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 15:04:00 -
[216] - Quote
Nice, another change that has nothing to do with anything that no one ever complained about... |

Zaxix
Long Jump.
146
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 15:08:00 -
[217] - Quote
Anything that makes the game more logical is a good thing. But if you're going to be doing this anyway, might as well use the opportunity to clean up the naming conventions. There have been lots of good suggestions in the thread. I also like the suggestion to keep subsystems in their own subcategory.
I would be even happier to see some new filter/view system that allowed me to setup my own views, e.g. display spaceship command skills by race or cap/sub cap, similar to the market ship class display. And while you're in there, add a skills for ship filter so i can enter/select a ship and see what i need to fly it on my own character sheet. You already display on ship info, but its buried many clicks into either a search result or, more likely, a market UI walk. In the spirit of making the game more logical, anything that gets us closer to having an ingame evemon or eft is a good thing. Third party apps are great and the people who create and support them are saints, but players really shouldn't have to create something to handle such a basic function of any game. Especially one with as many choices as this one. ***Prodigal Frog***
|

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
5402
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 15:10:00 -
[218] - Quote
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Rob Crowley wrote:Bad changes: [list]
Spaceship Piloting: this sounds cheap and childish
Indeed How about "Space Craft Credentials" ? Sounds like it could be confused with certificates and the actual skills you learn aren't really about credentials in any way. That isn't compatible with the initial purpose of this change. Since the skills are about learning how to better control and command your spaceships, an appropriate name should be something relating to Spaceship Command & Control. Except no spaceship piloting. It's like having a skill called car driving. It just sounds wrong. |

Speedkermit Damo
Callide Vulpis Curatores Veritatis Alliance
74
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 15:10:00 -
[219] - Quote
Changing the names of a few skills and rearranging them a bit. Really?
Pointless tinkering!
Couldn't you find something a bit more important to work on? it's not like the players haven't been asking you devs for long enough.
POS's Fixing Sov off-grid boosting Fixing Sov AFK cloaking Fixing Sov Passive income - Moon goo Fixing Sov Don't Panic.
|

Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
446
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 15:23:00 -
[220] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Changing the names of a few skills and rearranging them a bit. Really?
Pointless tinkering!
Couldn't you find something a bit more important to work on? it's not like the players haven't been asking you devs for long enough.
POS's Fixing Sov off-grid boosting Fixing Sov AFK cloaking Fixing Sov Passive income - Moon goo Fixing Sov
you have a point, but CCP wants to clean/fix all the stuff that scares off the newbies first.
You, me, we are already dependent, your money is in their pockets, now they want other people money.
In the end of the day this is a business an money comes first. Don't forget that when you see them making changes to things that vets don't care about. Skill change is the bottom of any backlog list of a vet player like us, in CCP is in the top... $
Well, just do like I do, embrace the opportunity and try to make this change a good one, even if is not important. Test 1, 2, 3... |

Oraac Ensor
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
260
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 15:42:00 -
[221] - Quote
Systems Online wrote:I do not like a skill name starting with an acronym. Pronouncing "SEE PEE YOU" Management. is just awkward. CPU is not an acronym. If it were, it would be pronounced "c'pew".
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:* Also Armor Honeycombing skill sounds silly and not sci-fi-ish while Armor (Plating) Management/Distribution will be much better imo. Honeycombed armour is, by definition, not plating. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
178
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 15:51:00 -
[222] - Quote
Talking about armour honeycombing makes me think well if this skill reduces the penalty of armour plating . Why doesn't shield extenders have a skill to reduce their penalty ..
Shield Extender Efficiency 5% reduction of signature radius penalty on shield extenders Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767
Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Adunh Slavy
1089
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 16:00:00 -
[223] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Spaceship Piloting: is the old Spaceship Command group, no change except with the name.
Yuck! The word 'command' has so much more to it than 'piloting'. Any jerk off can be a pilot, but not everyone can 'command'.
We're supposed to be these super powerful semi-god like beings, compared to the ants on the planets. |

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
198
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 16:04:00 -
[224] - Quote
Oraac Ensor wrote:Systems Online wrote:I do not like a skill name starting with an acronym. Pronouncing "SEE PEE YOU" Management. is just awkward. CPU is not an acronym. If it were, it would be pronounced "c'pew". If CPU isnt acronym for Central Processing Unit then what is? Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Galen Dnari
Fhloston Paradise E.Y
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 16:13:00 -
[225] - Quote
Kyt Thrace wrote:MOVE the Anchoring Skill, it DOES NOT belong under Corporation Management. :P
So where does it belong? http://eveboard.com/ub/1939472205-31.png |

Galen Dnari
Fhloston Paradise E.Y
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 16:16:00 -
[226] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Oraac Ensor wrote:Systems Online wrote:I do not like a skill name starting with an acronym. Pronouncing "SEE PEE YOU" Management. is just awkward. CPU is not an acronym. If it were, it would be pronounced "c'pew". If CPU isnt acronym for Central Processing Unit then what is? He's right. An acronym is, by definition, an abbreviation formed from the initial letters of other words and pronounced as a word. CPU is an abbreviation. http://eveboard.com/ub/1939472205-31.png |

Galen Dnari
Fhloston Paradise E.Y
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 16:22:00 -
[227] - Quote
Throktar wrote:+1 to most of this. Keep Spaceship Command...I command, I do not "pilot"
You are both right and wrong about that. The difference being that a pilot does not necessarily command, though a ship commander must necessarily be able to pilot (though in pre-capsuleer days he would typically delegate that to a subordinate). http://eveboard.com/ub/1939472205-31.png |

Sugar Kyle
The humbleless Crew
262
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 16:34:00 -
[228] - Quote
Spaceship Command please. Spaceship piloting is terrible.
Multitasking was a great name. I know we are making things streamlined but some of these name changes are, frankly boring and uninteresting. They carry no creative flare or flavor for Eve as its own universe. Many times the name change appears to be done just because vs a need. Multitasking was not a mind bogglingly complex thing but it was cute and fit.
Tilde soaked words from something kinda like a pirate. |

Tu'yak Marowshay
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
39
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 16:48:00 -
[229] - Quote
WHY DO YOU KEEP DUMBING DOWN THIS GAME. You keep simplifying everything for 13 year olds getting bored with WoW.
I personally don't play this game because it is easy or simple, it is appealing because it is hard and confusing and if you don't have a decent head on your shoulders you won't do very well.
Many other more important problems that you need to address before making this game simplified and bringing in a bunch of middle school kids with daddy's credit card.
How about sov mechanics Limited number of missions for high sec bears Lack of **** to do in wormholes
To name a few ^^^^
From now on just name all the skills "ALADEEN" I am sure it will work out just fine.
New bro - "Hey what skill gives more tracking out of my guns". Bitter Vet - "Aladeen"
|

Leskit
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
29
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 16:51:00 -
[230] - Quote
I see what you're trying to do,Ytterbium, and I can appreciate that, but some of that just feels like dumbing-down terms. Spaceship piloting is terrible. Command is so much better. Command implies control, piloting is just getting in, and flooring the gas pedal. Multitasking was a great one too; if you really have to change it, it could be "target multitasking", not advanced target management. blech.
renaming nanite control-good idea. I like breaking shield and armor into their own groups. Electronic warfare drone interfacing- the name doesn't relate to what it does :\ |

Ka Kapaj
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 16:55:00 -
[231] - Quote
Tu'yak Marowshay wrote:WHY DO YOU KEEP DUMBING DOWN THIS GAME. You keep simplifying everything for 13 year olds getting bored with WoW.
I personally don't play this game because it is easy or simple, it is appealing because it is hard and confusing and if you don't have a decent head on your shoulders you won't do very well.
Many other more important problems that you need to address before making this game simplified and bringing in a bunch of middle school kids with daddy's credit card.
How about sov mechanics Limited number of missions for high sec bears Lack of **** to do in wormholes
To name a few ^^^^
From now on just name all the skills "ALADEEN" I am sure it will work out just fine.
New bro - "Hey what skill gives more tracking out of my guns". Bitter Vet - "Aladeen"
That'd actually make the game harder, not easier.
That said, +1 Keep "Spaceship Command" as it is, though. |

Ka Kapaj
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:00:00 -
[232] - Quote
Tu'yak Marowshay wrote:WHY DO YOU KEEP DUMBING DOWN THIS GAME. You keep simplifying everything for 13 year olds getting bored with WoW.
I personally don't play this game because it is easy or simple, it is appealing because it is hard and confusing and if you don't have a decent head on your shoulders you won't do very well.
Many other more important problems that you need to address before making this game simplified and bringing in a bunch of middle school kids with daddy's credit card.
How about sov mechanics Limited number of missions for high sec bears Lack of **** to do in wormholes
To name a few ^^^^
From now on just name all the skills "ALADEEN" I am sure it will work out just fine.
New bro - "Hey what skill gives more tracking out of my guns". Bitter Vet - "Aladeen"
Stop being such an 3L337 player.
A game's difficulty should lay within its gameplay contents, not within the labeling.
It's not the shiny package that makes a gift pack good, it's the content inside it.
|

adopt
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
596
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:14:00 -
[233] - Quote
Can we please keep the rigging and subsystem skills separate? It's confusing if they are put together. Shadoo > Always remember to fit Cynosural Field Generator I, have 450 Liquid Ozone in your cargo and convo a friendly Pandemic Legion member if you have a capital or super capital ship tackled.
|

Ka Kapaj
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:17:00 -
[234] - Quote
Leave the subsystem and rigging skills separated, please. |
|

CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
2152

|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:25:00 -
[235] - Quote
Update based on what we have seen so far.
Starship Piloting instead of Starship Command:
- For this particular point we wanted to distinguish the skill and the group so they do not overlap - it also ties on other plans we have on the future. However, we hear you, agreed it sounds less appealing than the one we have currently - we'll discuss this point internally again.
Energy Management and Operation:
- Changing them to Capacitor Management and Capacitor System Operation makes sense, thanks for catching that.
Primary and secondary attribute concerns:
- Relax, we thought this over, and this is less of an issue than you think it is
 - Armor: only consists of Intelligence / Memory skills
- Electronic Systems: same, Intelligence / Memory
- Engineering: mainly has Intelligence / Memory skills, except for Weapons Upgrades and Advanced Weapons Upgrades, requiring either Perception / Memory or Perception / Willpower.
- Neural Enhancement: mainly has Intelligence / Memory, except for the Informorph Phsychology skill that has Charisma / Willpower.
- Production: skills only require Memory / Intelligence or Intelligence / Memory, which is not a problem.
- Resource Processing: mainly has Memory / Intelligence skills, except for Interplanetary Consolidation, Command Center Upgrades requiring Charisma / Intelligence, and Astrogeology, requiring Intelligence / Memory.
- Scanning: only has Intelligence / Memory skills.
- Science: skills all are Intelligence / Memory, except for Research Project Management, which is Memory / Charisma.
- Shields: have Intelligence / Memory attributes.
- Ship Modification: skills are either Intelligence / Memory, or Perception / Willpower for Offensive and Propulsion Subsystems, but this will exist no matter in which group Tech3 subsystem skills are.
- Targeting: are Intelligence / Memory based.
Multiple Targeting and Advanced Multiple Targeting:
- Agreed, it doesn't sound that great. As with Spaceship Piloting, this will be discussed internally again - some options listed in that thread sound promising, but please remember that we would ideally like skill names to be representative of what they actually do.
Where is the Cynosural Field Theory skill?
- In the Navigation group, will add that to the first thread, thanks.
Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing:
- Agreed the name doesn't really makes sense, we'll discuss that one as well.
Planetology and Subsystem groups:
- If possible we would like to separate skills by purpose, not feature. For instance we are not splitting Sience skills if they are based on Tech2 Invention or Tech3 reverse manufacturing.
How about Hardwiring Implants?
- Good point, suffixes need to be renamed to match the new groups as well.
Typos, typos everywhere! Seriously man, are you rolling your face on the keyboard when typing?
- Eeep sorry, didn't double-check the last section of the OP, will fix this now
 How dare you dumb the game down? Raaawrrrraaage!
- This expression, "dumbing the game down", is not appropriate here. EVE gameplay and sense of loss should be harsh, dark and unforgiving, in that there is no doubt and we agree completely. However, fighting the UI at every turn does not make one "elite" at the game - it just means you have become used to an old, outdated interface for too long. Simply put, the hard and unforgiving nature of EVE should not be to retrieve information on a basic level, it should be on how players act based on that information and all the gameplay that revolves around it.
How about moving the Anchoring skill out of the Corporation Management group?
- Definitely, CSM suggested moving it to the Electronic Systems group as it's tied with bubbles, but you could also argue it fits under Production as its tied with Starbases. What do you think?
In all cases, many thanks for the comments people!
|
|

Xolve
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1551
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:35:00 -
[236] - Quote
:cripes: Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
178
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:41:00 -
[237] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium what about navigation skill? being the same as the navigation set of skills Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767
Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Sugar Kyle
The humbleless Crew
262
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:41:00 -
[238] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: How about moving the Anchoring skill out of the Corporation Management group?
Definitely, CSM suggested moving it to the Electronic Systems group as it's tied with bubbles, but you could also argue it fits under Production as its tied with Starbases. What do you think?
[/list]
It would have functioned beautifully under the mechanics skill. But since you are onlining and offlining it may just belong to a computer/interface focused skill section.
I'm not rawr rage over the name changes. They make sense. I am more wondering why it is wrong to have some unique or interesting versions of things, such as multitasking, to describe it when the word does work, vs everything having to be multi-targets to advanced multi-targets. I don't have problems with the bulk of the changes or moving things into better sections.
I may simply like words too much and be one who finds appreciation in the game having a bit of its own lexicon and feel to terms. It is a future state with different social cultures. Comprehensible does not have to mean super simple. Appropriate and translatable. Understandable. It is the question of why would the topic of Spaceship Command come up at all as something that needed to change? I understand and appreciate that it has been readdressed. I don't understand why it happened in the first place.
What would Spaceship Command have been confused with that it needed to be updated to Spaceship Piloting to remove unnecessary complexity and update it from its outdated structure? Those are the little aspects of the proposed changes that make me a bit puzzled. Much of this makes complete sense and I agree. Yet, some of it seems to be touched just to be touched and change/updated/refreshed.
That is my 'rawr rage' I guess. Sorry if it sounds angry and full of emo.
Beyond that, thank you for reading through our feedback and integrating our opinions into your discussion and decisions. Tilde soaked words from something kinda like a pirate. |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
5644
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:42:00 -
[239] - Quote
Don't dump subsystems into the same group as rigging skills. That's a ******* awful idea and it causes the exact problem you're trying to fix with the science and mechanics skill groups.
Keep the subsystems skill group and add a rigging skill group. -áMy (mostly boring) Youtube channel. |

Elizabeth Aideron
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
54
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:45:00 -
[240] - Quote
Tu'yak Marowshay wrote:WHY DO YOU KEEP DUMBING DOWN THIS GAME. You keep simplifying everything for 13 year olds getting bored with WoW.
I personally don't play this game because it is easy or simple, it is appealing because it is hard and confusing and if you don't have a decent head on your shoulders you won't do very well.
Many other more important problems that you need to address before making this game simplified and bringing in a bunch of middle school kids with daddy's credit card.
How about sov mechanics Limited number of missions for high sec bears Lack of **** to do in wormholes
To name a few ^^^^
From now on just name all the skills "ALADEEN" I am sure it will work out just fine.
New bro - "Hey what skill gives more tracking out of my guns". Bitter Vet - "Aladeen"
looking things up in the wiki is appealing? |
|

CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
2153

|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:46:00 -
[241] - Quote
Going to edit my previous post to be less sarcastic - we value your feedback, which is why we're posting here.
Regarding the Subsystem / PI groups, we're not saying it's going to be final, we're just mentioning our preference here, we definitely see where you are coming from. |
|

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
178
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:47:00 -
[242] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Going to edit my previous post to be less sarcastic - we value your feedback, which is why we're posting here.
Regarding the Subsystem / PI groups, we're not saying it's going to be final, we're just mentioning our preference here, we definitely see where you are coming from.
arr but the sarcasm is the best bit :) Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767
Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
199
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 18:04:00 -
[243] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: Don't you think changing skill names is "dumbing the game down"?
- EVE gameplay and sense of loss should be harsh, dark and unforgiving, in that there is no doubt and we agree completely. However, fighting the UI at every turn should not be the main complexity point here - it just means players have become used to an old and outdated interface for too long. Simply put, the hard and unforgiving nature of EVE should not be to retrieve information on a basic level, it should be on how players act based on that information and interact with the gameplay that revolves around it.
In all cases, many thanks for the comments people!
If you want to fix "fighting UI" start with drone UI and corp management UI. Skill system is(was) ok. As i said earlier in this thread its not about dumbing game, but your new skill names lost flavor and became just another skills with generic names that doesnt have the feel of cold, harsh and unforgiving universe. The only sensible change was for Nanite Control skill. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Alexander the Great
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
91
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 18:13:00 -
[244] - Quote
While you're looking at inconsistence in skill names are you going to fix inconsistence in their effects and prerequisites?
One example is how Sentry drones skill differs from all other drone types, explained in detail here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=253506 |

Jhan Niber
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 18:19:00 -
[245] - Quote
Doesn't make sense to get rid of the subsystem category. Subsystems are integral necessary parts of Tech 3 ships, unlike rigs, and it would be clearer to leave the subsystem group.
Forgot to say that otherwise it looks good to me. One last suggestion, it would be nice to see something like (P, W) next to a skill indicating the primary and secondary attribute of Perception Willpower. |

gramafon
Sacred Temple Darkness of Despair
18
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 18:19:00 -
[246] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Going to edit my previous post to be less sarcastic - we value your feedback, which is why we're posting here.
Regarding the Subsystem / PI groups, we're not saying it's going to be final, we're just mentioning our preference here, we definitely see where you are coming from. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3299526#post3299526 please read this (if you didnt do it before).
I think its really easy to correct and could make EVE is much more better and easier for players  |

John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force Tribal Band
106
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 18:20:00 -
[247] - Quote
Clearly I'm a long way from being a noob and compared to when I started, this game is infinitely easier to get to grips with, so forgive me if I'm wrong in my assessment. Yet I can't help feel that the way skills are presented is antiquated, having not much changed in the last ten years and where the problem of over complexity lies. You have a character sheet showing a series of cascading drop down lists providing minimal visual information by way of five squares to indicate levels of training. The same applies to certificates.
What I feel would be much better is a more visual approach to the skill sheet is more along the lines of an organisational chart. Begin each with the base skill and then branching skills off that, showing clearly the skill path you're taking to your desired outcome. So let's say you have something simple like the Navigation skills. Rather than being held within a drop down menu, you visually represent them something like this. This is just a quick mock up just to give you an idea of what I mean. What I'm thinking is something like this.
The character sheet starts off not too dissimilar to what it is now but when you click on a skill category, it opens up an interactive window, similar to the character/ship picture sheet, containing the graph linking all skills within that category. Each circle is divided in to five segments, each representing a level of skill training. Each connecting line is red until the corresponding skills prerequisite level is reached. Hover over the skill and it tells you the required level needed to unlock its training. As you can now, you can filter between skills you have, skills you have and you can train or all skills available within that skill's category.
|

Phoenus
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
102
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 18:22:00 -
[248] - Quote
Please for the love of christ Ytterbium, learn how to spell armour properly.
You don't need to encourage the savages who have decimated the second most widely spoken language in the world. |

Titus Tallang
EVE University Ivy League
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 18:25:00 -
[249] - Quote
Elizabeth Aideron wrote:looking things up in the wiki is appealing?
To me, yes. Finding information provides a sense of accomplishment. |

Jakob Anedalle
Beelzebub Corp
60
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 18:44:00 -
[250] - Quote
Re: Starship Command / Piloting
Perhaps CCP is moving away from the idea of there being a big crew inside the ships. A crew that we always ignore or pretend aren't there because it would break other things? Trying out all the things to do here in Eve - it's quite a checklist. So I made a blog Jakob's Eve Checklist |

Morgred
Sidereal Ventures
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 18:53:00 -
[251] - Quote
what is grametiric sensor compensation? please tell me caldari ships still use gravimetric sensors to find stellar bodies instead of using words and alphabets to find these stellar bodies. (i jest of course)
what about planetary interaction? it makes sense that planet scanning goes with the other scanning skills but will the skills used to build better planet infrastructure be placed under the harvesting skill groups or the manufacturing skill groups? |

Bob Bedala
32
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 18:58:00 -
[252] - Quote
Probably the most important post here so far:
Crash Lander wrote:This is good however what does this mean for the primary and secondary attributes of the skills? Previously it was possible to guess (mostly correctly)
BAM! I think although good changes and overall helpful to new players, without better surfacing of the relations between skills & prim/sec attributes, it makes explaining that tricky topic to newer players more difficult.
Also +1 for Spaceship Command. |

Carmaine
The Awesome Corp
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 19:17:00 -
[253] - Quote
Dropping my 2 cents:
- Has people have already said, keep Spaceship Command, we are commanders, not pilots. We're not sitting on the deck and piloting our mighty battleships, we are on the deck ordering our men tasks that they were trained to do (on top of other things like the whole "we feel what the ship feels thing".) Same could be said about the targeting rename, very poorly done.
- Why is planetary Interaction split all over the place? Your intention is to make things cleaner and easier to understand by new players, than you go and move all the planetary interaction skills to different skill subsets. (Command Center Upgrades in Resource Processing? Advanced Planetology in Scanning (Btw, logy means science of/the study of, if anything it should be in science).)
- Keep the T3 tab, if anything you should be added more sub-tabs to that for each race, not removing it!
|

unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Transmission Lost
38
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 19:27:00 -
[254] - Quote
Mechanics seems an odd one out in the armor group maybe just call it armor or armor managment? |

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
199
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 19:28:00 -
[255] - Quote
Carmaine wrote:Dropping my 2 cents: [list]
Has people have already said, keep Spaceship Command, we are commanders, not pilots. We're not sitting on the deck and piloting our mighty battleships, we are on the deck ordering our men tasks that they were trained to do (on top of other things like the whole "we feel what the ship feels thing".)
To be precise we are not on ship's deck. I doubt there are decks on ships at all. Maintenance crew can be near gun ports or engine room, but there is no real need for deck. Capsuleer himself is located deep inside ship in capsule. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
178
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 19:39:00 -
[256] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Mechanics seems an odd one out in the armor group maybe just call it armor or armor managment?
its actually the Hull HP bonus skill ... hull upgrades is armour HP skill ... confusing isn't it .. i have played the game since 2010 and i still mix them up and have to look at evemon to go oh right that's what they do.. Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767
Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Carmaine
The Awesome Corp
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 19:47:00 -
[257] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Carmaine wrote:Dropping my 2 cents: [list]
Has people have already said, keep Spaceship Command, we are commanders, not pilots. We're not sitting on the deck and piloting our mighty battleships, we are on the deck ordering our men tasks that they were trained to do (on top of other things like the whole "we feel what the ship feels thing".)
To be precise we are not on ship's deck. I doubt there are decks on ships at all. Maintenance crew can be near gun ports or engine room, but there is no real need for deck. Capsuleer himself is located deep inside ship in capsule. Well maybe not on the deck but you get my point, I think there is a distinction between a pilot and a commander of a ship, even dictionary definition from Merriam-Webster points to the same conclusion. The commander/master of a ship (Can be called Captain) orders his crew in the navy, and it translates to the same thing in the air force, the commander/captain of a plane is an officer who commands the crew of an airplane.
Meanwhile pilot is either: a : one employed to steer a ship : helmsman b : a person who is qualified and usually licensed to conduct a ship into and out of a port or in specified waters c : a person who flies or is qualified to fly an aircraft or spacecraft Although it is not defined in definition C, we can assume that it refers to small planes, where you have little to no orders to give. |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
243
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 19:48:00 -
[258] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote:Just to clarify since I don't see any CSM saying nothing against it, the CSM agrees with this change: Spaceship command -> Spaceship Piloting ?
really?
explain
Edit: Can a CSM post here the official CSM position about those changes, now that the cat is out I would like to hear a official word about the people that represent me about this proposal.
Good luck with that, they are career politicians that turn invisible when the spotlight is on them. Tiericide is tiers by another name. |

Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
392
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 20:06:00 -
[259] - Quote
I think it would be really helpful to add sub-groups of skills.
Spaceship Piloting (SC, ACS, Cap ship) > Amarr Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Caldari Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Gallente Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Minmatar Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Tech 2 Spaceship Command (AS, Inty, Dic, HIC, HAC, etc)
Definitely feature creep, but it would make things a lot easier to manage. DirectX 11, it's not rocket appliance! |

Sarmatiko
1253
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 20:13:00 -
[260] - Quote
I wonder when devs get their hands on Thermodynamics.. "It's too confusing for average newbie Joe, poor dude cannot read skill description! Let's rename this to Module Overheating".
 -¥ |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
243
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 20:14:00 -
[261] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Update based on what we have seen so far.
Multiple Targeting and Advanced Multiple Targeting:
Agreed, it doesn't sound that great. As with Spaceship Piloting, this will be discussed internally again - some options listed in that thread sound promising, but please remember that we would ideally like skill names to be representative of what they actually do.
Target Acquisition and Advanced Target Acquisition, increased levels in either skill allow you to 'aquire' more targets etc. Tiericide is tiers by another name. |

Deornoth Drake
Black Hole Squadron
36
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 20:21:00 -
[262] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: snip Primary and secondary attribute concerns:
- Relax, we thought this over, and this is less of an issue than you think it is
 - Armor: only consists of Intelligence / Memory skills
- Electronic Systems: same, Intelligence / Memory
- Engineering: mainly has Intelligence / Memory skills, except for Weapons Upgrades and Advanced Weapons Upgrades, requiring either Perception / Memory or Perception / Willpower.
- Neural Enhancement: mainly has Intelligence / Memory, except for the Informorph Phsychology skill that has Charisma / Willpower.
- Production: skills only require Memory / Intelligence or Intelligence / Memory, which is not a problem.
- Resource Processing: mainly has Memory / Intelligence skills, except for Interplanetary Consolidation, Command Center Upgrades requiring Charisma / Intelligence, and Astrogeology, requiring Intelligence / Memory.
- Scanning: only has Intelligence / Memory skills.
- Science: skills all are Intelligence / Memory, except for Research Project Management, which is Memory / Charisma.
- Shields: have Intelligence / Memory attributes.
- Ship Modification: skills are either Intelligence / Memory, or Perception / Willpower for Offensive and Propulsion Subsystems, but this will exist no matter in which group Tech3 subsystem skills are.
- Targeting: are Intelligence / Memory based.
snip
Still no mention about if you're really intending to change them or not! Due to attribute remapping we do plan ahead about a year (more or less) so it would be great if you could let us know in advance (as in several months) before you change the primary and secondary attributes. Or you could just grant additional remaps or skill points. |

anishamora
Atelierele Grivita
30
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 20:21:00 -
[263] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote: If you want to fix "fighting UI" start with drone UI and corp management UI. Skill system is(was) ok. As i said earlier in this thread its not about dumbing game, but your new skill names lost flavor and became just another skills with generic names that doesn't have the feel of cold, harsh and unforgiving universe. The only sensible change was for Nanite Control skill.
This!!
The main focus should be on UI functionality that you use "on the field" or during combat where speed and precision are of the essence. I can live with spending 2-3 more minutes to search for a certain skill but that's a luxury that you cannot afford in combat or crisis situation. For moments like that you need a fast and sleek UI, not the turd that drone control is now.
|

Bloodpetal
Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal The Mockers AO
1325
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 20:39:00 -
[264] - Quote
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Update based on what we have seen so far.
Multiple Targeting and Advanced Multiple Targeting:
Agreed, it doesn't sound that great. As with Spaceship Piloting, this will be discussed internally again - some options listed in that thread sound promising, but please remember that we would ideally like skill names to be representative of what they actually do.
Target Acquisition and Advanced Target Acquisition, increased levels in either skill allow you to 'aquire' more targets etc.
Targeting Acquisition and Signal Acquisition are too similar sounding and do two totally different things.
All other "Management" Skills increase your ability to handle the "thing" that you are managing. So it should be Target Management. And Signal Acquisition should be changed to Targeting Acquisition, because you acquire targets faster. Where I am. |

Cyd Sunflare
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 20:44:00 -
[265] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:Little Dragon Khamez wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Update based on what we have seen so far.
Multiple Targeting and Advanced Multiple Targeting:
Agreed, it doesn't sound that great. As with Spaceship Piloting, this will be discussed internally again - some options listed in that thread sound promising, but please remember that we would ideally like skill names to be representative of what they actually do.
Target Acquisition and Advanced Target Acquisition, increased levels in either skill allow you to 'aquire' more targets etc. Targeting Acquisition and Signal Acquisition are too similar sounding and do two totally different things. All other "Management" Skills increase your ability to handle the "thing" that you are managing. So it should be Target Management. And Signal Acquisition should be changed to Targeting Acquisition, because you acquire targets faster.
I believe the "Signal Acquisition" you're looking for is actually Signature Analysis, which is fine as it is. |

Lunaleil Fournier
StarFleet Enterprises Red Alliance
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 20:59:00 -
[266] - Quote
Nice changes overall.
I'm with the others in thinking weapon upgrades and AWU seemed out of place even though they affect powergrid. Maybe its the name, or the skills being a pre-req for actual weapon upgrades and seige modules, or both.
Also, I'm not sure that targeting needs to be its own group. All of those skills would fit within the electronics group and be justified.
|

Number One Everything
Icanhazcheezburger
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 21:14:00 -
[267] - Quote
Deornoth Drake wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote: Primary and secondary attribute concerns: (more stuff)
Still no mention about if you're really intending to change them or not!Due to attribute remapping we do plan ahead about a year (more or less) so it would be great if you could let us know in advance (as in several months) before you change the primary and secondary attributes. Or you could just grant additional remaps or skill points.
The updated post Ytterbium posted is a lot better. Glad you're reading feedback, and everything in the update sounds reasonable. I would like a clarification on changing skill's attributes or not though. That's not cosmetic, that makes a difference. |

Lunaleil Fournier
StarFleet Enterprises Red Alliance
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 21:26:00 -
[268] - Quote
Went and re-read entire thread...all lot of synergy in this thread on feedback it seems.
+1 for keeping sub-systems separate from rigs. +1 keep spaceship command. +1 for target management or similar. +1 for changing tactical weapon reconfiguration to Siege module operation
I think that PI scanning should go in the PI group...its a different type of scanning and I think it still makes sense even though it slightly breaks the theme. There's always an exception to the rule! |

Davion Falcon
Daktaklakpak.
57
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 22:06:00 -
[269] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Simply put, the hard and unforgiving nature of EVE should not be to retrieve information on a basic level, it should be on how players act based on that information and interact with the gameplay that revolves around it.
Beautiful. Simply beautiful. Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 22:21:00 -
[270] - Quote
Post removed, decided bitter vet counter post was not worth another post from me. |

Ashterothi
Aideron Robotics
161
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 22:29:00 -
[271] - Quote
One of the ways I make my isk in this game is recruiting people into EVE with the recruit a friend option. I also like helping out newer players and help run a newbie friendly corp. On that note may I please ask you to not change the skills that match name with the categories.
As it stands right now I can tell people to go after the "named" skills if they do not know what else to do. Pretty much across the board, if you want to do stuff involving that category, training the skill that is named after the category is a good idea. This allows it to be very approachable to a newer player. They do not need to worry about certs, or reading to much of stuff. They know Engineering, Electronics, Gunnery, Drones, etc are all good skills.
It is quick to convey, easy to remember, and simple to execute. Change the names in my opinion clears up nothing, and disrupts this simple first step to understanding the skill system. Aideron Robotics is hiring for the Gallente Federation war effort! https://www.aideronrobotics.com/wiki/Applying |

Tony S7ark
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 22:37:00 -
[272] - Quote
marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better
|

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 22:51:00 -
[273] - Quote
tasman devil wrote:I know I will be probably ignored but I just cannot let this go past without me saying my mind about it. The whole refurbishing of the skill groups sounds nice, but... BUT! So what SHOULD we do? Spaceship Command ALL T1 ship command skills Gö£ Advanced Spacehip Command (Tech 2 ship command skills) Gö£ Armour Management (Armour skills) Gö£ Drone Management (Drone skills) Gö£ Electronic Systems Management (CPU skills) Gö£ Electronic Warfare Management (EW / Anti-EW skills) Gö£ Engineering Management (PG skills) Gö£ Gunnery Management (Gunnery skills) Gö£ Missiles Management (Missile skills) Gö£ Navigation Management (Navigation skills) Gö£ Shield Management (Shield skills) Gö£ Ship Modifications (Rigs and T3 subsystems skills)
1st thank you for posting a well thought out post.
2nd my only real criticism is that you use the word 'management' repeatedly for this group, management to me is a human/human interaction and doesn't fit well with human/machine interactions. I'm sure that human/machine interactions come with the title management in some form in RL but i just feel another word here would fit better. |

Tanaka Aiko
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
179
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 22:57:00 -
[274] - Quote
I like this change, it will be way clearer this way, and identical to the market. Less time lost searching where is this damn skill. |

Enthes goldhart
The Generic Pirate Corporation Fusion.
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 22:59:00 -
[275] - Quote
If it aint broke donGÇÖt fix it.
Some of these changed make sense and will make it simpler for new players but for everyone else (your current player base) itGÇÖs just a pain in the ass having to re-learn things.
Just seems like a waste of resources to me, IGÇÖd rather you put in a second undock button (where it used to be) and made it change colour when your undocking.
|

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 23:14:00 -
[276] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote:
you have a point, but CCP wants to clean/fix all the stuff that scares off the newbies first.
You, me, we are already dependent, our money is in their pockets, now they want other people money.
In the end of the day this is a business an money comes first. Don't forget that when you see them making changes to things that vets don't care about. Skill change is the bottom of any backlog list of a vet player like us, in CCP is in the top... $
Well, just do like I do, embrace the opportunity and try to make this change a good one, even if is not important for you.
Nice!
Big +1
You have a very good attitude about changes, none of us gets everything we want from changes to a game but a good healthy attitude about game development sure helps discussion about those changes immensely.
|

TehCloud
Carnivore Company
64
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 23:15:00 -
[277] - Quote
marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better
This!
Also "Shields" and "Armor" sounds incredibly lame.
Make it either Shield Tanking and Armor Tanking. Or maybe put "Management" after each.
just my 0.02ISK My Condor costs less than that module! |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 23:25:00 -
[278] - Quote
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
Target Acquisition and Advanced Target Acquisition, increased levels in either skill allow you to 'aquire' more targets etc.
I posted to this idea earlier, the term 'acquisition' is vague it could easily refer to locking time or an increase in targeting range, these are both abilities that increase your ability to 'acquire' a target. |

Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
157
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 23:34:00 -
[279] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: Electronic System: is the old GÇ£electronicsGÇ¥ group. Now only contains offense EW related skills.
Contains the Cloaking, Electronic Warfare, Frequency Modulation, Long Distance Jamming, Projected Electronic Counter Measures, Propulsion Jamming, Sensor Linking, Signal Dispersion, Signal Suppression, Signature Focusing, Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration, Target Breaker Amplification, Target Painting, Turret Destabilization and Weapon Disruption skills.
I think you forgot the Warfare in between Electronic and Systems. If they're all electronic warfare skills shouldn't it be Electronic Warfare Systems?  |

Joelleaveek
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 00:00:00 -
[280] - Quote
"Spaceship Piloting" sounds like what a young child would say. How about "Starship Command". |

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1265
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 00:37:00 -
[281] - Quote
just gona drop another .02ISK here: please stop making skill anmes too generic, straightforward and 'unsciencefictiony'. even a newbie should not be spared the effort to read what the skill actuallly does, so if the name does not desctibe it precisely but instead sounds atmospheric that's a win in my book. (multitalsking and nanite control can go away though, they're just dumb.)
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
604
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 01:18:00 -
[282] - Quote
I think electronic systems (the group) might be confused with the racial electronic subsystem skill |

Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
472
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 01:47:00 -
[283] - Quote
I don't mean to derail the topic, but why not spend the time and resources allocated towards this work on POS upgrades which will win you serious loyalty and kudos from your existing [and paying] customers? +++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark GÇ£SeleeneGÇ¥ Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 04:17:00 -
[284] - Quote
Hakaru Ishiwara wrote:I don't mean to derail the topic, but why not spend the time and resources allocated towards this work on POS upgrades which will win you serious loyalty and kudos from your existing [and paying] customers?
I give them kudos for fixing a system that is clearly broken and im an existing and paying customer.
"What you want" doesn't not necessarily make your issue more important than what others feel is a good idea (see several previous posts where the poster expressed a fondness for this proposal).
It also does not imply that there is a general consensus that "we the paying customer base" feel your proposal is more important than the topic of discussion.
I would advise against the argumentative form of "we" and instead simply and succinctly express your opinion and let it rise or fall in the arena of public discourse based on its merits or lack thereof. |

buffindy
The Bird Nest
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 04:57:00 -
[285] - Quote
will this make it easier to tell the Q key from the Z key? |

Heinel Coventina
University of Caille Gallente Federation
35
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 05:48:00 -
[286] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Update based on what we have seen so far.
[list] Starship Piloting instead of Starship Command:
For this particular point we wanted to distinguish the skill and the group so they do not overlap - it also ties on other plans we have on the future. However, we hear you, agreed it sounds less appealing than the one we have currently - we'll discuss this point internally again.
This should be Starship Mastery. |

Commander A9
The Scope Gallente Federation
485
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 07:07:00 -
[287] - Quote
The certificate adjustment and adding more of them I like.
But the renaming of skill categories I feel is a waste of time; it doesn't terribly do anything drastic other than change of a few names. And I feel like it is being considered as 'change for the sake of change to avoid stagnation.' Recommendations: -bring back the Jukebox! -enable ships wobbling in hangar view (pre-Captains Quarters) -add more missions (NPC fleet vs. NPC fleets that actually shoot) -less focus on graphics, more on mechanics |

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
203
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 07:07:00 -
[288] - Quote
Heinel Coventina wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Update based on what we have seen so far.
[list] Starship Piloting instead of Starship Command:
For this particular point we wanted to distinguish the skill and the group so they do not overlap - it also ties on other plans we have on the future. However, we hear you, agreed it sounds less appealing than the one we have currently - we'll discuss this point internally again.
This should be Starship Mastery. Nope, Starship Mastery = Advanced Starship Command. And then: we already have dungeons(CCP definition of deadspace pockets) all management skills > mastery skills Corporations > Guilds Missions > Quests Capacitor > Mana Cap Battery > Mana potion Shield/Armor Repairer > MediKit SP > EXP Off/on-grid booster > Buffer Logistics > Healing Cloaking > Hiding Every lvl in support skills for any weapon system will give +1 to that weapon's name: gunnery 5, surgery strike 4, Large energy turret 4 = +13 Tachyon Beam Laser. WIth every + guns get bigger model and at certain + start to glow. etc...
Would that make game easier to understand for new players? Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Alexila Quant
Strategic Acquisitions Group Tactical Research Lab
93
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 08:50:00 -
[289] - Quote
Spaceship Piloting is just bad. I didn't mention it on my first post because I figured it would quickly get changed but it hasn't yet so I must say something.
Space Ship Control, or more concise; Ship Control would be a better route to take if you MUST rename the category (I don't see a reason)
CPU Management is not immersion friendly and sounds bad (Same with Power Grid Management, and, well all of your current name changes)
You can be specific and explanatory with your naming conventions without being robotic.
Just a few ideas;
Processor Enhancement Processor Management Computer Engineering Electronics Engineering (Since the sole reason for this change as you said is to not have the skill name be the same as the category name)
Target Management Advanced Target Management
Power Core Management Power Core Enhancement
Category gripes:
Renaming the Electronics category and shifting some skills around sure, but if you're switching it to only offensive Electronic Warfare skills then switch it to something along those lines. Not 'Electronic System' (See point above about being robotic).
Ideas: Electronic Warfare?  Offensive Electronic Systems Offensive Electronics
Cutting down Missile Launcher Operation I can understand but again with the robotic approach.
Ideas:
Missile Operation? Missile Control
My original gripes were with regard to you guys needlessly over complicating the sorting. Merging the subsystems and Rigs skills into one category is counterproductive as well as splitting up the Planetary interaction skills into how ever many different places you are putting them.
That's all the moaning I have for you now. |

Vorll Minaaran
Centre Of Attention Middle of Nowhere
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 09:46:00 -
[290] - Quote
Hi,
I can accept your desire to make the skillnames more newbie-friendly, but you do exactly as the item name change: finding out the worst new names and alienating the older players. It's really sad. :( How many times will you make the same mistake?
Some constructive thoughts: If the goal to eliminate the same groupnames and skillnames, would be better to rename the Spaceship command and Advance spaceship command skills. Those skills affect the ship agility, so could be Spaceship control and Advanced spaceship control instead. Or maybe the group could be Spaceship Operation as the skill description says so: "Skill at operating Amarr frigates."
The ultimate solution would be some new UI for skills, more visual, tree or graph-like or as like John McCreedy's post #247 in this thread. And need some modul info which show the affecting skills on that module like in EFT.
|

Eli Kzanti
Remanaquie Federation
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 10:08:00 -
[291] - Quote
'spaceship piloting' - honestly? You'd rather call it that than spaceship command? 'Spaceship Piloting' is the dumbest name for a skill group in EVE you could've come up with... What has this EA man done to you, CCP...
And don't even get me started on how stupid 'multiple targeting' sounds... |

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
2297
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 11:20:00 -
[292] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Update based on what we have seen so far.
EVE gameplay and sense of loss should be harsh, dark and unforgiving, in that there is no doubt and we agree completely. However, fighting the UI at every turn should not be the main complexity point here
Where was this principle when the loot spew mechanic was thought to be a wonderful idea?
"Let's make it hard to get everything by introducing a UI mechanic that makes it hard!"
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |

valthyr
Legion of Darkwind Order of the Void
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 11:27:00 -
[293] - Quote
I have to say I like most of the changes except the part about lumping the subsystems skills in with Ship Modifications, I honestly believe that the subsystems need to remain their own group or a sub group under Ship modifications. |

Turelus
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District
458
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 12:23:00 -
[294] - Quote
Spaceship Command sounds better than Spaceship Piloting IMO, can't we keep it? Lieutenant Turelus
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
The Fourth District |

Elena Thiesant
Sun Micro Systems
439
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 12:31:00 -
[295] - Quote
Hosedna wrote:I really would have kept the old Planetology group intact. Now the planet skills are in 2 or 3 groups, which defeats the whole purpose of the rename pass imho !
This. Absolutely. |

Sahriah BloodStone
Takmahl Dynamics
14
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 12:31:00 -
[296] - Quote
Most of the changes are awesome. I definitely agree with creating new groups to have things more organized.
There are a couple things that sound kinda silly though.
- Engineering and electronics were fine. The names are a little long winded now, but i could live with it
- Spaceship piloting - Really? Sounds like the way a 7yr old would describe it. Spaceship command was WAY better, please don't change this. I'm playing a grown up game (incoming lols)
- Targeting was fine. I think Targeting and Advanced targeting would sound better, or something like Target Acquisition and Advanced Target Acquisition.
- Please keep all the planetary interaction skills together
Try to keep everything sounded advanced and professional, other then that its fantastic you guys are grouping everything into more intuitive sections! |

Galen Dnari
Fhloston Paradise E.Y
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 12:48:00 -
[297] - Quote
Keep Spaceship Command and Advanced Spaceship Command. If you must change the group name, change it to Spaceship Operation. Or do it the other way around.
Subsystems are not rigs. Don't group them together.
Non sequitur: What happens to a capsuleer who is killed when outside his pod? http://eveboard.com/ub/1939472205-31.png |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
180
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 13:00:00 -
[298] - Quote
Electronic warfare skill doesn't tell you its actually an ecm cap reduction skill.... Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767
Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
1820
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 14:02:00 -
[299] - Quote
i think you guys should review the complete set of drone skills.
Just took another quick look and its full inconsistencies.
example: scout drone operation -> (scout?) drone range (is the description even correct? doesn't count for heavies?) combat drone operation -> light + medium dps (heavy drones are no combat drones?) heavy drone operation -> dps sentry drone interfacing -> dps electronic warfare drone interfacing -> drone range for all drones
thanks for listening, much appreciated eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |

Mila Strelok
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
28
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 14:14:00 -
[300] - Quote
Eve Online is dying... |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
180
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 14:15:00 -
[301] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:i think you guys should review the complete set of drone skills.
Just took another quick look and its full inconsistencies.
example: scout drone operation -> (scout?) drone range (is the description even correct? doesn't count for heavies?) combat drone operation -> light + medium dps (heavy drones are no combat drones?) heavy drone operation -> dps sentry drone interfacing -> dps electronic warfare drone interfacing -> drone range for all drones
thanks for listening, much appreciated
there are loads of inconsistencies with skills names and effects. Drone skills need a good re balance and new ones added Guns need sorting out needing small specs in order to train large specs make no sense. missiles skills need reducing from 10% to 5% to be brought back into line with the rest of the skills. T3 subs should take longer to train and remove SP loss T3 ships shouldn't need cruiser lv5 as a pre-req to train add a shield extender efficiency skill that reduces sig rad penalty by 5% on shield extenders Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767
Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Akiko Sciuto
Cold Nova Industries
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 14:29:00 -
[302] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:I give them kudos for fixing a system that is clearly broken and im an existing and paying customer.
Please explain to me how the names are broken? Might it be a little confusing? Yeah, but I don't see how it's broken, I can still train the skills just fine. I personally don't see how having to read the description means its broken.
As for fixing things, really? Sure they're renaming a few things to become easier to understand, great makes sense no arguements here, doesn't effect me in the slightest, but I can't really argue about the change when it makes sense. But take for example the PI skills they're scattering them across multiple catagories. How is this helpful or useful?
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Planetology and Subsystem groups:
If possible we would like to separate skills by purpose, not feature. For instance we are not splitting Sience skills if they are based on Tech2 Invention or Tech3 reverse engineering.
I'm fairly sure the purpose of the Planet Management skills is to manage planets, they don't do anything else so why shove them into a bunch of different catagories? Your just undoing the work this change is meant to be doing. Sure I get you want to put all the scanning skills together but when the scanning skills only reflect one catagory just leave it in said catagory. The PI scanning and managemeant is all handled by the same UI so the skills should also stay in the same catagory. It's not as if I have to jump in a scanning ship to do this, its just pulling a slider left and right so its not even really scanning per se, more so a feature on the planet management UI.
As for the subsystem skills I do think it would be wise to leave them in their seperate catagory, due to the special circumstances regarding the skill loss on ship loss. |

Garth Pollard
Spirits of Essence
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 14:30:00 -
[303] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: [list] Starship Piloting instead of Starship Command:
For this particular point we wanted to distinguish the skill and the group so they do not overlap - it also ties on other plans we have on the future. However, we hear you, agreed it sounds less appealing than the one we have currently - we'll discuss this point internally again.
Starship Administration or even Starship Operation, while not as dominating as "Starship Command", might work. |

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
122
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 14:35:00 -
[304] - Quote
Overall this is a horrible idea.
Nanite Control renamed Neurotoxin Control... Okay got it maybe that one might not make sense but some of these seem to be renaming stuff because of people not wanting to spend time to lean the game.
How hard is it to figure out everything under Electronics is either for CPU or other electronic application. This change seems to cater to the "I want it spoon fed to me" crowd. Eve is about spending time learning about the game while your pilot slowly learns skills as well.
The new skill names don't even sound good to me. Spaceship Command to Spaceship Piloting. Missile Launcher Operation to Missiles And my favorite "I'm too lazy to look up what the skill does" Targeting to Multiple Targeting
CCP please rethink this! |

Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 14:55:00 -
[305] - Quote
Haven't read through it but off the top of my head I can mention that electronic warfare drone interfacing should be split into two skills, one for increasing control range that does not require electronic warfare skill but instead drones level 5. And another skill for controlling electronic warfare drones, that require drones level 5 and electronic warfare level 4.
And many skills, fex target painting, is rather backwards. Target painting skill should improve target painter effectiveness, and another skill should decrease its cap use ("Efficient target painting" lets say, and variations on that name for the rest of the equipment). The target painting skill would then be in electronics and efficient target painting would be in engineering along with the rest of the efficient cap use skills. Similar skills should be for afterburners, microwarpdrives, microjumpdrives respectivlely. Spin-up time improves in MJD skill, cap use in its engineering skill, speed increases in AB skill, cap use in its engineering skill, microwarpdrive can have a signature radius decrease while MWD is active as a skill that requires L5 MWD skill, and the MWD skill increases speed, its engineering skill decreases cap use, or perhaps just it just reduces cap size penalty, or both, or two skills, one for each. Each skill should be more singular in purpose and effect, but without being just stacked mile high in sequential skill requirements. Because the whole point of Eve is that we can't train Everything, and have to specialize in what we train. But we can't specialize enough because skills have too many effects per skill (the more effects they have the longer it takes to train them, and that limits specialization. Its like if every biologist had to take three engineering PhD's before becoming a biologist because the curriculum happens to have 3 times more engineering than biology).
Just my five kroners on the subject. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
181
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 15:07:00 -
[306] - Quote
Ronny Hugo wrote:Haven't read through it but off the top of my head I can mention that electronic warfare drone interfacing should be split into two skills, one for increasing control range that does not require electronic warfare skill but instead drones level 5. And another skill for controlling electronic warfare drones, that require drones level 5 and electronic warfare level 4.
And many skills, fex target painting, is rather backwards. Target painting skill should improve target painter effectiveness, and another skill should decrease its cap use ("Efficient target painting" lets say, and variations on that name for the rest of the equipment). The target painting skill would then be in electronics and efficient target painting would be in engineering along with the rest of the efficient cap use skills. Similar skills should be for afterburners, microwarpdrives, microjumpdrives respectivlely. Spin-up time improves in MJD skill, cap use in its engineering skill, speed increases in AB skill, cap use in its engineering skill, microwarpdrive can have a signature radius decrease while MWD is active as a skill that requires L5 MWD skill, and the MWD skill increases speed, its engineering skill decreases cap use, or perhaps just it just reduces cap size penalty, or both, or two skills, one for each. Each skill should be more singular in purpose and effect, but without being just stacked mile high in sequential skill requirements. Because the whole point of Eve is that we can't train Everything, and have to specialize in what we train. But we can't specialize enough because skills have too many effects per skill (the more effects they have the longer it takes to train them, and that limits specialization. Its like if every biologist had to take three engineering PhD's before becoming a biologist because the curriculum happens to have 3 times more engineering than biology).
Just my five kroners on the subject.
CCP Ytterbium must be thinking he has opened a can of worms about now :) when all he was asking was about renaming and grouping ... but it shows how much work is needed in improving skills and sorting them out so they make sense and are greater encompassing and better balanced. Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767
Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Syri Taneka
NOVA-CAINE
80
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 15:10:00 -
[307] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:you forgot "Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing". It has nothing to do with ewar or even with the other interfacing skills, it adds drone control range.
EWAR Drone Interfacing IS a pre-req for EWAR drones (which happens to add control range as a side effect). |

Victor Deveron
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 15:14:00 -
[308] - Quote
Hmmm...yes this is a new alt...But I remember my newbie 3 years ago.....I received lots of assistance from older veteran players back then to fit my ships, learn what skill is for what.
All I can say now is seriously?? A noob player should be taught in game first and foremost by those he/she meets in game....and for better understanding as they are being taught given home work so to speak by reading the attributes and descriptions of skills and what not.
I agree only with the name changing that it might make sense a little bit for some of it....but what i dont agree with is the fact this opens the door a little wider for dumbing down EVE. I play EVE because you need some kind of wit, intelligence to play let alone figure things out....making everything player noob friendly is just wrong.
If i wanted to play such a game I would go play WoW and spend my money at Blizzard....forcing noobs to read and learn their skills and what works or doesnt work is a very good part of what makes eve interesting....plus it help older players to weed and cull out the undesirables *ie:to stupid/young/immature* from being part of a group.
Really let the players control the training of their newbs its better that way and has worked that way for a long time. maybe the guy proposing this...should weed himself out of the game. |

Andrew Alancourt
Titanomachy Manufacturing and Research
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 15:38:00 -
[309] - Quote
I don't really like the idea of renaming the core skills like Navigation, Mechanics, Engineering, Electronics etc. to refer to their specific effects. The reason is that those skills play a role much larger than just directly increasing abilities. They are the gateway to skills in their groups -- you generally have to train them first to start unlocking other skills. The way they are named now, it's obvious that they're the "core" skills (they are even called such by players) and you should start there in order to be able to branch out. If they're labeled more specifically then it doesn't make sense that you have to train then first.
The opposite problem is true for EWAR Drone Interfacing; yes, that is a terrible name for what it does and it should be changed. But once the name is changed there will make even less sense for it to have a prerequisite of EWAR IV. I think if the name is changed, the prerequisite should be changed too. |

Lilliana Stelles
815
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 15:58:00 -
[310] - Quote
This thread is so casual.
Don't like technoblabber? Don't play eve. It's part of the game flavor.
I don't really approve of any of these changes. Incarna from 2009. 3 Years later and what we have doesn't look half as good as this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n41s1Iox18A |

Ezek Price
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 16:03:00 -
[311] - Quote
Electronics/Engineering was fine. As was Spaceship Command.
Nothing is broken here. War doesn't determine who is right, only who is left.
My blog, Civire Commander: http://civre.blogspot.co.uk/ |

Freelancer117
so you want to be a Hero
68
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 16:11:00 -
[312] - Quote
Good idea to go over this stuff CCP. The learning curve for new players is high enough already  Eve rule no.1: The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg http://bit.ly/1a5dQGs |
|

ISD Cura Ursus
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
155

|
Posted - 2013.07.05 16:29:00 -
[313] - Quote
Off topic post removed. Please do not post non-eve related videos.
ISD Cura Ursus Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|

Albert Spear
meadhan oidhche cinneach HELM Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 16:53:00 -
[314] - Quote
As to subsystems and T3 ships -
It may or may not make sense to group all of the skills in one group - for lack of a better name right now "Advanced Technology" and include the ship command skills with the subsystem skills, since they are intertwined and they only impact each other. |

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
762
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 16:56:00 -
[315] - Quote
ISD Cura Ursus wrote:Off topic post removed. Please do not post non-eve related videos.
I guess CCP is working with the reptilians. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
1821
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:07:00 -
[316] - Quote
Syri Taneka wrote:Bienator II wrote:you forgot "Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing". It has nothing to do with ewar or even with the other interfacing skills, it adds drone control range. EWAR Drone Interfacing IS a pre-req for EWAR drones (which happens to add control range as a side effect).
which makes it even worse eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |

MrZany
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
56
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:12:00 -
[317] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium,
with respect to skill names particularly the lower ranked "core" skills I think you should choose names that are both descriptive and exciting. This may keep newer players interested and immersed in the game.
there is nothing exciting about training "Navigation" skill but what about "engine overcharge" or "engine tuning"
"Electronincs" boring "CPU overclock" a bit more exciting etc. etc.
So the new guys in the corp are talking about their skills, now when asked what they are doing they might reply "I'm over charging my engines, I want a bit more velocity".
thanks for reading
P.s. if you can't keep "spaceship command" would you consider "starship command" or "starship piloting"? "Spaceship piloting" sounds a bit drab.
|

Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
182
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:24:00 -
[318] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Update based on what we have seen so far. Starship Piloting instead of Starship Command:
- For this particular point we wanted to distinguish the skill and the group so they do not overlap - it also ties on other plans we have on the future. However, we hear you, agreed it sounds less appealing than the one we have currently - we'll discuss this point internally again.
How about you simply switch them around. 'Starship Command' for the name of the group and 'Starship Piloting' for the individual skill. The skill gives a bonus to a ships agility and that makes me think about piloting. Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene. |

Thorian Crystal
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
25
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:32:00 -
[319] - Quote
You should also unify the way the names are. For example you have groups Armor and Shields. Why shields is plural here?
Also Electronic System but Missiles. Why missiles is plural?
"Multiple Targeting"? You actually mean multitargetting?
CPU management and Power grid management groups will be far away from each other now... They used to both start with an E.
Why "CPU managementGÇ¥" but "Neurotoxin Control"? Should unify capitalization.
"Scoial" -> Social
"Skill Harviring" you guess this one? |

Zaxix
Long Jump.
146
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:34:00 -
[320] - Quote
Galen Dnari wrote:Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Oraac Ensor wrote:Systems Online wrote:I do not like a skill name starting with an acronym. Pronouncing "SEE PEE YOU" Management. is just awkward. CPU is not an acronym. If it were, it would be pronounced "c'pew". If CPU isnt acronym for Central Processing Unit then what is? He's right. An acronym is, by definition, an abbreviation formed from the initial letters of other words and pronounced as a word. CPU is an abbreviation. The technical term is "initialism." ***Prodigal Frog***
|

Thorian Crystal
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
25
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:37:00 -
[321] - Quote
Still, an abbreviation as part of the name feels odd. |

Zaxix
Long Jump.
146
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:45:00 -
[322] - Quote
Phoenus wrote:Please for the love of christ Ytterbium, learn how to spell armour properly.
You don't need to encourage the savages who have decimated the second most widely spoken language in the world. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/colour#Etymology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armour#Etymology
It's funny that a Brit would attempt to defend his native tongue by choosing words that have a French origin for that particular variant of spelling. You're also mispronouncing it for that particular spelling. We took the liberty of correcting the spelling and maintaining the correct pronounciation.
Your empire had its day. The language is OURS now! ***Prodigal Frog***
|

Alexila Quant
Strategic Acquisitions Group Tactical Research Lab
97
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:06:00 -
[323] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:Syri Taneka wrote:Bienator II wrote:you forgot "Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing". It has nothing to do with ewar or even with the other interfacing skills, it adds drone control range. EWAR Drone Interfacing IS a pre-req for EWAR drones (which happens to add control range as a side effect). which makes it even worse
That skills is a little convoluted, I agree. |

Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 19:00:00 -
[324] - Quote
I say instead of improving the skill names now, just add it to the to-do list for 1.2 or even the next expansion, and do the rest that was suggested also. -dividing up skill effects into more specialized skills with smaller training time multipliers. -A few more exciting names sprinkled where it makes sense (fex afterburner skill that increase AB speed should perhaps be something exciting sounding, like something Scotty would do just before he says "I'm giving it all she's got captain!"). -I agree with much of what the opposition say about changing grouping etc, but many things will make far more sense to regroup when the effects from skills are split up into individual skills. So as is now, I would say regrouping is not strictly necessary, but will be required after splitting skill effects into their own skills. So no point bothering with grouping and renaming it now only to have to do it all again later. But before the skill effects can be divided up the new skills and their effects must be written down, that's a few days work at least (they also need to specify how existing skills transfer into the new skills). So get cracking on that and post a draft for review and I'm sure we'll try to be as helpful and constructive as possible.
PS: There's probably a few other good points, but these are the three that stuck out as tangible improvements.
PPS: Electricians use high current and low current to distinguish between powergrid stuff and electronics stuff. Maybe this could be a useful distinction in Eve void of abbreviations? |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
181
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 19:48:00 -
[325] - Quote
another thing i find odd is that the curse needs 3 lv5 skills aswell as cruiser lv5 to fly why does it need sig analysis and electronic upgrades lv5? Also a fair amount of T2 ships need spaceship command lv5 why? its making you train more lv5 skills to use other lv5 skills surely the point of T2/lv5 is for specializing in something you want to do but why would you force this when its unnecessary? considering you changed the pre-reqs on CS and the other T2 ships so you didn't have to train long lv5 skills or things like logi cruisers you wouldn't otherwise use.. i mean who trains electronic upgrades lv5 ?? Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767 Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Haifisch Zahne
Hraka Manufacture GmbH
202
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 21:02:00 -
[326] - Quote
I am *so* glad that CCP has the developer resources available to devout to such EXTREMELY pressing issues as skill naming.
In light of the inter-relationships of the various skills, and CCP's continued typo's and errors which *still exist before this effort (for the last 10 years)*, I only imagine the can of worms that will be unleashed by scrambling the names and groups. And, so, again, I am *so* glad that CCP has the developer resources available to devout to these pressing issues.
Just takes a load off my mind, knowing that my subscription funds such efforts. Thanks CCP! |

Keldor Eternia
Multnomah Interstellar Holdings Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 21:36:00 -
[327] - Quote
This is a great change. When we look back after changes like this it's hard to believe how much crap we had to sift through for ten years. |

Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
76
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 22:13:00 -
[328] - Quote
quote=Zaxix]Phoenus wrote:Your empire had its day. The language is OURS now! **** off. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 23:12:00 -
[329] - Quote
Akiko Sciuto wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:I give them kudos for fixing a system that is clearly broken and im an existing and paying customer. Please explain to me how the names are broken? Might it be a little confusing? Yeah, but I don't see how it's broken, I can still train the skills just fine. I personally don't see how having to read the description means its broken. As for fixing things, really? Sure they're renaming a few things to become easier to understand, great makes sense no arguements here, doesn't effect me in the slightest, but I can't really argue about the change when it makes sense. But take for example the PI skills they're scattering them across multiple catagories. How is this helpful or useful?
1. please quote my post where i make a claim that 'scattering PI" all over the place is a good idea.
2. I'll clarify the problem with your acceptance that reading the descriptions is good enough and yes i will exaggerate here to emphasis my point and make no claim that your beliefs are this extreme.
Skill One.
Skill two.
Skill Three.
Um, what do they do Maldiro? Go read the descriptions!
3. The current skills are, in some cases at least, placed in confusing locations the prime example would be Weapon Upgrades being found under 'turrets' when it is a skill that also applies to missile launchers.
There are more problems with the current skill listings and namings but this should get you thinking about why i feel they are broken and need of a fixing.
|

coldkill
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 01:12:00 -
[330] - Quote
It's already been mentioned, but: Spaceship Piloting is a bit of a naff name and doesn't accurately reflect what happens (from an RP sense) with larger ships. Understandably, frigates due to capsule technology only contain a pod pilot, however, cruiser, possibly destroyer, upwards all contain crew, therefore the capsuleer is commanding that vessel, not just piloting it. In fact, they may well not be 'piloting' it at all, but giving commands to the crew instead. |

Tampopo Field
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 02:01:00 -
[331] - Quote
I like most of the changes suggested in the orginal post. The skill names and groupings as they are now are somewhat confusing. There are a few things I would prefer to change form the OP.
First off the "Spaceship Piloting" sounds whimpy. While it may be more accurate from a game perspective, as you don't actually command anyone to do anything, the orginal "Spaceship Command" is alot better name. And if it is thought to be something that can be confused with the "Leadership" skill group, change the "Leadership" group name to "Fleet Command" or something similar.
Secondly the splitting of an alredy existing group of P.I skills, which is very descriptive of its content, is a bad idea. While it may be a small group, I do not think this a sufficent reason to spread it's contents all around the place. The purpose of the changes is to "make skills and their associated groups easier to find, classify and understand as a whole" and this suggested change is utterly conter-productive toward this end. And incase there will be new skills that affect P.I or something else with planets (or moons) these hypothetical skills would have a suitable group alredy.
Thirdly the names "Multiple Targeting" and "Advanced Multiple Targeting" don't sound right. Try "Multi Targeting" and "Advanced Multi Targeting." In my opinion they sound alot better and are just as good at describing what the skills do.
_______________
As for some (some not ALL) of the objections I'v come against the proposed changes. They seem to read:
"I can find the skills I need just fine. So can All other existing players. Changing them will mean I have to learn the new locations."
This is pretty mutch the same argument I came across against the Odyssey BD and dessy skill changes. "I" like things as they are. "I" don't want anything to change. "I" don't want to have to learn anything new. "I" am the spokesperson for everyone who isn't saying otherwise.
I think the proposed change will make it easier for new players and players who haven't comited the contents of all skill trees into memory, to find relevant skills.
Also:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote: 2. I'll clarify the problem with your acceptance that reading the descriptions is good enough and yes i will exaggerate here to emphasis my point and make no claim that your beliefs are this extreme.
Skill One.
Skill two.
Skill Three.
Um, what do they do Maldiro? Go read the descriptions!
Second also: Sorry about the typos. I'm too lazy to proofread this thing. |

Debir Achen
The Red Circle Inc.
60
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 03:08:00 -
[332] - Quote
Callic Veratar wrote:I think it would be really helpful to add sub-groups of skills.
Spaceship Piloting (SC, ACS, Cap ship) > Amarr Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Caldari Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Gallente Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Minmatar Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Tech 2 Spaceship Command (AS, Inty, Dic, HIC, HAC, etc)
Definitely feature creep, but it would make things a lot easier to manage. Yep!
Let's re-imagine the whole skill tree as a two-level tree (rather than the current 1-level tree). As far as possible, the first skill in each sub-tree is the "named" skill, which is fundamental to all other skills in the tree. Note that 'named' skills might be nested: Electronic Warfare is a base skill for a tree of skills, but is itself a subtree from Electronics
Ship Systems: - Electronics: Electronics, (all the sensor & targeting related skills) - Electronic Warfare: Electronic Warfare, ... - Propulsion Jamming: Propulsion Jamming, ...
- Engineering: Engineering, ... - Energy Systems Operation: Energy Systems Operation, Energy Management, ... - Shield Operation: Shield Operation, Shield Management, ...
- Mechanics: Mechanics, Hull Upgrades, (armor skills) - Repair Systems: Repair Systems, ... - Jury Rigging: ...
- Subsystems: ...
Weapon Systems: - Gunnery: - Missile Launcher Operation: - Drones: - Weapon Upgrades: (includes seige modules)
Social Skills: - Corp Management: - Social: - Leadership: - Trade:
Spaceship Command: - Spaceship Command: Spaceship Command, Advanced Spaceship Command, Capital Ships, all the T2 skills - Navigation: (seems to fit here as well as anywhere) - Amarr / Caldar / Gallente / Minmatar Spaceship Command
Industry: - Industry: Industry, production skills - Mining: Mining, ... - Refining: Refining, ... - PI: ... - Spaceship Construction:
Science: - Science: Science - Research: Research, Lab Operation, ..., all the R&D skills (maybe split the specific R&D and the 'base' R&D skills) - Astrometrics: Astrometrics, ... - Exploration: Archaelogy, Hacking, ... - Personal Enhancement: Cybernetics, Informorph Psych, (boosters) - Thermodynamics: Thermodynamics, (Nanite Repair skills)
Stuff that I'm not quite sure where it fits: - Anchoring, Salvaging (despite the similarity, I assert this is *not* a mining skill, since it's generally used by non-miners), cynos + jump portals, Starbase Defense Management Aren't Caldari supposed to have a large signature? |

RampoIIa
Throw More Dots
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 05:52:00 -
[333] - Quote
YOU GOT THESE RIGHT: CPU Management Power Grid Management Neurotoxin Control Armor Engineering Missiles Production Ship Modification Scanning Shields Targeting Outpost Construction
RENAME THESE: Targeting > Multi-Targeting Multitasking > Advanced Multi-Targeting Energy Pulse Weapons > Smartbomb Operation Electronic Systems > revert to Electronics or Electronic Warfare Infomorph Psychology > Jump Clone Operation Spaceship Piloting > Ship Command or Ship Control (both the category and skill) Science > Advanced Production Daytrading > ? Remote x Procurement > ? Remote x Visibility > ? Remote x
RELOCATE THESE: Cynosaural Field Theory > Science (will fit in with Jump Portal Generation) Planet Management Skills should stay under Planet Management for the same reason Corporation management is not being integrated into Social. The skills are similar in spirit but should stay in separate categories for fast comprehension.
REVIEW THESE SKILLS FOR POTENTIAL CHANGES: Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing GÇô wonGÇÖt fit well anywhere Energy Pulse Weapons GÇô wonGÇÖt fit well anywhere
You seem to want to simplify the naming of the categories, so why not look into the new Resource category as being renamed Mining or Harvesting. Social could be renamed Missions. You then have categories called Trade, Mining, Missions, Production, Corporation Management, etc. To a new player looking to get into GÇ£miningGÇ¥ or GÇ£missionsGÇ¥ or GÇ£tradeGÇ¥, they know instantly where to look.
I had my girlfriend who recently began playing EVE with me review this thread's contents and assist in my above decisions. |

Dornkirk Cirim
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 06:58:00 -
[334] - Quote
As someone who has designed taxonomies and filing categories for a living, I appreciate the challenge here.
RampoIIa wrote: Infomorph Psychology > Jump Clone Operation Spaceship Piloting > Ship Command or Ship Control (both the category and skill)
You then have categories called Trade, Mining, Missions, Production, Corporation Management, etc. To a new player looking to get into GÇ£miningGÇ¥ or GÇ£missionsGÇ¥ or GÇ£tradeGÇ¥, they know instantly where to look.
As the proud owner of new jump clones, I still find it a bit morbid to think of them as meat puppets my disembodied consciousness is "operating". It's probably not inaccurate to the fiction though... I would suggest "Jump Clone Possession" instead. Implying both that the mind is possessing the bodies, and that the skill controls how many we can possess in stations. 
Ship Control suits me. An earlier argument in the thread about preferring "Command" as though we are Captain Kirk giving a helmsman orders, is pretty much shot to blazes by the concept of Boosters, implants and Quafe improving reaction speed. If that was actually how the fiction worked, every "captaineer" would have Charisma +10. No, I'm covered in goo that isn't wet. I can see the gooblob quite clearly, down the stairs from my Captain's Quarters when docked in a pod.
Naming the trees based on professions, something the tutorials already try to establish in people's minds, is very sensible! |

Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15093
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 09:06:00 -
[335] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Spaceship Piloting: is the old Spaceship Command group, no change except with the name. Nooooooo. I love all the other changes and can see a need, but this????? It's bloody awful.
Please keep Spaceship Command.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |

Radius Prime
Tax Evading Ass.
90
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 09:59:00 -
[336] - Quote
You are doing it again... DO NOT FIX WHAT AIN'T BROKEN! Put your time in something that will add to the game. If you cannot find anything useful to do feel free to hand in your resignation cause these changes will force me to suggest the same to CCP.
Hope you find something more useful to pursue...
Radius Reopen the EVE gate so we can invade Serenity. Goons can go first. |

Photon Ceray
Caesar Lile Directorate
38
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 10:54:00 -
[337] - Quote
Very good step and long needed. but in order to make things simpler and more organized then skills should be sorted by function not only what direction they serve. and while you're at it, you might as well sort it real good once and for all!
for example, Science skills should be split into:
1- Laboratory operations: this should have the lab operation related skills 2- Industrial Science: this should have the skills related to invention and t2 manufacturing, because these are completely different and almost unrelated to any lab operations! why should they be in the same category then?
Other skill groups are already grouped by function properly, please don't change those, you'd make the opposite of what you want to achieve here!
"Subsystems" is excellent as it is, i would move it OUT of ship modification group, it's just a hassle to always have this extra tab.
"Planet Management" is perfect as it is, please don't change!
However, some suggested groups need better names. for example:
"Scanning" should be renamed to "Exploration" , because hacking and analyzing are not scanning skills.
"Electronics systems" should be "Electronic Warfare", that's the only logical name for it.
Many other skill names need to be changed as well, such as:
Laboratory operation: should be renamed to "Laboratory Multitasking" or something like that to reflects it's actual function.
Ore industrial: this is for a salvage ship, the word "industrial" makes it confusing. rename it to salvage platforms or something.
Amarr/g/c/m Industrial: these are cargo ship, they don't do any industry, so they should be renamed to "transport ships".
Transport ships: in light of the above suggestion, these should be the "Advanced transport ships"
Advanced weapon upgrades: a lot of debate about this one, rename it to "Weapon Powergrid Management" and then put it under engineering.
Weapon upgrades: > Weapon CPU Management
Hull upgrades: > Armor something
Astrogeology > Advanced Mining operations
The list goes on, but it's really not hard to sort out what skills have confusing names and how to name them better. the main problem could be from the trolls that oppose everything that moves and everything that stays still.
|

Kocur4d Zeus
PSS Spolem
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 11:18:00 -
[338] - Quote
There is one confusing skill name in industry tree:
Production Efficiency - reduces materiel needed for production.
On the other hand we have Production Efficiency(PE) of a BPO that is reducing time needed for production.
Same name but one is affecting time and second is affecting material levels.
This should be change to two different names.
|

Vanessa Serenity
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 12:01:00 -
[339] - Quote
Spaceship Command!
Spaceship piloting makes it sound like I am personally the one steering. Am I not the one in command, telling my minions of the ship what to do and where to go? The minions being the ones in red shirt that always die with the ship as I activate my clone of course. |

Silver Getsuga
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 12:05:00 -
[340] - Quote
Logged in just to ask to not to change awesome skill name "Spaceship Command". And yes, I'm new player and view it as the perfect name. |

tasman devil
Pangalactic Punks n' Playboys HUN Reloaded
35
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 14:22:00 -
[341] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:tasman devil wrote:I know I will be probably ignored but I just cannot let this go past without me saying my mind about it. The whole refurbishing of the skill groups sounds nice, but... BUT! Let us have a look at what my problems with this reorganisation is: Armours Shields Electronic Systems Engineering Ship Modifications Targeting Scanning Are all related to ships and ship fitting one way or another. Plus PI has already its own group, but now they will be a part of another skill group GÇôread: they just dump PI into another group while at the same time clearly stating that they want every one of those groups to have a ground of their own GÇô sounds either hypocrite or not really thought out for me, youGÇÖll be the judge on that! :P So what SHOULD we do? If you dig deep, really deep down there are three core elements of the skill sets: 1: Productions one way or another (production/invention/exploration, etc) 2: Ship commands one way or another (pvp/pve) 3: Character managements one way or another (implants, leadership, /corp/ally management, etc.) So how can we benefit from this? - By enabling sub-categories to emerge! It is really not a difficult thing but would enable to have a logical build-up of skills: Spaceship Command ALL T1 ship command skills Gö£ Advanced Spacehip Command (Tech 2 ship command skills) Gö£ Armour Management (Armour skills) Gö£ Drone Management (Drone skills) Gö£ Electronic Systems Management (CPU skills) Gö£ Electronic Warfare Management (EW / Anti-EW skills) Gö£ Engineering Management (PG skills) Gö£ Gunnery Management (Gunnery skills) Gö£ Missiles Management (Missile skills) Gö£ Navigation Management (Navigation skills) Gö£ Shield Management (Shield skills) Gö£ Ship Modifications (Rigs and T3 subsystems skills) Pilot Enhancement (Clone skills) Gö£ Corporation Management (Corporation stuff(NO POS!)) Gö£ Neural Enhancement (Implants and boosters) Gö£ Leadership Enhancement (Leadership skills) Gö£ Social Relations (Social skills) Science (Generic Science skills) Gö£ Production (Manufacturing skills) Gö£ Research (Invention, hacking, salvaging) Gö£ Planetary and Personal Production (PI and POS skills) Gö£ Resource Processing (Reprocess) Gö£ Resource Harvesting (Mining) Gö£ Trade Management (Trade skills) I try to clear the dust a little: Ship Commands: Everything related to ships (read: skills that affect ship properties when trained), basic command and module enabling skills go into here (odd one out for example: bubbles as they require anchoring which will be in Science in this new order) Pilot Enhancements: Everything related to having a better performing character and cross-character relations. Implants, boosters, corporations skills, social standing. (read everything that affects the CHARACTER and/or the player GÇô and the player relations) Science: Here goes everything related to acquiring stuff. (read: building stuff, erecting stuff (POS, Station), mining stuff, looting stuff, trading stuff etc). 1st thank you for posting a well thought out post. 2nd my only real criticism is that you use the word 'management' repeatedly for this group, management to me is a human/human interaction and doesn't fit well with human/machine interactions. I'm sure that human/machine interactions come with the title management in some form in RL but i just feel another word here would fit better.
1: my pleasure ;-)
2: I'm ok with that. Then let us call it enhancements, but I think we both know that someone will figure out a better name for it I don't belive in reincarnation I've never believed in it in my previous lives either... |

Zaxix
Long Jump.
149
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 15:36:00 -
[342] - Quote
Sal Landry wrote:Zaxix wrote:Your empire had its day. The language is OURS now! **** off. Aren't you brits supposed to say Sod off or Bugger off? Chalk one more up for the Yanks! You even curse like us! ***Prodigal Frog***
|

Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 15:49:00 -
[343] - Quote
I spent 6 hours reworking the entire skill system and now its 21 000 characters over the 6 000 character maximum that I just noticed right now  |

Sir Dragon
Einherjar Yggdrasils
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 16:42:00 -
[344] - Quote
No, let perfection be.
[consider this letter as pointing at no one at all : and my end all "i never want to need to post anything again" uber answer].
I am presuming that statistics has lead CCP to this conclusion of "changing skill catagories".
I can assure you that almost everyone is a whiner (me too). We whine and whine and whine. It is not, necessarily, the game that is causing us to "whine", maybe it was to much coffee or that dude that called me bad things...
So you can go ahead and re-invent the wheel (skill catagories); to that end of, answering the mighty clarvoyant call of "staticstics", but I asure you that people will keep whining, and "lo and behold when the dust has settled" statistics will start demanding more preposterous change to suit the whiners.
Before you know it CCP's Eve will be a smoldering ruin that pritty much resembles Blittz's Wow that is an "apply face to keyboard" compatible "we let whiners define the game".
Or is it Job Security that makes people come up with these ludicrous ideas: a person spining up theories outof crack statistics to that end of "having some thing todo"... who knows...
What i am on about is . . . you conform to whiners and their ludicrous ideas you eventually wind up with equally false statistics that lead CCP into game breaking ideas. [Lt. Cmdr. Data]: "Perhaps. Perhaps not, sir." [Capt. Picard]: "That's hardly a scientific observation, Commander. "[Data]: "Captain, the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is, 'I do not know'. I do not know what that is, sir." |

Oraac Ensor
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
260
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 18:03:00 -
[345] - Quote
Zaxix wrote:Sal Landry wrote:Zaxix wrote:Phoenus wrote:Please for the love of christ Ytterbium, learn how to spell armour properly.
You don't need to encourage the savages who have decimated the second most widely spoken language in the world. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/colour#Etymologyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armour#EtymologyIt's funny that a Brit would attempt to defend his native tongue by choosing words that have a French origin for that particular variant of spelling. You're also mispronouncing it for that particular spelling. We took the liberty of correcting the spelling and maintaining the correct pronounciation. Your empire had its day. The language is OURS now! **** off. Aren't you brits supposed to say Sod off or Bugger off? Chalk one more up for the Yanks! You even curse like us! You're jumping to conclusions - I don't see anything that identifies Sal as a Brit.
Besides, Brits only say "sod off" or "bugger off" when they're being polite. "**** off" is about as English as you can get (derived from Middle English, first recorded use 1503).
As for defending French-derived spellings, Brits don't have an inferiority complex regarding their history or ancestory. Maybe Americans would find retaining the French versions an unwelcome reminder of the eternal debt they owe to the French army for winning their revolution for them.
American English isn't even consistent. They have "armor", "color", "humor", etc, but still use "glamour". In a British court the accused is charged with an "offence" and "evidence" is given, but in an American court the accused is charged with an "offense" but still faces "evidence".
Having said all of that, I think there's undeniable evidence that the two versions of the language are merging very rapidly, thanks first to movies, then tv and now the Internet. And it isn't one-way traffic - I've noticed several examples of British vocabulary in recent US tv shows. |

Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 19:05:00 -
[346] - Quote
6k character limit. So I'll cut my 6 hour work to bits:
Ship skills work like this: -One skill per ship, at L1 you can fly the ship, no skill prerequisites. -Each ship has several sub-skills: --Agility. --Speed. --armor hp. --shield hp. --Shield Recharge rate. --Shield emergency (chance for damage going through the shield at under 25% shield capacity). --hull hp. --powergrid. --capacitor-bank skill (cap amount). --power core (cap recharge). --Scan resolution. --sensor strength. --signature radius. --Armor EM, thermal, kinetic, explosive resistance skills. --Shield -----\\--- --hull ----\\---- --cargo cap. --drone cap? --Drone bandw? --Calibration points? They only improve 1 ship. But subskills are mostly 1X for sub-capitals. The attributes they give are not huge, just one attribute is improved in each skill. T2 ships and T3 ships have extra attribute sub-skills. The ship skill still improves the bonuses of each ship as they do now. Module skills work like this: (Tiered module) ---Armor repairing (skill, no prerequisites): ---Small armor repair (skill, armor repairing L1 prerequisite). ---Medium armor repair (skill, armor repairing L2 prerequisite). ---etc. With small armor repair skill at L4 T2 small armor repairer can be used. And the same with medium and large. All these skills improve repairer amount for their specific module size. (untiered module) ---Sensor boosting (skill, can use module at L1, T2 at L4, no prerequisites). (then there are these efficiency skills for the modules) -Low-current (group previously electronics): --Armor (group): ---Small Armor repair processor efficiency (skill, reduces CPU use of this module). ---Medium armor repair (skill)... --Sensor boosting (group): ---Sensor booster processor efficiency (skill, reduces CPU use). -High-current (group previously engineering): --Armor (group): ---Small armor repair powergrid efficiency (skill, reduces PG use). ---Small Armor repair capacitor efficiency (skill, reduces cap use). ---Medium armor repair (skill)... --Sensor boosting (group): ---Sensor booster capacitor efficiency (skill, reduces CPU use). (sensor booster does not require more than 1PG so does not have PG efficiency skill). -Gun skills, tank skills and rig skills, drone skills, module skills, will be pretty much the only thing to keep people from training an Amarr BS and then training a Caldari dreadnought next. Gun skills will require a bit less time to train for those who specialize enough (fex large artillery), but the efficiency skills only help that gun, large artillery in our example, so generalizing will quickly mean you spend more time training gunnery skills now than it would take before. Turrets also have module-specific (specific to type and size module) tracking speed skill, signature radius skill, optimum range skill, falloff skill, cycle time skill. launchers have their equivalent skills.
-Each tiered module has 3 sizes that dictate powergrid use, capacitor use and CPU use (some 4). Frigate size, cruiser size, battleship size, and some capital size.
If you train battleship repairer you should not have to train frig repairer also. But, this does not mean everyone will fly around in maxed out battleships after 30 days training, it will take longer to become a perfect pilot for a ship, but a perfect pilot is slightly more perfect (if he hasn't trained his cargo space to L5 instead of Hull HP to L5). But you can also fex not care about shield and hull HP and resistance at all if you're training an archon, and focus all time on maxing out capital repair skill and armor resistance skills. Coupled with some selected drone skills, etc, one could fly a carrier in acceptable time, but to be really really effective it will still take quite some time. Except, NO time is spent training none-archon skills in this example, and in other examples no other time will be spent training other stuff than what you specifically want to use.
You can easily fly a standard ship with no other skills than base skills, but you'd spend your time doing PVE until the skills are decent. As it is now though, you must spend lots of time on things you won't use in order to meet lots of funny prerequisites. Prerequisites BEFORE you can fly. Anyone should be able to fly whatever ship they want to fly (and fit, not counting possible powergrid and CPU limits) within lets say 30 days, even a Titan if they can pay for the skills and ship right away, but if you want to fly it well you should not be forced to train other ships and modules you don't use, but you should be forced to sacrifice other skills (if you want to fly a battleship well in little time you must sacrifice subskills that you don't train for your small guns, fex, and other frigate and cruiser sized modules in favor of efficiency skills for battleship sized modules and tracking and falloff for your large turrets etc).
Above ship sub-skills with large T2 energy turret, Large energy turret tracking+falloff+range+cap+powergrid+CPU+sig radius reduction subskills all at L5 its about 222 days to fly one battleship with perfect skills. Not counting the low-slot modules, mid-slot modules, and any other high-slot modules and rigs. Same amount of time for all other ships. But, about 50 days would be enough to have a quite useful PVE battleship. It would also change the weight of the game from training for months before being able to fit certain modules regardless of powergrid, CPU and Cap situation, to being able to fit modules right away, just buy the skill to be able to use all the modules and train them to L1. But if you wish to make a career out of it you'll have to focus lots of training time correctly. Partly because without high-level efficiency on some modules (fex the guns you use) its going to be difficult to fit everything you need with the available powergrid, CPU and cap. Increasing focus on fitting choices. |

Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 20:07:00 -
[347] - Quote
Oh, and I know someone will not understand the whole concept given the limited character explanation, so I must add a second post even though its frowned upon. -Fex in the new system if I had skills primarily on armor tanking I would by that skill-set be limited to armor tanking vessels, in practical terms not absolute terms. Since I could fly any ship very quickly, but to fly shield tanking ships with armor tanks are not very practical. The route for shield-tanking and armor tanking will be slightly longer, with the armor and shield resistance skills moved over to the ship sub-skills (they would replace the resistance skills of today. They only work when adding passive modules that increase resistance, also in the new system). And armor, shield and Hull HP moved to the ship sub-skills. armor-tanking ships will have far larger armor-bonus to armor-hp subskill than shield-tanking ships (so it wouldn't hurt a shield-tanker to not train armor HP subskill, and thus allowing more specialization). The point is to have to make the tough choice about what to NOT train, more so than what to train. Since the number of skills that take short are so high (I know I want to train all the skills I DONT EVEN USE to L3 or so before I go for 12D+ skills lol). -Incase you misunderstood it, the drones would work like the turrets in skills. You can fly heavy drones almost right away, but you would need to upgrade the drone control ability and control range etc sub-skill for each ship you wish to fly drones with (not all ships can fly drones, carriers have multiple drone subskills). -Oh, and all the skills everyone has to train now in order to do anything (science, electronics, engineering, mechanics, hull upgrades, navigation etc), go away in various ways and some transform into subskills, module specific skills, module type and size specific skills for modules with several size modules etc. But certain things will remain as the core "identity" skills as it were. -What sort of tank you use, -what weapons type and size and variation (short or long range, energy/projectile/hybrid/missile, small/medium/large/capital, T1/T2, how much cargo space you require for ammo also impacts choice of ships) you use, -drone skills (which type (size and damage type, drone tank type (drones tank like your ship does)), -navigation skills (If you have trained AB or MWD most, 1MN, 10MN or 100MN size most), -what modules you have trained most (Fex ECM is more caldari oriented perhaps), -what rigging skills you have focused on (armor tanking, navigation, drones, gun rigs for your particular best-skilled guns, etc). You will be able to train for the best possible fitting of one fit, lets say tachyon large T2 beam turrets on an apocalypse, with all the subskills and tank needed etc to have the ship as good as need be for it to be "maxed" in about half a year, a quarter year if you drop some things that in practice can be painfully not trained and still be quite useful in a fleet battle (like the two L5 gun skills, L5 resistance skills, L5 gun cap efficiency skill, L5 gun CPU efficiency skill, and a few other L4 and L5 efficiency skills that you don't need because you have just enough CPU and capacitor (cap rigs and one damage rig, with better efficiency skills almost right at the half-year mark you could have two damage rigs and even one cap rig (perfect calibration subskill), or so it would be balanced in my world).
Oh, and I have now spent 12 hours on this, please spend more than five seconds before figuring out if you have imagined the concept correctly and like it or not. I know we all like it the way it is, but that does not mean we can't like it in another way that allows new people to join the game without being forced to pay as much money as we have before they can fly what we can fly. We're afterall the ones who will sell stuff to them and earn our PLEX from their losses as they run about in low-subskilled ships (either because they're newbs, or because they can't bring themselves to specialize enough). Think about that before you think the new players will somehow get to play for way less investment, and that it is somehow unfair that they get to have it easier than we did. |
|

ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
89

|
Posted - 2013.07.06 20:17:00 -
[348] - Quote
A post containing an attempt to bypass the profanity editor has been deleted.
Forum rule 7. Use of profanity is prohibited.
ISD Tyrozan Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|

Broxus Maximas
Shadow State SpaceMonkey's Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 23:17:00 -
[349] - Quote
Good changes it is now much easier to understand. |

YuuKnow
Terra-Formers
815
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 00:59:00 -
[350] - Quote
Why not just call "electronic systems" , "Electronic Warfare" instead? Seems simpler.
yk |

Dristan Evrard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 04:08:00 -
[351] - Quote
If you must change Spaceship Command to make the skill category and skill different, leave the category named Spaceship Command, and change the skill to Spaceship Piloting, or even better, just Piloting.
Also, please "split" the infinitive. It's good English to do so.
CCP Ytterbium wrote:- Electronics: has been renamed to GÇ£CPU managementGÇ¥ not to conflict with group names and be more explicit at what the skill actually does.
[*] Engineering: has been renamed GÇ£Power Grid managementGÇ¥ not to conflict with group names and be more explicit at what the skill actually does.
|

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
208
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 05:59:00 -
[352] - Quote
TL; DR
Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 07:23:00 -
[353] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote: Yesyes, but what do you think of it? Maybe you could reiterate the conceptual change in skills in fewer words?
PS: I have never seen reading as a drag, its the act of opening the book that makes me yawn. |

Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
454
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 11:03:00 -
[354] - Quote
Of course nostalgy would tell me to be against this change, but I have to admit that it makes things more obvious now, so overall that's a good change.
There is just one thing wrong, I don't think that the subsystem category should dissapear. It's highly confusing, as you put individual-ship related skills with general ship related skills. So : Keep the old Subsystem category !
Also I'm not sure about Planetary Management skills, imo they should still be in their own category. On the other hand, I understand that the new category with minigame skills would then be very.. light.
Edit : Also, Electronics into Electronic System, and Spaceship command into Spaceship piloting.. LOL. It is both not really needed AND not lore friendly. Especially the spaceship piloting part. G££ <= Me |

Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
27
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 11:05:00 -
[355] - Quote
This appears like more 'dumbing-down' of the game to me. The average EVE Online player is not stupid or ignorant and can work out what the current skill category names mean and relate to.
I and many other would much rather CCP STOP trying to fix things that are not broken & please start fixing things that ARE BROKEN!
The first one that springs to mind is Corporation/Alliance Roles & Permissions in conjunction with their use on Player Owned Stations. We know this needs fixing. You know this needs fixing. It may take some time but please fix this and not things that are not broken. I'd pull my hair out but I don't have that much left. Grrrr.  |

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
5414
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 11:29:00 -
[356] - Quote
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:I and many other would much rather CCP STOP trying to fix things that are not broken & please start fixing things that ARE BROKEN! The first one that springs to mind is Corporation/Alliance Roles & Permissions in conjunction with their use on Player Owned Stations. We know this needs fixing. You know this needs fixing. It may take some time but please fix this and not things that are not broken. I'd pull my hair out but I don't have that much left. Grrrr.  I'd like to highlight and support this sentiment. I don't think there is anything wrong with wanting to improve on minor features and make things more understandable. I'm also not suggesting you're not working on the important stuff. It's just important to underline, that this stuff is of little importance to us and your initial plans aren't turning it to gold either. Just a system with different oddities. It's minor fiddling on unimportant things, that seems borderline pointless busywork. A thousand improvements of this caliber won't even come close to the benefits and good will of, for example, what giving dev love to corporation management would yield. |

Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 12:28:00 -
[357] - Quote
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:This appears like more 'dumbing-down' of the game to me. The average EVE Online player is not stupid or ignorant and can work out what the current skill category names mean and relate to.
Everyone can learn one thing, yes. But new players are pushed into a whole (not half) universe of things to learn all at once without any clear indications of what to learn when. If it isn't made easier it hurts CCP's bottom line (and the speed at which new features emerge). If it is not made easier then at least it should be clear in what order they need to learn things (and not just what order they need to DO things, but about what they should learn about first and second etc to have a good rate of growth for understanding the universe). Then they can learn early that they can ignore learning about POSes, planetary interaction, null-sec, capital ships etc until later.
But I can agree that on its own changing the names of the skills and the way they are grouped does little to add to the game. It does quite little to make it easier for new people. It would be an easier system if you had three skill-sets, -one set for the ships (1 ship-skill per ship to fly the ship, each ship with its set of sub-skills/secondary skills that don't transfer to other ships), -one set for the modules (one skill per module, modules with more than one size has subskills, each module has its efficiency-skills (use less CPU, PG, cap etc)), -one set for the profession-skills (science skills, planetary interaction skills, corp skills, fleet command skills, anchoring skills, manufacturing skills, social skills (skills to improve how well you can do missions and what you get paid)). This would make it quite obvious what to learn first if you wish to improve an attribute on your ship (yield, dps, velocity, HP etc), and what to train if you wish to do something else than just fly. It could be explained with a few pictures instead of a tutorial if need-be. If you want to use a module, you train the module skill (no prerequisite skills), if you want to use a ship, you train that ship-skill, if you want to improve you train what you want to improve (tracking, PG use, cap use, CPU use, sig radius, HP, resistance, falloff, range, cycle time, drawbacks, damage multiplier etc). (is this a short enough skirt Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris?) EDIT: Oh, and on frigates most T1 frig-size modules fit without problems, so new people don't have to bother with sub-skills for their modules for basic frig fits. That means they only need to train the module skill, the ship skill, and then they can fly both. The point is to have them flying as they learn, not studying a curriculum before they are given the keys to the spaceship. |

Vas Vadum
PH0ENIX COMPANY Tribal Band
51
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 12:34:00 -
[358] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Update based on what we have seen so far. [list] Starship Piloting instead of Starship Command:Energy Management and Operation:Multiple Targeting and Advanced Multiple Targeting:Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing:Agreed, it doesn't sound that great. CCP Ytterbium wrote:Don't you think changing skill names is "dumbing the game down"? EVE gameplay and sense of loss should be harsh, dark and unforgiving, in that there is no doubt and we agree completely. However, fighting the UI at every turn should not be the main complexity point here - it just means players have become used to an old and outdated interface for too long. Simply put, the hard and unforgiving nature of EVE should not be to retrieve information on a basic level, it should be on how players act based on that information and interact with the gameplay that revolves around it.
Yea, none of these sound good. It's like you're calling all eve players idiots because they can't figure out what stuff does, and aren't bright enough to spend 2 minutes clicking the little blue info bubble on each skill. I knew off the bat "targeting" had to do with how many targets I could lock. Like. DUH. You'd have to be less than a monkey to not figure that out.
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Planetology and Subsystem groups:If possible we would like to separate skills by purpose, not feature. For instance we are not splitting Sience skills if they are based on Tech2 Invention or Tech3 reverse engineering. Typos, typos everywhere! Seriously man, are you rolling your face on the keyboard when typing?Eeep sorry, didn't double-check the last section of the OP, will fix this now 
[sarcasm] You misspelled Science. [/sarcasm]
CCP Ytterbium wrote:How about moving the Anchoring skill out of the Corporation Management group? Definitely, CSM suggested moving it to the Electronic Systems group as it's tied with bubbles, but one could also argue it fits under Production as its tied with Starbases. What do you think?
Maybe Starbase should be moved to Corporation, as it is most usually a corporation asset. Anchoring? It is mostly used for starbase structures, but that's a tough one to move somewhere.
Things I agree with. QUOTE: Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn I and many other would much rather CCP STOP trying to fix things that are not broken & please start fixing things that ARE BROKEN!
The first one that springs to mind is Corporation/Alliance Roles & Permissions in conjunction with their use on Player Owned Stations. We know this needs fixing. You know this needs fixing. It may take some time but please fix this and not things that are not broken. I'd pull my hair out but I don't have that much left. Grrrr. 
QUOTE: James Amril-Kesh Don't dump subsystems into the same group as rigging skills. That's a ******* awful idea and it causes the exact problem you're trying to fix with the science and mechanics skill groups.
Keep the subsystems skill group and add a rigging skill group.
QUOTE: Carmaine Has people have already said, keep Spaceship Command, we are commanders, not pilots. We're not sitting on the deck and piloting our mighty battleships, we are on the deck ordering our men tasks that they were trained to do (on top of other things like the whole "we feel what the ship feels thing".) Same could be said about the targeting rename, very poorly done.
Why is planetary Interaction split all over the place? Your intention is to make things cleaner and easier to understand by new players, than you go and move all the planetary interaction skills to different skill subsets. (Command Center Upgrades in Resource Processing? Advanced Planetology in Scanning (Btw, logy means science of/the study of, if anything it should be in science).)
Keep the T3 tab, if anything you should be added more sub-tabs to that for each race, not removing it!
QUOTE: Lunaleil Fournier Went and re-read entire thread...all lot of synergy in this thread on feedback it seems.
+1 for keeping sub-systems separate from rigs. +1 keep spaceship command. +1 for target management or similar. +1 for changing tactical weapon reconfiguration to Siege module operation
I think that PI scanning should go in the PI group...its a different type of scanning and I think it still makes sense even though it slightly breaks the theme. There's always an exception to the rule! |

Noriko Mai
893
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 12:35:00 -
[359] - Quote
Destination SkillQueue wrote:Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:I and many other would much rather CCP STOP trying to fix things that are not broken & please start fixing things that ARE BROKEN! The first one that springs to mind is Corporation/Alliance Roles & Permissions in conjunction with their use on Player Owned Stations. We know this needs fixing. You know this needs fixing. It may take some time but please fix this and not things that are not broken. I'd pull my hair out but I don't have that much left. Grrrr.  I'd like to highlight and support this sentiment. I don't think there is anything wrong with wanting to improve on minor features and make things more understandable. I'm also not suggesting you're not working on the important stuff. It's just important to underline, that this stuff is of little importance to us and your initial plans aren't turning it to gold either. Just a system with different oddities. It's minor fiddling on unimportant things, that seems borderline pointless busywork. A thousand improvements of this caliber won't even come close to the benefits and good will of, for example, what giving dev love to corporation management would yield. It looks like they are avoiding the real problems and fix everything around the broken things. I don't understand this... There a obvious things broken as hell and they do stuff like this... But what do you expect from a company that is unable to to unify the description of a few ships for YEARS. |

Psychotic Psychosis
Beanbag. Tribal Band
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 12:51:00 -
[360] - Quote
You need to remember that people who do the skill renaming probably / very likely don't work on the issues regarding UI Implemenation/Combat/Anything Else. It is probably part of the localization team editing text files.
Either way CCP, Thanks for your continued work, but maybe you could confirm whether or not the people assigned to this is their core jobs, and not taking time away from more important bugs.
Psycho
|

Vas Vadum
PH0ENIX COMPANY Tribal Band
51
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 12:51:00 -
[361] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:It looks like they are avoiding the real problems and fix everything around the broken things. I don't understand this... There a obvious things broken as hell and they do stuff like this... But what do you expect from a company that is unable to to unify the description of a few ships for YEARS.
It's because they don't know how or lack the skill to fix these problems at the current time. At least that's my guess. So they go about changing other things to make it look like they are doing work while they sit there twiddling their thumbs wondering how to fix the issues that plague the game. I mean they did an epic update, and now they are going back to doing dumb useless things. |

Psychotic Psychosis
Beanbag. Tribal Band
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 12:55:00 -
[362] - Quote
Vas Vadum wrote:Noriko Mai wrote:It looks like they are avoiding the real problems and fix everything around the broken things. I don't understand this... There a obvious things broken as hell and they do stuff like this... But what do you expect from a company that is unable to to unify the description of a few ships for YEARS. It's because they don't know how or lack the skill to fix these problems at the current time. At least that's my guess. So they go about changing other things to make it look like they are doing work while they sit there twiddling their thumbs wondering how to fix the issues that plague the game. I mean they did an epic update, and now they are going back to doing dumb useless things.
I'm pretty sure CCP as a very well established game dev completely has the "skill" to do these sort of changes, i mean they coded a permanent universe to begin with... |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
182
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 13:37:00 -
[363] - Quote
also talking about missile skills.. its a little confusing if you look at the base missile stats before you put them in your ship the stats don't really take into account your missile skills ..
also since missile skills usually add upto 100% range and 50% on other stats like tracking its hard to understand looking at say a Heavy missile in eve what kind of performance you will get from them.
besides making these stats accurate with your skills added in game i would also suggest reducing the skills down to more conservative 5% a level .. and then apply the difference to the missiles themselves this would massively help new players understand what the missiles will actually do without having to load them into a ship or look at eve Hq or something.
You shouldn't need 3rd party applications to understand and get accurate figures that the game should be doing already perhaps also the descriptions of missiles in game could be more informative like the ammo for guns now have clear percentage stats on the descriptions. Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767
Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |

Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
156
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 13:38:00 -
[364] - Quote
How CCP spends subscription money on EvE - renaming things and appealing to the lowest common denominator
If you are going to rename something at least make it sound good |

Mercedes Chance
GDC Enterprises
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 13:48:00 -
[365] - Quote
I concur with many others . . . Spaceship Command sounds better and should stay the same. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
190
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 13:57:00 -
[366] - Quote
Also please don't make me train energy grid upgrades lv5 just to fly a HAC its just strange surely you could switch it to lv4 and then add the lost time onto some other skill you could add to its pre-req that's upto a lv4 skill thats relevant to the ship like a navigation skill perhaps the mwd skill to lv3 or 4.
Another thing is since you have the large micro jump drive limited to battleships why don't you do the same thing with AB's and mwd's? more consistency please... also would stop exploitation of over sized props like tengus come to mind. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 16:00:00 -
[367] - Quote
In practice, hull is no more a subcategory of armor than shields is a subcategory of armor, all three are entirely different levels of a ship's defensive abilities and as such we need three clear divisions:
shields - all shield relevant skills
armor - all armor relevant skills
hull - all hull relevant skills.
To further emphasize my point:
1. no module or skill that affects the armor of a ship should have the word 'hull' in it.
2. no module or skill that affects the hull should use the term 'structure' in it's description as you have given it the title "hull" and it should be referenced as such. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 16:30:00 -
[368] - Quote
Please remove the 'daytrading' skill and refund SPs as needed.
Reasoning: Contracts is the branch of EVEs marketplace that adds the scamming intrigue to the game, while the market should be a safe haven for commerce ( I believe this is why you restrict the market to 'original blueprints only').
I know many will disagree with this reasoning and that is fine, it is just my humble opinion.
P.S. My humble opinion is always right, just ask me! |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 16:41:00 -
[369] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:also talking about missile skills.. its a little confusing if you look at the base missile stats before you put them in your ship the stats don't really take into account your missile skills ..
also since missile skills usually add upto 100% range and 50% on other stats like tracking its hard to understand looking at say a Heavy missile in eve what kind of performance you will get from them.
besides making these stats accurate with your skills added in game i would also suggest reducing the skills down to more conservative 5% a level .. and then apply the difference to the missiles themselves this would massively help new players understand what the missiles will actually do without having to load them into a ship or look at eve Hq or something. Adding missile range in km would be nice instead of having to calculate velocity X flight time.
You shouldn't need 3rd party applications to understand and get accurate figures that the game should be doing already perhaps also the descriptions of missiles in game could be more informative like the ammo for guns now have clear percentage stats on the descriptions.
also add a new skill called medium assault missiles and they could be a lower damage better tracking version of HAMS. replace RML's with medium assault launchers that way you get better tracking against smaller ships but without the massive loss of dps and ofc using small missiles on a medium sized ship is out of whack really.
If i am misunderstanding your post i apologize in advance but....
The reason skills that affect "missile range" are not dynamically updated to reflect your current skills is because things like ship choice can also affect "missile range" and they don't know what ship, of the 10 missile ships you have, that you intend to fly. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
190
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 17:03:00 -
[370] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Harvey James wrote:also talking about missile skills.. its a little confusing if you look at the base missile stats before you put them in your ship the stats don't really take into account your missile skills ..
also since missile skills usually add upto 100% range and 50% on other stats like tracking its hard to understand looking at say a Heavy missile in eve what kind of performance you will get from them.
besides making these stats accurate with your skills added in game i would also suggest reducing the skills down to more conservative 5% a level .. and then apply the difference to the missiles themselves this would massively help new players understand what the missiles will actually do without having to load them into a ship or look at eve Hq or something. Adding missile range in km would be nice instead of having to calculate velocity X flight time.
You shouldn't need 3rd party applications to understand and get accurate figures that the game should be doing already perhaps also the descriptions of missiles in game could be more informative like the ammo for guns now have clear percentage stats on the descriptions.
also add a new skill called medium assault missiles and they could be a lower damage better tracking version of HAMS. replace RML's with medium assault launchers that way you get better tracking against smaller ships but without the massive loss of dps and ofc using small missiles on a medium sized ship is out of whack really. If i am misunderstanding your post i apologize in advance but.... The reason skills that affect "missile range" are not dynamically updated to reflect your current skills is because things like ship choice can also affect "missile range" and they don't know what ship, of the 10 missile ships you have, that you intend to fly.
that doesn't explain why they don't update them with skills... and then when loaded to the ship then they Could update them to the ships bonuses.
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 17:22:00 -
[371] - Quote
Deleted, reason clarified in my next post below. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
190
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 17:26:00 -
[372] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Harvey James wrote:
You shouldn't need 3rd party applications to understand and get accurate figures that the game should be doing already perhaps also the descriptions of missiles in game could be more informative like the ammo for guns now have clear percentage stats on the descriptions.
If i am misunderstanding your post i apologize in advance but.... The reason skills that affect "missile range" are not dynamically updated to reflect your current skills is because things like ship choice can also affect "missile range" and they don't know what ship, of the 10 missile ships you have, that you intend to fly. Quote: that doesn't explain why they don't update them with skills... and then when loaded to the ship then they Could update them to the ships bonuses.
Apologizing again if I'm still missing your point, but..... 1. you state you want a clear understanding of what impact a skill that increases missile range will have on missile range without needing a third party application but even if they give you what you want you will still need to use a third party application to know what range you will ultimately have on any given ship. 2. If you are going to take the time to chose a ship, load it with mods, select your missile launchers and then choose your missiles and THEN check it to see what your missile range ultimately is then your request isnt helping you, you can place your mouse over your loaded missile launcher and there is its range.
My main point being here is that if you look at missiles right now and say you wanted to use them on a caracal you would have to make so many calculations to figure out what you'll get not just range but also tracking etc.. and the point of this thread is too make things much clearer... you seem to not want this for some reason Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 17:29:00 -
[373] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:... you seem to not want this for some reason
Not that i don't want it, it is just that despite reading 3 of your posts now, my thick skull still isn't seeing your point and i will take up no more of your time, cheers!
, Maldiro Selkurk.
On another subject:
+1
....for your signature line (if that is what they are called) where you basically state that T3's should be slammed with the nerf bat, I couldn't agree more that they are seriously OP in their current form. |

Bovaan
Sunset Warriors Legacy Rising
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 18:40:00 -
[374] - Quote
Energy Pulse Weapons
Always confused me with pulse lasers. How about "Smartbomb Operation"? And should it be moved from the Engineering group? |

Benjamin Artoriana
The Goat Lords Excavation Inc
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 19:10:00 -
[375] - Quote
ChromeStriker wrote:GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+
Keep Electronics and Engineering names the same... might just be nestalgia but never heard they were a problem... seems quite straightforward to me.
Targeting - Target Acquisition
Multitasking - Advanced Target Acquisition
GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+GÇ+
Or
Targeting - Target Management
Multitasking - Advanced Target Management Something, something, don't be an idiot. Blah, blah, I love EVE and goats. |

Seamus Donohue
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
37
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 20:13:00 -
[376] - Quote
Reading through the original post by CCP Ytterbium, I would like to propose the following amendments or reversions:
"CPU Management" and "Power Grid Management" should instead be "CPU Optimization" and "Powergrid Optimization"; optimization, rather than management.
For "Targeting" and "Multitasking", I suggest "Targetlock Optimization" and "Advanced Targetlock Optimization".
The new "Armor" group should be named "Armor and Structure".
"Mechanics" as a skill should be "Structural Integrity".
"Electronic System" as a group should be "Electronic Warfare".
"Ship Modifications" as a group should be split into "Rigging" and "Subsystems".
"Spaceship Command" as a group should retain its' classic name.
---
Everything else looks good to me. I like it. Survivor of Teskanen. -áFan of John Rourke.
I have video tutorials for EVE Online on my YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/SeamusDonohueEVE |

Vas Vadum
PH0ENIX COMPANY Tribal Band
52
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 20:29:00 -
[377] - Quote
Seamus Donohue wrote:Reading through the original post by CCP Ytterbium, I would like to propose the following amendments or reversions:
"CPU Management" and "Power Grid Management" should instead be "CPU Optimization" and "Powergrid Optimization"; optimization, rather than management.
For "Targeting" and "Multitasking", I suggest "Targetlock Optimization" and "Advanced Targetlock Optimization".
The new "Armor" group should be named "Armor and Structure".
"Mechanics" as a skill should be "Structural Integrity".
"Electronic System" as a group should be "Electronic Warfare".
"Ship Modifications" as a group should be split into "Rigging" and "Subsystems".
"Spaceship Command" as a group should retain its' classic name.
---
Everything else looks good to me. I like it.
I actually like some of this, most of it. But I don't like the fact that CCP is dumbing down the game for the idiots or the 12 year olds. They did this with implants, dumbing them down for people when all you had to do was take a minute to read it's info page. I mean, people always open these before buying anyway so what's the point of renaming. I think this is mostly just a delay tactic, to disguise the fact that they can't fix our current problems, so they are gonna work on something pointless to distract us for a while. |

Lord Mandelor
Tengoo Uninstallation Service
179
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 21:01:00 -
[378] - Quote
Here to support glorious Spaceship Command. Knight and Agent of the New Order |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
190
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:34:00 -
[379] - Quote
Perhaps you could change the bonus on the following: to 2% damage -Energy turrets -hybrid turrets -projectile turrets -Heavy missiles -heavy assault missiles -rockets -cruise missiles -light missiles -torpedoes
The reason being that at 5% you can't not train them to lv5. at 2% lv5 is more optional and thus making training lv5 unnecessary unless you want to specialize in T2 ammo. Then ofc you need to make T1/faction ammo worth using. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS strain SELKURK
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:11:00 -
[380] - Quote
Seamus Donohue wrote:Reading through the original post by CCP Ytterbium, I would like to propose the following amendments or reversions:
"CPU Management" and "Power Grid Management" should instead be "CPU Optimization" and "Powergrid Optimization"; optimization, rather than management.
For "Targeting" and "Multitasking", I suggest "Targetlock Optimization" and "Advanced Targetlock Optimization".
The new "Armor" group should be named "Armor and Structure".
"Mechanics" as a skill should be "Structural Integrity".
"Electronic System" as a group should be "Electronic Warfare".
"Ship Modifications" as a group should be split into "Rigging" and "Subsystems".
"Spaceship Command" as a group should retain its' classic name.
---
Everything else looks good to me. I like it.
1. Anything that gets them to not use the term 'management' gets my vote (it is much to vague a term) 2. Targetlock Opt. is to vague, it could just as easily refer to locking time and locking range. 3. Armor and Hull should be separated into to distinct categories, since they are distinct protection levels in actual practice. 4. Mechanics should be called hull integrity, unless they change all references to 'hull' to 'structure' instead, in which case I would support 'structural integrity', in short they need to chose a name and be consistent with its use. |

ikisol
Wings of Turul HUN Reloaded
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:33:00 -
[381] - Quote
please
DO not make WOW out of EVE
no need for DUMB |

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
774
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:46:00 -
[382] - Quote
ikisol wrote:please
DO not make WOW out of EVE
no need for DUMB
becaues dumb is a noun https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |

DooDoo Gum
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
40
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:58:00 -
[383] - Quote
about bloody time.. |

Bru Swillis
Titan Technologies Inc
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 03:20:00 -
[384] - Quote
Please just leave well enough alone, please please pretty please cherry on top. Stop changing stuff that works perfectly fine, and that people have been used to for so long. It just causes alot of unnecessary aggrevation . |

Octoven
Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming
167
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 04:24:00 -
[385] - Quote
There are some issues here that clearly haven't been thought through. I mean to be honest it doesnt make sense to say CPU Management is a pre-res for Targeting (Multiple Targeting). Another issue:
Quote:Armor: is a new skill group, that has all armor skills - the GÇ£mechanicsGÇ¥ skill group has been removed.
Contains the Armor Honeycombing, Armor Resistance Phasing, Capital Remote Armor Repair Systems, Capital Remote Hull Repair Systems, Capital Repair Systems, EM Armor Compensation, Explosive Armor Compensation, Hull Upgrades, Kinetic Armor Compensation, Mechanics, Remote Armor Repair Systems, Remote Hull Repair Systems, Repair Systems and Thermic Armor Compensation skills.
As you can see, having "Mechanics" can mean armor or hull. When you think of the word mechanic, you think of metallic items on a ship that can be fixed or changed. Hull and armor fall under that. Your new proposal puts hull under an Armor category which doesnt make sense.
Quote:Electronic System: is the old GÇ£electronicsGÇ¥ group. Now only contains offense EW related skills.
This change isn't really a change, its redundant. We spaceship pilots KNOW that anything fitted to our ship is a "system" it doesnt need to be re-iterated.
Quote:Engineering: now has all skills related with energy management and fittings in general.
Contains the Advanced Weapon Upgrades, CPU Management, Capital Energy Emission Systems, Electronics Upgrades, Energy Emission Systems, Energy Grid Upgrades, Energy Management, Energy Pulse Weapons, Energy Systems Operation, Nanite Interfacing, Nanite Operation, Power Grid Management, Thermodynamics and Weapon Upgrades skills.
Not sure where to even begin here. A)CPU Management doesnt belong, it is CPU not power and thus is not an engineering skill. CPU Management would be better suited in the Electronics System category. B) It makes no sense referring Nanite control to Neurotoxin Control and leaving Nanite Interfacing and Nanite Operation by its name. If you want to change one, be consistent and change all related. So you would have Neurotoxin Interfacing and Neurotoxin Operation. Be sure to also change the name of the item that these use like Nanite Paste to Neruotoxin Paste. If you do not do these things, you only create confusion where there was clarity before. Personally Id say leave the name for all nanite skills the way they are and save yourself some work.
The Planet Management skill group needs to stay exactly where it is. It makes no sense spreading 5 skills that are only useful for PI over multiple categories not related to each other.
Spaceship Command needs to stay Spaceship Command, not Spaceship Piloting. This is an adult game, not for 6 year olds. Adults understand the concept of what commanding a spaceship means, we don't need to play it down to grammar school grammar.
I like most of the categorizing but as for the 5 major skill renaming, they should stay the same. Leave electronics where it is instead of CPU Management. By doing so, the Electronics skill can be the anchor for the Electronics category. Having Engineering remain the same is the anchor for the Engineering category. It makes zero sense to change the two at all. Let eve players read the descriptions for these skills to better understand what they are. THAT is why the descriptions are there in the first place. The names are to invite a bit of reality to it. Targeting is also fine the way it is; however, you could rename Multitasking to Multiple Targeting or even stick with Advanced Targeting. As I stated with Nanite Control, that too should stay as is. |

Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 06:12:00 -
[386] - Quote
How can we blame CCP for thinking changing the names and grouping improves the game when everyone in here argues for another change in name and/or grouping as "better"?
And am I really alone in thinking how skills work is the real way skills could be improved? The skills are exactly like other MMORPG's. "Train this skill to get armor HP for your character", everyone trains it because everyone has lots of armor on their ships (even shield-tankers), and the armor HP skill gives armor to ALL ships, so you can not NOT train it. So the only thing it does is to make all the players exactly alike. These skills that give attributes to everything are like giving basket-ball players skills that make everyone five inches taller if they subscribe to a newspaper for a month. The subscription is not pricey enough to make some people not train it, so everyone must train it to be competitive. It does not add to the PVP side if it gives attributes to all ships. Skills that would add to PVP are skills that improve one attribute for one player, and another attribute for the other (you know, the fire-mage gets hotter fire and the ice-mage gets colder ice, not that they both get 5% more HP).
I do realize CCP 10 years ago thought that the skills had to pay off so much you can not NOT train them, because they had the overwhelming feeling that people had no reason to train skills just to get this and that attribute better. But there is no need to have skills EVERYONE must train. There are enough ships and modules and things to do that blanket-skills are not necessary anymore. Instead of having a skill-tree where one leads to more which leads to more. Just have One per module, which leads to sub-skills for different sizes, one skill per ship, which leads to sub-skills for that ship. That still means you could train for two decades and still not have them all, but you wouldn't need to train skills that buff attributes for all ships to be competitive, just your ship. |

Vorll Minaaran
Centre Of Attention Middle of Nowhere
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 07:34:00 -
[387] - Quote
Octoven wrote:
... B) It makes no sense referring Nanite control to Neurotoxin Control and leaving Nanite Interfacing and Nanite Operation by its name. If you want to change one, be consistent and change all related. So you would have Neurotoxin Interfacing and Neurotoxin Operation. Be sure to also change the name of the item that these use like Nanite Paste to Neruotoxin Paste. If you do not do these things, you only create confusion where there was clarity before. Personally Id say leave the name for all nanite skills the way they are and save yourself some work.
You have never used combat boosters, dont you? :) Nanite Control: Proficiency at reducing the severity of the side effects experienced upon injection of combat boosters. Neurotoxin Recovery: Proficiency at biofeedback techniques intended to negate the side effects typically experienced upon injection of combat boosters. (has prereq Nanite Control) That's why they'll change Nanite Control to Neurotoxin Control and it makes sense. |

Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
169
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 08:08:00 -
[388] - Quote
Spaceship Pilotting is a poor name IMHO, it's inappropriate due to the naval scale of EVE ships, we are commanding a crew, instructing PWOs to determine firing solutions...etc after all. Pilotting is likely to obfuscate that distinction - and might well lead to expectations of joystick flight, target leading and so on which will be difficult to manage.
Missile Launcher Operation should stay too, it is composed of skills which affect missile launchers after all. The use of T2 Torps for example is dependent on the use of a T2 siege launcher, rather than a skill after all.
There are various other changes which also seem counterproductive. |

Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon Drunk 'n' Disorderly
745
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 10:16:00 -
[389] - Quote
So we will pilot something else than spaceships in the future?
"Also, your boobs " -á CCP Eterne, 2012
|

Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon Drunk 'n' Disorderly
762
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 10:36:00 -
[390] - Quote
How about
Interstellar Vessel Piloting |

Luscius Uta
Unleashed' Fury Forsaken Federation
44
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:12:00 -
[391] - Quote
just like most people here, there's some changes that I like and some I don't. I don't see a reason to change names of Electronics and Engineering skills, unless you want to change names of Electronics and Egineering T3 subsystems as well (since some of them will increase CPU and powergrid, just like parent skill). However, some skill names, such as Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing, are inaccurate and should be changed (my advice on new name is "Drone Networking"). I also welcome moving WU and AWU out of Gunnery group. Rigs and subsystems could be placed in the same group as those two (I would call it "Spaceship Upgrades"), along with some fitting-related skills such as Energy Grid Upgrades and Electronics Upgrades.
That's just my 2 cents :) |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
190
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:15:00 -
[392] - Quote
WU is an cpu skill in effect so should be in electronics
AWU is an pg grid upgrade in effect so should be in engineering Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

TharOkha
0asis Group
541
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 19:00:00 -
[393] - Quote
Everything sounds OK but please DO NOT RENAME SPACESHIP COMMAND to spaceship piloting for god sake  GÇ£If reality can destroy the dream, why shouldn't the dream destroy reality?GÇ¥ |

Miss Mass
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 19:31:00 -
[394] - Quote
Add me to the list of people who don't understand why you're doing this. If the intention is to make it easier for new players to find the skills they need to train, there are two problems with this exercise:
1) The first, as many have pointed out, is that your new categorization scheme makes certain choices that are just as arbitrary or non-intuitive as some in the old scheme. Most likely any scheme that you come up with is going to contain some such choices.
2) The second is that there are many skills guides out there that are publicly available, and countless more that are corporation-specific. When you check in your proposed changes, you'll instantly obsolete all of that material that many new players use. You're creating work for all of the people who maintain wikis, as well as the folks who volunteer their time to produce tools for the EVE community.
For those of us who don't always equate "change" with "new and improved", it would be helpful to hear more of the motivation for a change when it's initially proposed. E.g. "we get 200 petitions a week about this problem" or "surveys consistently show that users are confused" or "the CSM forwarded complaints". In the absence of that, it's often easier to see the disruptive effects of the change as opposed to the benefits, which in this case aren't obvious, at least to me. |

Abishai
56
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 20:22:00 -
[395] - Quote
Terrible
1) The new category names are weak at best. Come on.... Spaceship Piloting....
2) The new groupings are based on your ideas of what skills are needed for a specific task, not on how they affect the ship itself. Get out of my sandbox.
|

Zane Tekitsu
D.I.C.A.D. Solutions
32
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 20:56:00 -
[396] - Quote
The skill set seemed to be pretty good where it was. At the worst, neural influences could be in their own section. |

BoBoZoBo
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
290
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 21:14:00 -
[397] - Quote
I think most are VERY logical
HOWEVER - WTF is the point of changing SPACESHIP COMMAND ?
Not only does it sound silly, it just isn't correct on a technical level. Piloting and command are two different things.
I do not simply pilot the craft like some low-level officer at the CON, I command it.
+1 To almost everything -1 to changing Spaceship Command to Pilot. -1 Targeting (name change is also a bit non-sensical)
That is just silly and completely unravels te rest of the renaming logic Primary Test Subject GÇó SmackTalker Elite |

Inokuma Yawara
University of Caille Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 21:59:00 -
[398] - Quote
Makari Aeron wrote:Ohes noes, CCP has changed the names and grouping of skills that make my internet spaceship pixels have more oomph. I must emo rage about it!!1ONE11!!  (There was a severe lack of emo rage in this thread so I had to add some even if it was fake. My only complaint is that Spaceship Piloting sounds "weaker" than Spaceship Command)
On a real ship. The commander utters commands, and the pilot turns the wheel. You mean I'm getting demoted? I like command better. Watch this space.-á New exciting signature in development. |

Ryelek d'Entari
The 4th Legion Here Be Dragons
90
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:17:00 -
[399] - Quote
TBQFH, nobody really cares about the group names, but the skill names themselves are important to us.
Don't rename the iconic Engineering and Electronics skills. At a minimum you'll be instantly invalidating 10 years' worth of guides and reference material, much of which is in your very own wiki (or are you going to troll through every page which references 'Engineering V' in text and update it? Good luck with that...)
Furthermore, you're not being very consistent here: the 'Corporation Management', 'Drones', 'Gunnery', 'Leadership', 'Social', 'Science', 'Trade' and 'Navigation' skills are still named the same as their respective groups. So don't change Spaceship Command or Engineering (or Electronics), that's just silly renaming for silly renaming's sake.
Skills which do deserve renames because their original names are weird
- Multitasking --> "Advanced Targeting" (alternately, name the targeting skills Target Management and Adv Tgt Mgmt)
- Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing --> "Long Range Drone Interfacing"
- Energy Grid Upgrades --> "Engineering Upgrades" (encompassing both power grid and capacitor upgrades, neither of which are energy grids)
- Shield Compensation --> "Shield Boost Economization" (or whatever: anything to differentiate it from the resistance-boosting "Kinetic/Thermic/EM/Explosive Shield Compensation" skills, which incidentally need some serious love)
- Thermic XXX --> "Thermal XXX" (please stick with thermal, the two are synonymous but thermic is antiquated)
- Frigate/Industrial/Cruiser/etc Construction : Please add an "advanced" in front of these, as they only have use for T2 production.
- Remote Sensing --> "Remote Planetary Sensing" (especially since the context of being in the Planet Management group is now being lost)
- Jury Rigging --> "Ship Rigging". While the phrase 'jury rigging' is technically the correct term for a makeshift modification, particularly in a nautical context, it is more commonly associated with corrupting a trial jury, a la Al Capone. It just smells weird, please rename. :)
- Afterburner --> "Afterburners" or "Afterburner Operation". It's just odd to name a skill in the non-plural sense.
- Hacking --> "Data Analysis" or "Encrypted Data Analysis". Basically tie this skill name to the Data Analyzer and Data Sites.
- Archaeology --> "Relic Analysis" or "Archaeological Relic Analysis". Similarly tie this skill name to the Relic Analyzer and Relic Sites.
- All T3 subsystems skills --> properly name these as "subsystem" skills, e.g. "Minmatar Propulsion Subsystems"[/i].
As they are now, they look very appealing for any pilot to train for their respective race. It is not clear by your proposed group/name combo that they are useful only for T3 ships (though the skill descriptions themselves are pretty clear).
Skill Groups
- Electronics System (sic) --> "Electronic Warfare Systems"
- Armor + Shields (combine the two) --> "Defensive Systems"
Other tidbits
- Survey III as a prerequisite for Salvaging makes even less sense than it did before.
- Energy Pulse Weapons really does not belong in the engineering group. Just stick it in Gunnery.
- Cloaking really does not belong in with the other ewar skills. Could put it in targeting or engineering groups. If you do leave it with the ewar skills, should probably move the items from the 'Electronics and Sensor Upgrades" to the "Electronic Warfare" item group as a result, which is a little weird.
Remember, don't change stuff just to change stuff, or to satisfy someone's internal OCD. The real world is messy, Eve should be too. qwerty vs dvorak. 'nuff said. |

Emiko P'eng
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:30:00 -
[400] - Quote
Spaceship Command +1
Piloting is just lame! As immortal clones we are supposed to be wired up to replace, in some cases hundreds of crew, we are Commander, pilot, navigator, weapons officer, electronics warfare officer, etc.... The skill covers not just piloting but how to synchronise all the ship systems to us. Just look at the bonuses you get for each ship with the current skill. Most of them have nothing to do with 'Piloting'
If you are really set on removing 'Commander' try 'Starship Familiarisation'
Targeting Systems / Advanced Targeting Systems +1
The military love their systems as we are supposed to be fighting using the word System is far more military
Subsystem skills independent category +1
As a skill set that you can lose skill on they need to be clearly marked as separate
Planetary Interaction skills independent category +1
Unless you are planning to totally overhauling Planetary Interaction, it has absolutely nothing to do with mining from a spaceship as it is all about building manned facilities on a planet. |

Barramuda
Jolly Codgers Get Off My Lawn
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 23:09:00 -
[401] - Quote
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better I'm with this guy. "Spaceship Piloting" is a little too limp-wristed.
I agree with commanders above. |

Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2117
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 00:07:00 -
[402] - Quote
This is so utterly pointless...
|

Khira Kitamatsu
678
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 00:40:00 -
[403] - Quote
So this is what CCP waste time on? Renaming skills and skill sets? Ponies!-á We need more ponies! |

Fennore
Underworld Innovations Sindication
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 03:31:00 -
[404] - Quote
Spaceship Piloting? No That's just poor grammar to begin with. You are commanding your ship. You are not just a pilot, you are commanding your ship and all it's systems and crew. |

Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
89
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 04:26:00 -
[405] - Quote
Spaceship Make-Active Enablertizor And Primary Bonus Magnificationing! |

Wyndeigo
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 04:26:00 -
[406] - Quote
I can see why some of the skills could use some cleaning up but;
1. There are far more important items that have been overlooked for far too long.
2. You are just creating a lot of redundant work for the third party developers that do not have entire teams to help and also do it mostly for free.
3. How about lets get ship tiericide, rebalancing or whatever you want to call it, get it done.
4. DO POS's, "nuff said"
5. long standing bug fixes
6. pve sucks, again, nuff said.
and the list goes on.
p.s. just noticed this also; go to the EvE gate main page and check out the Headline News column, you still have articles from Inferno patches, what the ... really Inferno!!! |

Nariya Kentaya
Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi
650
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 04:41:00 -
[407] - Quote
We dont pilot our sapceships, we CAMMAND them, aside from that most of my complaints can be written off as me being used to the old names and not liking change, kinda like back when ammo/meta names were all made unimaginative, er i mean, "streamlined" |

Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
367
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 06:44:00 -
[408] - Quote
Khira Kitamatsu wrote:So this is what CCP waste time on? Renaming skills and skill sets? It's certainly not a waste of time. It is going to be a lot easier for newbs to identify skills they are looking for. Remove insurance. |

Luscius Uta
Unleashed' Fury Forsaken Federation
44
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 07:56:00 -
[409] - Quote
One thing I forgot to mention in my previous post: Every skill group, except Planet Management and Subsystems, has a skill of the same name in it which is generally the most important skill in the group and has a 1x training multiplier. If you want to introduce new skill groups, I would like them to keep with this "tradition" (which can be done without introduction of new skills, I am assured). |

NeoShocker
Interstellar eXodus The Retirement Club
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 10:28:00 -
[410] - Quote
Yeah, I agree with the skill group to undergo some naming changes.
Armor, ok.
Electronic System, I disagree. Should separate between electronic and Electronic warfare. Electronic should be all CPU reducing related skills and cloaking device for example.
Engineering. Still same ol'. But all PG reducing skills shold be here.. I'm wondering about the Energy transfer tho'. I think those go under Electronic warfare. I'm unsure about nanite related skills. Don't think it fits into "engineering."
Missiles, ok.
Neural Enhancement. Ok
Production, ok.
Resource Processsing, perfect.
Ship Modification, ok, but as long its RIGS. T3 Subs should be on its own group categorry rather in Ship Modification.
Scanning, eh, ok I suppose. But I think those should go under electronics.
Science, ok
Shield, ok, makes more sense than engineering. I suggest renaming tactical shield manipulation to something else.
Spaceship Piloting, eh. Spaceship Command is a better name.
Targeting. Hm... I don't know. I think its unecessary. Should go into Electronic system. BUT all the sensor compensation should be in Electronic Warfare group. |

Juniper Weatherwax
Industrial Waste Removal Services
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 11:37:00 -
[411] - Quote
Tony S7ark wrote:marVLs wrote:Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better
How about looking at this a little differently, by obtaining licences to gain access rights to larger bigger or faster ships, like getting a motorcycle licence or a licence to drive a semi.
Frigate Licence Provisional Cruiser licence Caldari Freighter licence
So in effect, your 'logbook' would aquire licences to fly/pilot ships as your learning and abilities progressed.
Spaceship Command could be read as 'Ship Licences' and each section, Frigate - Dreadnaught would show non trained, partially trained, fully trained and with the holding of, say, cruiser licences for each faction, a new licence simply 'All Cruisers'.
'Space Ship Command' sounds like an authoritian resource, some thing you rmight report to to buy extended rights to stay in High Sec while you have a rating of -10.
'Space Ship Licences' tells you what it is, a portfolio of licencing achievements.
|

Benjamin Artoriana
The Goat Lords Excavation Inc
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 11:52:00 -
[412] - Quote
Debir Achen wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:I think it would be really helpful to add sub-groups of skills.
Spaceship Piloting (SC, ACS, Cap ship) > Amarr Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Caldari Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Gallente Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Minmatar Spaceship Command (F/D/C/BC/BS/I/SC/...) > Tech 2 Spaceship Command (AS, Inty, Dic, HIC, HAC, etc)
Definitely feature creep, but it would make things a lot easier to manage. Yep! Let's re-imagine the whole skill tree as a two-level tree (rather than the current 1-level tree). As far as possible, the first skill in each sub-tree is the "named" skill, which is fundamental to all other skills in the tree. Note that 'named' skills might be nested: Electronic Warfare is a base skill for a tree of skills, but is itself a subtree from Electronics Ship Systems: - Electronics: Electronics, (all the sensor & targeting related skills) - Electronic Warfare: Electronic Warfare, ... - Propulsion Jamming: Propulsion Jamming, ... - Engineering: Engineering, ... - Energy Systems Operation: Energy Systems Operation, Energy Management, ... - Shield Operation: Shield Operation, Shield Management, ... - Mechanics: Mechanics, Hull Upgrades, (armor skills) - Repair Systems: Repair Systems, ... - Jury Rigging: ... - Subsystems: ... Weapon Systems: - Gunnery: - Missile Launcher Operation: - Drones: - Weapon Upgrades: (includes seige modules) Social Skills: - Corp Management: - Social: - Leadership: - Trade: Spaceship Command: - Spaceship Command: Spaceship Command, Advanced Spaceship Command, Capital Ships, all the T2 skills - Navigation: (seems to fit here as well as anywhere) - Amarr / Caldar / Gallente / Minmatar Spaceship Command Industry: - Industry: Industry, production skills - Mining: Mining, ... - Refining: Refining, ... - PI: ... - Spaceship Construction: Science: - Science: Science - Research: Research, Lab Operation, ..., all the R&D skills (maybe split the specific R&D and the 'base' R&D skills) - Astrometrics: Astrometrics, ... - Exploration: Archaelogy, Hacking, ... - Personal Enhancement: Cybernetics, Informorph Psych, (boosters) - Thermodynamics: Thermodynamics, (Nanite Repair skills) Stuff that I'm not quite sure where it fits: - Anchoring, Salvaging (despite the similarity, I assert this is *not* a mining skill, since it's generally used by non-miners), cynos + jump portals, Starbase Defense Management
I can agree with this in part from the standpoint of moving skills into a two-tier system of base/core areas (since CCP are fond of tiers) with T2/3 modifiers (skills like HAC/HIC/etc) rather than the current single tier (and poorly named and some of the suggested name changes suck donkey balls) system.
A lot of good ideas floating about in this thread. Something, something, don't be an idiot. Blah, blah, I love EVE and goats. |

Liastr
Wayward 7
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 13:21:00 -
[413] - Quote
Multiple Targeting sucks. Target Management is much better. Target Acquisition to me sounds more like a targeting speed skill.
Spaceship Piloting is indeed 'naff'. Spaceship Command is much better. Really, there's no reason to change this.
Also +1 on standardizing the skill names for ORE ships. ORE industrial just for covering the Noctis is a bit dumb, unless you're planning on adding or moving more ORE ships to that group.
Not sure about the PI skills. PI is fairly unique in EVE industry, so it seems odd to spread it's skills out among the other industrial skills. I would vote to keep the Planet Management group. |

Markku Laaksonen
EVE University Ivy League
158
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 13:53:00 -
[414] - Quote
This is completely unnecessary. |

Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
390
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 15:00:00 -
[415] - Quote
Reorganizing the skills in specific skill related groups has long been needed. +1
Re/naming of the groups and making even more categories of them. -1.
Prefer the current category names as they make sense. Can add a hover over the categories to inform a player, for example, that Electronics skills offer A/B/C benefits (or add an additional box below the title explaining what skills in that category does).
The current category names have a ship system feel to them, where renaming them to specific skills and what they do, cheapens how a ship is looked as. In industry to the military, the names for equipment are related to the plant or ship itself. Sub systems (a sub-category) are named after specific systems or functions.
In the military command is the term for ship/station leadership (and only like in the Air Force/Army they're considered pilots, naval forces call them aviators. Generic command is recognized all over, not just branch related like "pilot"). "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|

YuuKnow
Terra-Formers
815
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 15:50:00 -
[416] - Quote
The current system is adequate really. Its not that complicated that anyone at CCP should be spending work time working on meaningless stuff like this.
yk |

spaco butilia
Mind Your Business
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 17:04:00 -
[417] - Quote
imho, there's no reason for continue to use the name hull upgrades for a skill that improve the armor hp amount and "mechanics" for another one that improves the hull hp amount.... |

Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 19:11:00 -
[418] - Quote
I'm swayed by reason and must change my view to "just keep it as it is, its too small of an improvement that it should take valuable time, best not over-think it and take a step back and look for something that is more worth it". If skills should be changed at all the change will be bigger than just changing names, the tree-shape of the skills would be removed and general uniformity of people's skills and ships would be removed, (fex all ships have pretty much the same amount of shield hp, armor hp and hull hp, same with all the other attributes, and all the same skills and modules and module attributes). This uniformity does make for an even playing-field but its like playing chess where white is playing white and make PVE the same all the time and PVP quite un-involved and detached. but more about that if I ever post the complete set of skill-improvements I've put together. |

Xercodo
Xovoni Astronautical Manufacturing and Engineering
2491
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 02:41:00 -
[419] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:One thing I forgot to mention in my previous post: Every skill group, except Planet Management and Subsystems, has a skill of the same name in it which is generally the most important skill in the group and has a 1x training multiplier. If you want to introduce new skill groups, I would like them to keep with this "tradition" (which can be done without introduction of new skills, I am assured).
Actually they are doing this specifically to break that tradition.
Many times people assume that training industry means any skill under the industry category when they go to do their first manufacture tutorial.
That overlapping name bit is terrible. The Drake is a Lie |

Xercodo
Xovoni Astronautical Manufacturing and Engineering
2491
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 02:44:00 -
[420] - Quote
Liastr wrote:Multiple Targeting sucks. Target Management is much better. Target Acquisition to me sounds more like a targeting speed skill.
Spaceship Piloting is indeed 'naff'. Spaceship Command is much better. Really, there's no reason to change this.
Also +1 on standardizing the skill names for ORE ships. ORE industrial just for covering the Noctis is a bit dumb, unless you're planning on adding or moving more ORE ships to that group.
Not sure about the PI skills. PI is fairly unique in EVE industry, so it seems odd to spread it's skills out among the other industrial skills. I would vote to keep the Planet Management group.
I also like the idea of making the skill tree more of a tree. Right now it's fairly flat.
-All ship skills. Sub folders for race specific skills please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The total Spaceship Command list is 67 items long! break it down a bit, spare a thought for my mouse wheel! -T2 ship skills (Assault ships, Interdictors, Heavy Interdictors, Recon, etc) would make sense to be in a different or sub-folder called something like Spaceship Command Specialization. Ties in well with the naming of the different weapon Specialization skills. -Weapon support skills (Missile Projection, Rapid Firing, Controlled Bursts, Motion Prediction, etc) being in a sub-folder would really help separate them from the core requirement skills from the support skills. You could call the sub folder Missile Proficiency or Turret Proficiency -Likewise with fitting skills. Separating out the "efficiency" skills from the "required for" skills would help clarify what's important to train first. ie; in Navigation there is Afterburner and High Speed Maneuvering and Jump Drive Operation in a sub-folder I'd put Acceleration Control and Fuel Conservation and maybe Jump Fuel Conservation. Call the folder Navigation Efficiencyor something.
I like the idea of sub folders because it would help with navigating the often long list of skills to find the one you're looking for. I'm glad this is being looked at, but just moving them around between single-level folders doesn't really help. We're still looking at big blobs of skills, slightly less vaguely grouped together without any real indication of how they interact. Using sub folders would go a long way to showing how skills relate to each other, not to mention cutting down on scrolling through large skill lists to find that one skill (and that's if you can even remember what it's called!!)
4 racial categories and Spaceship command, Adv Spaceship Command and Capital Ships can go into Navigation The Drake is a Lie |

Eckyy
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
37
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 04:09:00 -
[421] - Quote
My suggestions:
New category "Electronics Superiority" for electronic warfare.
Advanced Drone Interfacing -> Capital Drone Interfacing or Drone Control Unit Operation
Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing -> Ranged/Long Range Drone Control (or some other variant), sounds too much like Drone Interfacing but has nothing to do with damage.
Sentry Drone Interfacing -> Sentry Drone Operation - it's a 5% bonus so it falls under "operation" and not "interfacing"
Electronics -> Leave it as it is
Frequency Modulation -> open ti ideas but this one could use a name change - Predictive Jamming?
Multitasking -> Advanced Targeting
Electronic Warfare -> Target(ing) Disruption - Why does the ECM skill have so many other skills tied to it? It might be wise to separate it from electronic warfare, and give that skill another bonus.
Signal Dispersion -> Advanced Target Disruption
Signal Suppression -> Advanced Sensor Suppression ?
Signature Focusing -> Advanced Signature Amplification ?
xxx Shield Compensation - xxx Shield Hardening, or Anti-xxxx Ward Hardening
Energy Management -> Capacitor Management
Energy Pulse Weapons -> Smartbomb Operation - move to a "weapons" section
Energy Systems Operation -> Capacitor Systems Operation
Shield Compensation -> Efficient Shield Boosting ?
Tactical Shield Manipulation - there are all kinds of things wrong with the skill, it needs a complete rework
Controlled Bursts -> Efficient/Frugal Firing ?
Trajectory Analysis -> Predictive Firing ?
Siege Warfare -> Shield(ed) Warfare
xxx Armor Compensation -> xxx Armor Hardening
Guided Missile Precision -> Missile Precision
Missile Bombardment -> Missile Projection
Missile Projection -> Missile Navigation ?
Nanite Control -> "Booster" (Drug) Operation
Spaceship Command - great name, leave it alone |

Phoenix Cervantez
Terra Hawks The Initiative.
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 06:44:00 -
[422] - Quote
Like this a lot.... clarity! |

Photon Ceray
Caesar Lile Directorate
38
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 10:13:00 -
[423] - Quote
Also, some skills have vague names that don't reflect what they do. For example:
Metallurgy > rename to something like > Production efficiency research Research> 5% bonus to manufacturing time, this should be renamed to > production efficiency! Production efficiency> Material Efficiency Mechanics > Structure Integrity Hull Upgrades> Armor Integrity
It doesn't have to be precisely what I wrote, and there are a ton other skills that I didn't mention here, but you get the idea.
|

Asa Shahni
Tainted Dragons Drunk 'n' Disorderly
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 12:54:00 -
[424] - Quote
You guy should consider changing the certificate planner aswell ...not just because of the skill change you just showed us but the UI ...it can be a pain sometimes o7 |

Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
1087
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 13:31:00 -
[425] - Quote
I am really looking forward to some times after these changes are made, someone gets the bright idea that "hey, all these skills grouped by name should have the same attributes when it comes to learning them."
Today, in the vast vast majority of cases, the gunnery skills all are per/will or will/per, engineering skills int/mem or mem/int, etc etc. What happens after the name changes and name re-grouping happens? You want to see confusion, then you will see confusion.
Leave the damn thing alone. There are other issues far more pressing, like getting the pirate faction and T2 ships dealt with. Go help fozzie and Rise with that. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
191
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 14:21:00 -
[426] - Quote
Asa Shahni wrote:You guy should consider changing the certificate planner aswell ...not just because of the skill change you just showed us but the UI ...it can be a pain sometimes o7
also it says on energy turret certificates that energy turrets have good tracking ..... LOL not anymore Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

Luscius Uta
Unleashed' Fury Forsaken Federation
44
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 07:30:00 -
[427] - Quote
Xercodo wrote:Luscius Uta wrote:One thing I forgot to mention in my previous post: Every skill group, except Planet Management and Subsystems, has a skill of the same name in it which is generally the most important skill in the group and has a 1x training multiplier. If you want to introduce new skill groups, I would like them to keep with this "tradition" (which can be done without introduction of new skills, I am assured). Actually they are doing this specifically to break that tradition. Many times people assume that training industry means any skill under the industry category when they go to do their first manufacture tutorial. That overlapping name bit is terrible.
Well, they could fix that by introducing Mining group, which already has a skill of the same name with x1 training multiplier. Same goes for Shield Operation where all shield related skills should go, and possibly Targeting and Refining.
|

Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15147
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 10:37:00 -
[428] - Quote
Oh while you're at it, could you pleased delete mining and industry from my skill sheet, including the SP associated with them. Thank you kindly. 
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |

Balthazar Lestrane
Happy Endings. The Retirement Club
20
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 16:19:00 -
[429] - Quote
I defend CCP against trolls, the illiterate and those generally more stupid than they're given credit for on a number of occasions..
But no more. This is the **** you're spending your time on? LEAVE OUR SKILLS ALONE. Are you ******* kidding me? "Multiple Targeting"? "Spaceship PILOTING?" Well, you should probably change Signature Analysis to something wordy and over-simplified like "Targeting Speed Management" because apparently opening up the description for any given skill and using that 2nd Grade (too generous?) English knowledge was just too much ******* trouble.
Sheesh.
|

Ezra Nabali
Severasse Mining Severasse Militarized Mining Union
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 16:49:00 -
[430] - Quote
Balthazar Lestrane wrote:I defend CCP against trolls, the illiterate and those generally more stupid than they're given credit for on a number of occasions..
But no more. This is the **** you're spending your time on? LEAVE OUR SKILLS ALONE. Are you ******* kidding me? "Multiple Targeting"? "Spaceship PILOTING?" Well, you should probably change Signature Analysis to something wordy and over-simplified like "Targeting Speed Management" because apparently opening up the description for any given skill and using that 2nd Grade (too generous?) English knowledge was just too much ******* trouble.
Sheesh.
+1
Spaceship Piloting? seriously !?!?!
Eve is great because it requires a certain minimum intelligence to be played. To be honest: If you are too dumb to read a skill description to figure out what it does ....you probably shouldn't play this game.
Seriously ...stop wasting the subscription money you get from US for some nonsense like this.... Fix the ******* pos management. |

Siresa Talesi
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
48
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 19:47:00 -
[431] - Quote
I haven't read through the entire thread yet, so this may have been said already, but I felt that I should point out that the reason so many people have a problem with "Multiple Targeting" (saying that it sounds "clunky," etc.) is that it is grammatically incorrect English. Even if we don't always recognize this as the reason or understand why, when native English speakers hear something blatantly grammatically wrong, it tends to grate on our ears.
In this case, "multiple" is an adjective, it is used to describe nouns. So you could say "multiple targets," but never "multiple targeting," because "targeting" is a verb, and requires an adverb instead. Saying "multiple targeting" just makes you sound illiterate.
I realize that not everyone at CCP is a native English speaker, but I would hope that someone in charge of proofreading would have caught this before it was approved!
I have a feeling that a lot of other issues players are having with these names are also the result of langauage differences. It's not just enough to know the meaning of words, but you need to understand the connotations as well. For example, "Spaceship Piloting" just comes off so much weaker than "Spaceship Command." "Piloting" gives the impression of being subordinate to someone else (the ship's captain), while "command" clearly states that you are in charge. I'm sure most EVE players want to be and feel like the one in charge of their own ship, and the title "Spaceship Piloting" just takes away from that.
When games have poor english, it usually speaks to the quality or budget of that game. It would be a shame to let translation errors give the wrong impression about the quality of this game. Please seriously reconsider and review these changes, and make sure that they are vetted by native speakers of any language you intend to translate them into. |

Puskarich
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 21:43:00 -
[432] - Quote
Spaceship Command should stay as it is. Spaceship Piloting sounds lame as heck.
Sorry if you've already responded to this, but 22 pages of eve people isn't appealing. |

Arrigo Glokta
19
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 06:35:00 -
[433] - Quote
Siresa Talesi wrote:I haven't read through the entire thread yet, so this may have been said already, but I felt that I should point out that the reason so many people have a problem with "Multiple Targeting" (saying that it sounds "clunky," etc.) is that it is grammatically incorrect English. Even if we don't always recognize this as the reason or understand why, when native English speakers hear something blatantly grammatically wrong, it tends to grate on our ears.
In this case, "multiple" is an adjective, it is used to describe nouns. So you could say "multiple targets," but never "multiple targeting," because "targeting" is a verb, and requires an adverb instead. Saying "multiple targeting" just makes you sound illiterate.
I realize that not everyone at CCP is a native English speaker, but I would hope that someone in charge of proofreading would have caught this before it was approved!
I have a feeling that a lot of other issues players are having with these names are also the result of langauage differences. It's not just enough to know the meaning of words, but you need to understand the connotations as well. For example, "Spaceship Piloting" just comes off so much weaker than "Spaceship Command." "Piloting" gives the impression of being subordinate to someone else (the ship's captain), while "command" clearly states that you are in charge. I'm sure most EVE players want to be and feel like the one in charge of their own ship, and the title "Spaceship Piloting" just takes away from that.
When games have poor english, it usually speaks to the quality or budget of that game. It would be a shame to let translation errors give the wrong impression about the quality of this game. Please seriously reconsider and review these changes, and make sure that they are vetted by native speakers of any language you intend to translate them into.
I cannot agree more. Spaceship Piloting thing is giving me nightmares. |

Cpt Matis
Federal Commercial Office
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 07:42:00 -
[434] - Quote
I'm for quiet sometime now in some distance from my EVE world but I always keep my eye on what happening. today I read this thread about changing names of skills and such...... ;/ realy guys what is that? what was the problem with groups and names so far????? Here in Greece we have a .....proverb for that (sorry if it isn't translated 100% right but the meaning is the same) ...... "if devil doesn't have work to do....f%^*k hes children!!" This proverb it fits in this issue. I have to agree with someone above.....
change all skills to ALADEEN and you are done!!!
P.S. This game is awesome because it is HARD! don't make it ....soup! |

Dornkirk Cirim
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 21:35:00 -
[435] - Quote
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:This appears like more 'dumbing-down' of the game to me. The average EVE Online player is not stupid or ignorant and can work out what the current skill category names mean and relate to.
I would think the average intelligent EVE Online player also gets frustrated by redundant oversights? Issues created purely to do things in a gamey way.
I'm smart enough to realise that the names and descriptions for Scout Drone Operation (x1): Skill at controlling scout combat drones and Combat Drone Operation (x2): Skill at controlling scout drones are entirely redundant and could stand to be streamlined. It's fine to have two separate buffs, but nobody in their right mind should feel "smarter" for realising that the reason there's no Combat Drones category in the market is because they're really Scout drones.
Do people like feeling smart because things are designed in a smart way, or because they invented a cipher nobody can understand? Last time I did that, I was sitting in a treehouse.
Quote:Blackarachnia: Why do you always talk to yourself? Megatron: Ah, I simply have a penchant for... intelligent conversation. |

Dornkirk Cirim
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 21:57:00 -
[436] - Quote
Octoven wrote:We spaceship pilots KNOW that anything fitted to our ship is a "system".... ... Spaceship Command needs to stay Spaceship Command, not Spaceship Piloting.
Eh? |

Jasmine Assasin
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 02:23:00 -
[437] - Quote
I think "Spaceship Command" should stay as it is. "Spaceship Piloting" sounds like it should be the title for the next "for dummies" book.
Most of everything else I do agree with however. |

Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos
153
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 12:41:00 -
[438] - Quote
How about the weapon upgrade and advanced weapon upgrade skills. These are presently sitting in Gunnery. Yet the skills affect launchers as well. These skills should be moved to one of your new categories having to do with ship modifications |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
242
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 19:00:00 -
[439] - Quote
Deacon Abox wrote:How about the weapon upgrade and advanced weapon upgrade skills. These are presently sitting in Gunnery. Yet the skills affect launchers as well. These skills should be moved to one of your new categories having to do with ship modifications
well they both effect CPU and PG so should come under there appropriate categories respectively Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

Apostrof Ahashion
Viziam Amarr Empire
203
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 08:32:00 -
[440] - Quote
Fixing up groups a little sounds great but name changes on skills are really not needed. New player will be confused with both Electronics and CPU management until he reads the description and starts fitting some ships. Other suggestions sound just silly, and the people that cant figure out what Targeting does probably wont get it even when you rename it to something dumb like Multiple Targeting.
It basically serves no purpose and just breaks immersion. Whats next, Surgical Strike gets named - 3% turret bonus (damage). What about research skills? This wont ease the learning curve at all and just makes the game lose some of its style.
|

Vinzent Zeppelin
The Vela Pulsar Industries
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 18:59:00 -
[441] - Quote
Agreed that Spaceship Command should stay, and there's nothing inherenly negative about skill categories containing eponymous skills -- "Engineering" and "Electronics" sound fine (and preferable to "Energy Grid Efficiency" and "CPU Efficiency"). Them sharing a name with their category gives the impression that these are foundational skills for the rest in that category -- the same is true for Social, Trade, Gunnery, Industry, Navigation, etc. |

Max Zerg
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 23:29:00 -
[442] - Quote
My perdonal attitude to upcoming change is extremely negative
1) This is INDEED dumbing game down as for Murphy's laws: "Build a system that even a fool can use, and only a fool will use it".
2) This would definitely lead to lot of bugs and glitches with certificates
3) This is the nightmare for localization
4) This would force huge chagnes for EVEMON and similar tools
5) and the main reason why NOT to submit the changes: this would separate new players from old ones and newbies at help channels would refer to new skills while old players would still continiue to name skills as they used to for many years.
Please, let me rephrase: you intentionally build the solid barrier between new and old players.
You have decided to leave new player way more helpless as most of guides SHALL go obsolette. (even now in 2013 the new players still ask where they can obtain learning skills because of a plenty of outdated guides in the Internet, imagine how many questions should be asked at rookie help and appropriate localized channels). You think it would help new players, i do think it would leave them even more dissapointed and helpless.
really, why Cynology let's rename it into Dogbreeding ? Please, reconsider! |

Nova Satar
Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance
142
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 10:26:00 -
[443] - Quote
Why are you dumbing down EVE?
One of the things people always say about EVE is how complex it is, and how you have to actually research and learn things to succeed. Although the skill groups are pretty irrelevant, it's just another small part of EVE that is being dumbed down and losing it's identity.
Having to rename the armor skills group to "Armor" so people don't get "confused" wtf lol?
Spaceship Piloting??? It's impossible to say that out loud without sounding mentally deficient |

Smelly PirateSaint
Reikoku The Retirement Club
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 11:33:00 -
[444] - Quote
"Spaceship Piloting" sounds as though it's been renamed for a 10 year old's comprehension |

Zenith Gravit
LionGate Enterprises Care Factor
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 19:27:00 -
[445] - Quote
Please don't change Spaceship Command to Spaceship Piloting, as a previous poster stated it sounds childish. Spaceship Command just sounds better. |

Nova Satar
Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance
142
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 09:42:00 -
[446] - Quote
can we rename 'Gunnery' to 'Gun Shooting' please, as some people may not be aware the skills relate to the firing of the guns, rather than the appearance of the guns
I think Navigation should also be changed to "Spaceship Moving" so it's clear it relates to the movement of the ship, whereas navigation could be confused with directions and map based skills. |

deusexmura lard
BRAB0 The Volition Cult
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 02:13:00 -
[447] - Quote
please keep PI as is. In theory yes Planetology and Adv. Planetology are "scanning" abilities, but we are so used to those 5-6 PI skill lumped together. |

masternerdguy
nul-li-fy Nulli Secunda
1243
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 04:56:00 -
[448] - Quote
Are you guys just changing things for the sake of changing them? Things are only impossible until they are not. |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
261
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 09:15:00 -
[449] - Quote
*snip, I had been trolled, post removed to protect IQ Tiericide is tiers by another name. |

Baren
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 19:51:00 -
[450] - Quote
LOL Space ship piloting
Please leave it As Space ship command !
or we might as well have skills called
small laser gun(small energy turret), big laser gun(medium energy turrent), bigger laser gun(large energy turret), and really really big laser gun(xlarge engergy turret)
|

Nyrak
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2013.07.21 17:00:00 -
[451] - Quote
Dear CCP,
Who is your intended target audience for these changes? If after ten plus years players can not figure out what these skills mean, then those type of players would not survive long in this game anyway. |

Oraac Ensor
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
271
|
Posted - 2013.07.21 19:04:00 -
[452] - Quote
Nyrak wrote:Dear CCP,
Who is your intended target audience for these changes? If after ten plus years players can not figure out what these skills mean, then those type of players would not survive long in this game anyway.
Players who have been in EVE for ten plus years won't survive long?
Eh? I don't get that. |

AstraPardus
Lightspeed Enterprises Fidelas Constans
270
|
Posted - 2013.07.21 22:20:00 -
[453] - Quote
One of the things that appealed to me about EVE from the get-go was that the skills and a lot of the naming conventions required you to learn the EVE lingo and immerse yourself that much more. With these new naming conventions, I see the devs moving away from that and supporting a simpler, more 'dumbed-down' approach.
You can't see it, but rest assured that I am frowning. Every time I post is Pardy time! :3 |

Sabriz Adoudel
Paragon Blitz
555
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 07:06:00 -
[454] - Quote
Broadly like the changes.
Dislike 'Multiple Targeting' and 'Advanced Multiple Targeting' but I have no suggestions better than what has been said.
An enemy is just a friend that you stab in the front. |

Akturous
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
180
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 07:27:00 -
[455] - Quote
Space ship piloting is a joke. Multiple Targeting should be tactical targeting and advanced tactical targeting or something, seriously what kind of illiterate 12 year olds are you trying to placate with these names, it sounds terrible.
Catalised cold gas arc jet thrusters for life. Fulmination, bloodclaw, cataclysm, terror etc for life as well, these new naming this to simplify them are awful.
Vote Item Heck One for CSM8 |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10958
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 08:09:00 -
[456] - Quote
Nova Satar wrote:can we rename 'Gunnery' to 'Gun Shooting' please, as some people may not be aware the skills relate to the firing of the guns, rather than the appearance of the guns
I think Navigation should also be changed to "Spaceship Moving" so it's clear it relates to the movement of the ship, whereas navigation could be confused with directions and map based skills.
I like both of these ideas, I'll flag them to CCP later.
1 Kings 12:11
|

Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1356
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 08:29:00 -
[457] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Nova Satar wrote:can we rename 'Gunnery' to 'Gun Shooting' please, as some people may not be aware the skills relate to the firing of the guns, rather than the appearance of the guns
I think Navigation should also be changed to "Spaceship Moving" so it's clear it relates to the movement of the ship, whereas navigation could be confused with directions and map based skills. I like both of these ideas, I'll flag them to CCP later. Can you lobby for space ship piloting to be changed to "I can fly this" Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |

Sephira Galamore
Inner Beard Society
141
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 10:39:00 -
[458] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:Broadly like the changes.
Dislike 'Multiple Targeting' and 'Advanced Multiple Targeting' but I have no suggestions better than what has been said. A very easy fix would be... Multi-Targeting and Advanced Multi-Targeting, to get read of the "multiple".
But there have been better suggestions in this thread somewhere. |

Akturous
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
180
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 12:04:00 -
[459] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Nova Satar wrote:can we rename 'Gunnery' to 'Gun Shooting' please, as some people may not be aware the skills relate to the firing of the guns, rather than the appearance of the guns
I think Navigation should also be changed to "Spaceship Moving" so it's clear it relates to the movement of the ship, whereas navigation could be confused with directions and map based skills. I like both of these ideas, I'll flag them to CCP later.
Are you bloody serious?!! Gun shooting, spaceship moving, it sounds like the talk of a 5 year old. CSM, stuffing **** up since the beginning. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8 |

Sephira Galamore
Inner Beard Society
141
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 15:27:00 -
[460] - Quote
Akturous wrote:Are you bloody serious?!! Gun shooting, spaceship moving, it sounds like the talk of a 5 year old. CSM, stuffing **** up since the beginning. You may have forgotten to train Advanced Reading to IV. |

Infinite Force
Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance
641
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 16:30:00 -
[461] - Quote
Sephira Galamore wrote:Akturous wrote:Are you bloody serious?!! Gun shooting, spaceship moving, it sounds like the talk of a 5 year old. CSM, stuffing **** up since the beginning. You may have forgotten to train Advanced Reading to IV. Don't forget Sarcasm I (it's a level 1 skill .. everyone should have it trained to 1 at a minimum).
I feel that quite a number of these changes are completely dumbing down the game for no good reason. Really makes me wonder why I even bother to play sometimes. HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud
Hammer Mineral Compression - The only way to go! |

Balzac Legazou
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 02:22:00 -
[462] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Targeting: for the same reasons as above, this skill has been renamed "Multiple Targeting".
Multitasking: has been renamed "Advanced Multiple Targeting" for the same reasons as above.
They sound kind of bad. Maybe "Multi-Target Locking" and "Advanced Multi-Target Locking" ?
CCP Ytterbium wrote: Spaceship Piloting: is the old Spaceship Command group, no change except with the name.
Also sounds a bit silly. If you're afraid that "Spaceship Command" might sound like a leadership skill, go with "Spaceship Control" or simply "Helm".
CCP Ytterbium wrote: Resource Processing: has all mining, harvesting skills and reprocessing skills.
I'd prefer a clearer separation between mining and refining (not just in terms of skill names, but also in terms of skill requirements for things like mining crystals, etc.). Mining and refining are different activities, in Eve just like in the real world. A miner does not need to know anything about how refineries work, or vice versa. If anything, refining is closer to manufacturing than it is to mining (both are performed at stations, both deal with ore units while mining deals with volumes, etc.).
I realise this thread isn't about the skills themselves, but in case you want to clean up the overlap between mining and refining in the future (which I hope you do), I think it would be wise to separate "Resource Harvesting" (mining) and "Resource Processing" (refining) into two separate groups straight away.
Most of the rest seems to make sense and sound good. |

Siresa Talesi
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
61
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 19:53:00 -
[463] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Multiple Targeting and Advanced Multiple Targeting:
Agreed, it doesn't sound that great. As with Spaceship Piloting, this will be discussed internally again - some options listed in that thread sound promising, but please remember that we would ideally like skill names to be representative of what they actually do.
Again, it "doesn't sound that great," because it is grammatically incorrect English! You cannot pair an adjective (multiple) with a verb (targetting)! It sounds wrong because it is wrong! |

SGT FUNYOUN
Arachnea Phoenix Battalion Hoodlums Associates
68
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 03:30:00 -
[464] - Quote
For the period of ONE YEAR... I only ask one thing...
... PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE CCP...
... when you rename something, either put in parenthesis next to the new name, or as a cursor roll over pop-up, what the skill or category USED to be called.
So that way, older players who have been on for several years, can gradually get used to the new names, and it will keep the initial confusion of what skills are where down.
I know the new skill names are supposed to alleviate these problems but...
... there are some very silly (Google the word silly) people out there.
This little fix would keep those silly peoples' silly questions to a dull roar instead of a Blaster Cannon charge to the ear every five seconds. |

Nova Satar
Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 09:31:00 -
[465] - Quote
i think its fairly clear from this thread that everyone thinks its embarrassing and ******** |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
268
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 09:42:00 -
[466] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Malcanis wrote:Nova Satar wrote:can we rename 'Gunnery' to 'Gun Shooting' please, as some people may not be aware the skills relate to the firing of the guns, rather than the appearance of the guns
I think Navigation should also be changed to "Spaceship Moving" so it's clear it relates to the movement of the ship, whereas navigation could be confused with directions and map based skills. I like both of these ideas, I'll flag them to CCP later. Can you lobby for space ship piloting to be changed to "I can fly this"
Whilst you are lobbying over this can you also lobby to drop all skills completely, replace the mouse interface with a console controller and change the meta description of all items to 'standard, prototype and advanced' and feature more naked ladies in the ccp advertising after all we really need these 12 year old kids in eve online like an extra hole in the arse!
Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |

Goldensaver
ArTech Expeditions
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 18:25:00 -
[467] - Quote
Alright, my opinions on these matters.
PI should be in its own group, as it is now. Yes, it's a small group. But in that group is a list of skills that are in a vacuum from every other skill in game. They only really affect other skills in their group. You can do PI completely independant of everything else, except for getting an industrial skill to fly something to scoop. PI isn't affected by any other skills, and PI skills affect nothing else. They should be left on their own for ease of training for that specific thing.
I would almost feel for a "Harvesting" group to separate the core mining skills from the processing skills, but the group would be tiny and there is a link between the two where the processing skills let you use mining crystals. Ah well, what can be done?
Subsystems should remain independant from Rigs. You could have ship modification and ship modularization or something like that. I give no fucks what you name it. I just don't think they should both be lumped together in one big blob of skills. First of all, Subsystem skills are unique in that they are the only skill you can lose SP in if you do take all steps to keep your clone updated. You can keep your pod alive and those can still be lost. I just think those are unique in their own right and should be left for easy access to reskill again rather than hunting through rigging skills.
Perhaps you could separate out the science skills into two groups, "Science" and "Researching". You get your more basic skills, such as Advanced Laboratory Operation, Laboratory Operation, Metallurgy, Science, and possibly Research and Research Project Management in this (but those latter two would require new names), and leave the advanced skills which are required mostly only for invention in their own separate group. That way we'd have more basic science skills, like those required to research your blueprints in their own group, and invention related skills in their own group. This idea is maybe not good, I'm not sure how I feel on it, just thought I'd put it out there.
Spaceship Command needs to stay. I'm not a pilot, I'm interfacing with the ship and inputting my commands, I'm using my unique knowledge to interface with it and optimize it. I'm not just a monkey who sits in a seat and decides where to point it. |

Aleander Brunsh
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.27 11:25:00 -
[468] - Quote
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:So that way, older players who have been on for several years, can gradually get used to the new names, and it will keep the initial confusion of what skills are where down.
The old players will notice something's amiss. It's all the guides suddenly going obsolete what I'm more worried about. |

Ben Fenix
16
|
Posted - 2013.07.27 23:36:00 -
[469] - Quote
Please read this: Missile Skill Rename
Proposed it ages ago, might be the right time to implement it.
BF CapStream Because Cap Is Life |

Charlie Nonoke
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 00:33:00 -
[470] - Quote
Spaceship Piloting really sounds absurd. Something which an 8 year old would name.
Spaceship Command is more appropriate, and here's why I think it is:
As far as I'm aware, YOU, are the captain of the ship, and even though your ship listens to your clicks, what really happens behind the scenes is you issuing commands to the personnel, and they individually activate the ship thrusters, defense systems, etc... Here is a list of how many crew members each ship contains: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/New_Eden_crew_guidelines
Piloting would suggest that you alone flies the ship, with no help. As a captain, you command your crew to steer the ship.
Spaceship Command sounds more fitting. |
|

CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
2179

|
Posted - 2013.07.29 16:34:00 -
[471] - Quote
Small update.
- We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future.
- Same with the "Planetary Interaction" and "Subsystem" skill groups, we're not going to touch them based on received comments.
- "Multiple Targeting" and "Advanced Multiple Targeting" have been renamed "Target Management" and "Advanced Target Management".
- "Armor Honeycombing" has been renamed "Armor Layering".
- "Energy Management", "Energy Emission Systems" and "Energy Systems Operation" have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation".
|
|

PinkKnife
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
380
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 17:08:00 -
[472] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Small update.
- We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future.
- Same with the "Planetary Interaction" and "Subsystem" skill groups, we're not going to touch them based on received comments.
- "Multiple Targeting" and "Advanced Multiple Targeting" have been renamed "Target Management" and "Advanced Target Management".
- "Armor Honeycombing" has been renamed "Armor Layering".
- "Energy Management", "Energy Emission Systems" and "Energy Systems Operation" have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation".
Aww but I liked Honeycombing, reminded me of the breakfast cereal :(
Honestly, it should be something like efficiency or lightening. Layering sounds like it would have the opposite effect of what it does. |

Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc. The Fourth District
241
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 18:24:00 -
[473] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Small update.
- We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future.
- Same with the "Planetary Interaction" and "Subsystem" skill groups, we're not going to touch them based on received comments.
- "Multiple Targeting" and "Advanced Multiple Targeting" have been renamed "Target Management" and "Advanced Target Management".
- "Armor Honeycombing" has been renamed "Armor Layering".
- "Energy Management", "Energy Emission Systems" and "Energy Systems Operation" have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation".
Aww but I liked Honeycombing, reminded me of the breakfast cereal :( Honestly, it should be something like efficiency or lightening. Layering sounds like it would have the opposite effect of what it does.
How about GÇ£Armor OptimisationGÇ¥? Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows... |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
376
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 20:12:00 -
[474] - Quote
How about new skills? Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
173
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 22:02:00 -
[475] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Small update.
- We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future.
- Same with the "Planetary Interaction" and "Subsystem" skill groups, we're not going to touch them based on received comments.
- "Multiple Targeting" and "Advanced Multiple Targeting" have been renamed "Target Management" and "Advanced Target Management".
- "Armor Honeycombing" has been renamed "Armor Layering".
- "Energy Management", "Energy Emission Systems" and "Energy Systems Operation" have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation".
"Armor layering" implies adding armor, which isn't what the skill does. "Armor honeycombing" implies making the armor lighter, which is exactly what the skill does.
Not sure why you need to change that one... |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
377
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 22:06:00 -
[476] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Small update.
- We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future.
- Same with the "Planetary Interaction" and "Subsystem" skill groups, we're not going to touch them based on received comments.
- "Multiple Targeting" and "Advanced Multiple Targeting" have been renamed "Target Management" and "Advanced Target Management".
- "Armor Honeycombing" has been renamed "Armor Layering".
- "Energy Management", "Energy Emission Systems" and "Energy Systems Operation" have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation".
"Armor layering" implies adding armor, which isn't what the skill does. "Armor honeycombing" implies making the armor lighter, which is exactly what the skill does. Not sure why you need to change that one...
seems like wasted time and effort honeycombing is awesome name layering suggests adding who thought of this?
improving drone skills like e-war drone interfacing and adding new ones would be a better use of your time CCP Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
287
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 23:18:00 -
[477] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Small update.
- We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future.
- Same with the "Planetary Interaction" and "Subsystem" skill groups, we're not going to touch them based on received comments.
- "Multiple Targeting" and "Advanced Multiple Targeting" have been renamed "Target Management" and "Advanced Target Management".
- "Armor Honeycombing" has been renamed "Armor Layering".
- "Energy Management", "Energy Emission Systems" and "Energy Systems Operation" have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation".
Good news for all of us ship commanders. Thank you. Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1312
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 00:05:00 -
[478] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Small update.
- We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future.
- Same with the "Planetary Interaction" and "Subsystem" skill groups, we're not going to touch them based on received comments.
- "Multiple Targeting" and "Advanced Multiple Targeting" have been renamed "Target Management" and "Advanced Target Management".
- "Armor Honeycombing" has been renamed "Armor Layering".
- "Energy Management", "Energy Emission Systems" and "Energy Systems Operation" have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation".
good improvement in my opinion. the capacitor suff sounds a little awkward and i prefer the old names, but that's just personal taste at this point.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |

Destoya
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
127
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 07:59:00 -
[479] - Quote
Armor Layering is confusing with the module "Energized Armor Layering Membrane" . One solely affects armor plates while the other affects armor hitpoints regardless of whether plates have been installed.
Armor Honeycombing makes more sense, or alternatively something like Armor Plating Optimization, Armor Compositing |

Sephira Galamore
Inner Beard Society
143
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 14:56:00 -
[480] - Quote
I was always impressed how many tech and names are somehow still tied to actual tech/science. When you introduced Armor Honeycombing, that was another example. As others have said, "Armor Layering" even implies a diametrical meaning.
|

Jerrick Chase
Spacial Reconnaissance
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 15:05:00 -
[481] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Small update.
- We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future.
- Same with the "Planetary Interaction" and "Subsystem" skill groups, we're not going to touch them based on received comments.
- "Multiple Targeting" and "Advanced Multiple Targeting" have been renamed "Target Management" and "Advanced Target Management".
- "Armor Honeycombing" has been renamed "Armor Layering".
- "Energy Management", "Energy Emission Systems" and "Energy Systems Operation" have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation".
Great! Good. Good. Eh. Good.
Why "armor layering"? That implies the opposite of what the skill actually does, doesn't it? I fly mainly shield ships going into armor ships soon, training "Armor Layering" at first glance seems like I will be adding mass to the ships (more armor, more weight) when in reality its lightening the ship a bit. At work so I can't view the actual skill description.
Regardless... honeycombing makes more sense.
http://compositeswiki.org/honeycomb-structures/
Stick with honeycombing. |

Dersen Lowery
Laurentson INC The Last Chancers.
672
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 16:18:00 -
[482] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future.
Even if we do end up piloting our ships, as the new trailer sort of implies, "command" sounds better.
Everything else is fine, although I don't quite get "Armor Layering," and I prefer "Acquisition" to "Management" for the targeting skills. Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables. |

Balzac Legazou
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 22:45:00 -
[483] - Quote
Siresa Talesi wrote: Again, it "doesn't sound that great," because it is grammatically incorrect English! You cannot pair an adjective (multiple) with a verb (targetting)! It sounds wrong because it is wrong!
"Targeting" in that context isn't a verb, it's a noun (i.e., "the targeting of multiple targets", not "I am multiple targeting some targets"), just as "a killing" or "an opening" are nouns, although they're spelled the same way as the corresponding transitive verbs. It's perfectly fine to say something like "multiple opening strategies" (ex., in chess) or "multiple targeting systems" (ex., laser painter vs. GPS-guided bombs). But things can be correct and sound bad, and "multiple targeting" does.
Anyway, looks like they've already picked a better alternative.
Now if only they'd split Resource Harvesting (mining) and Resource Processing (refining) into different groups...
P.S. - I agree that "Armor Layering" sounds a bit ambiguous. Maybe "Armor Plate Optimization", if you really want to get rid of "honycombing", for some reason ? |

Woei1988
Tainted Dragons Drunk 'n' Disorderly
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 02:02:00 -
[484] - Quote
Yes! Lets dumb eve down even more. First safety buttons and log off timers.. Now renaming stuff that's been ingame for 10 bloody years.
Suggestion: Rename Eve Online to Spoonfeed Online..
Absolutely useless this..
Btw, where's the new skill: "Eve for Dummies: 5% chance to teleport away in pvp per shot fired upon you". Might as well~ Or "Safety Button Safety: Gives another safety button for your safety button, incase you accidentally press it" Nyan...-á |

Kara Corvinus
Empyrean Acolytes
36
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 04:17:00 -
[485] - Quote
CCP,
Seeing as YOUR LORE states that "capsuleers" do not PILOT their ships, but instead COMMAND them, it seems really stupid that you decided "Spaceship piloting" was a good replacement.
YOUR 2 CENTS from your own damn lore.^ |

Nova Satar
Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance
154
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 12:02:00 -
[486] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Small update.
- We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future.
- Same with the "Planetary Interaction" and "Subsystem" skill groups, we're not going to touch them based on received comments.
- "Multiple Targeting" and "Advanced Multiple Targeting" have been renamed "Target Management" and "Advanced Target Management".
- "Armor Honeycombing" has been renamed "Armor Layering".
- "Energy Management", "Energy Emission Systems" and "Energy Systems Operation" have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation".
much better, and the ones changed atleast aren't cringeworthy
|

Kara Corvinus
Empyrean Acolytes
59
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 12:14:00 -
[487] - Quote
I made my voice.
CCP listened.
I love this company so much. |

Gorianteffa
Tainted Dragons Drunk 'n' Disorderly
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 17:32:00 -
[488] - Quote
just why? leave the skills alone.
there is one thing in eve that help you tell what it is that you are looking at, it called ' READING ' you know right click, get info
slowly loosing faith here. |

Syrias Bizniz
Space-Brewery-Association 24eme Legion Etrangere
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 17:45:00 -
[489] - Quote
The best thing about this thread is that some renames that won't have a huge impact gets more discussed than a change to medium long range turrets which will totally change the game on cruiser / BC scale. |

Siresa Talesi
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 19:06:00 -
[490] - Quote
Balzac Legazou wrote:Siresa Talesi wrote: Again, it "doesn't sound that great," because it is grammatically incorrect English! You cannot pair an adjective (multiple) with a verb (targetting)! It sounds wrong because it is wrong!
"Targeting" in that context isn't a verb, it's a noun (i.e., "the targeting of multiple targets", not "I am multiple targeting some targets"), just as "a killing" or "an opening" are nouns, although they're spelled the same way as the corresponding transitive verbs. It's perfectly fine to say something like "multiple opening strategies" (ex., in chess) or "multiple targeting systems" (ex., laser painter vs. GPS-guided bombs). But things can be correct and sound bad, and "multiple targeting" does. Anyway, looks like they've already picked a better alternative. Now if only they'd split Resource Harvesting (mining) and Resource Processing (refining) into different groups... P.S. - I agree that "Armor Layering" sounds a bit ambiguous. Maybe "Armor Plate Optimization", if you really want to get rid of "honycombing", for some reason ?
Um, "strategies" is a noun, as is "systems," so I'm not sure what you're getting at ("opening" and "targeting" in the cases you listed are adjectives). You wouldn't say "multiple strategizing", now would you?
Bad grammar is still wrong. |

Ryelek d'Entari
The 4th Legion Here Be Dragons
91
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 21:21:00 -
[491] - Quote
Time to reiterate that changing the names of the Engineering and Electronics skills is just plain silly.
Look carefully at the prereqs for all the Science T2 skills. Why would they have "CPU Management" and "Power Grid Management" (or whatever) as prereqs?
Leave those two skills alone, please. |

AstraPardus
THE INSURGENCY The Unthinkables
274
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 21:48:00 -
[492] - Quote
In the event that you havan't decided to abandon this change, allow me to again say: Please stop this madness.
We don't like it. Every time I post is Pardy time! :3 |

Goldensaver
ArTech Expeditions
207
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 05:30:00 -
[493] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:We're going to leave the "Spaceship Command" skill as such for now, even if things may change in the future. Even if we do end up piloting our ships, as the new trailer sort of implies, "command" sounds better. Everything else is fine, although I don't quite get "Armor Layering," and I prefer "Acquisition" to "Management" for the targeting skills. Acquisition would be better used in "Signature Analysis" I'd feel. Management implies the management of multiple targets, whereas acquisition implies the act of obtaining them as targets. I feel that in this case "Management" is the superior choice.
Not that I really care all too much if they change or leave "Signature Analysis". |

Violet Winters
Angelic Eclipse.
97
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 18:50:00 -
[494] - Quote
What ... what even .... I don't get it? .... WHY ... nope, can't be arsed -1  Anglic Eclipse.
Lee told me to remove my signature Minmatar and Gallente FW |

Balzac Legazou
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 19:13:00 -
[495] - Quote
Siresa Talesi wrote:Bad grammar is still wrong.
No, it isn't. In the expression "a killing", I suppose you think "killing" is also an adjective, or maybe a verb...? It's not, it's a noun. Likewise, it's perfectly valid to talk about "the targeting (of enemies)", or just "targeting", as a noun describing the act of targeting (verb) those enemies. And that's the context in which "targeting" was used in the original suggestion.
But this is completely off-topic; consult a dictionary if you have any doubts that "targeting" (or "killing", or "opening") can be nouns.
|

Balzac Legazou
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 19:16:00 -
[496] - Quote
AstraPardus wrote:In the event that you havan't decided to abandon this change, allow me to again say: Please stop this madness. We don't like it.
That "we" definitely doesn't include me. A lot of the current skill names have very little connection to their actual effect, and in some cases they're downright deceptive (ex., mix-up between energy grid and capacitor skills).
The current suggestions might not be perfect (partly because the skills themselves have some illogical interdependencies), but they're certainly an improvement.
|

Kerdrak
D00M. Northern Coalition.
67
|
Posted - 2013.08.02 13:33:00 -
[497] - Quote
Ravcharas wrote:Quote:Electronic System: is the old GÇ£electronicsGÇ¥ group. Now only contains offense EW related skills. I'd name it Electronic Warfare Systems, then. And maybe rename the Electronic Warfare skill while you're at it.
+1
An entire group for Electronic Warfare would have sense and giving them "personality".
|

Kerdrak
D00M. Northern Coalition.
67
|
Posted - 2013.08.02 13:35:00 -
[498] - Quote
Woei1988 wrote:Yes! Lets dumb eve down even more. First safety buttons and log off timers.. Now renaming stuff that's been ingame for 10 bloody years.
Suggestion: Rename Eve Online to Spoonfeed Online..
Absolutely useless this..
Btw, where's the new skill: "Eve for Dummies: 5% chance to teleport away in pvp per shot fired upon you". Might as well~ Or "Safety Button Safety: Gives another safety button for your safety button, incase you accidentally press it"
UI changes are not "dumbing down", merging all the missile skills in a single one would be. |

Nicen Jehr
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
218
|
Posted - 2013.08.02 14:17:00 -
[499] - Quote
I agree that Armor Honeycombing is much more descriptive than Armor Layering. It makes perfect sense already. Little Things to improve GëíGïüGëí-á| My Little Things posts |

Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2013.08.02 14:45:00 -
[500] - Quote
Nicen Jehr wrote:I agree that Armor Honeycombing is much more descriptive than Armor Layering. It makes perfect sense already.
Agreed. |

Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2013.08.02 14:50:00 -
[501] - Quote
I think it'd make sense to move the targeting related skills into the same group as the offensive EWAR skills, and eliminate the separate targeting group all together.
Multiple Targeting -> Targeting Advanced Multiple Targeting -> Advanced Targeting
The only confusion in the past was that the common usage of multitasking has nothing to do with targets. |

Rain6637
Team Evil
1621
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 03:25:00 -
[502] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium I met you at EVE Vegas last year. of the Devs you're my favorite, you seem like a fun person to be around.
as for the skill name changes, yeah, go ahead. the reasons listed make sense. except for Spaceship Piloting... Command sounds stronger.
//LOL derp that was CCP Bettik i'm thinking of. Rainf1337 on Twitch |

Savira Terrant
EVE Corporation 1212120482 Unchained.
53
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 08:09:00 -
[503] - Quote
Kerdrak wrote:Ravcharas wrote:Quote:Electronic System: is the old GÇ£electronicsGÇ¥ group. Now only contains offense EW related skills. I'd name it Electronic Warfare Systems, then. And maybe rename the Electronic Warfare skill while you're at it. +1 An entire group for Electronic Warfare would have sense and giving them "personality".
+1 to both
Also armor layering does not make sense. If you want a descriptive skillname, call it "Reactive Armor Hardening"
I like the skillnames Target Management and Advanced Target Management. I would prefer if you would change the sheme of all advanced skill from "advanced..." to "... - Advanced"
Now also go ahead and rename Signature Analysis to "Target Aquisition".
These proposals would conviniently group these skill together in the skills list. . |

Rafael Tonka
Razgriz Corporation Nova Industrial Coalition Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 18:48:00 -
[504] - Quote
Dumbing down the game for the less mentally agile yet again? |

Padraig O'Mahone
Grey Area Protective Services THE H0NEYBADGER
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 20:43:00 -
[505] - Quote
It looks like a lot of people feel the same way.
"Armor Layering" is just not a good change. It seems to imply ADDING armor and making it heavier, as opposed to HOLLOWING armor, giving it a honeycombed interior, and making it lighter which "Armor Honeycombing" describes exactly.
There is no need to change "Armor Honeycombing" at all, it immediately conveys what the skill does through the name. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
416
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 20:47:00 -
[506] - Quote
Padraig O'Mahone wrote:It looks like a lot of people feel the same way.
"Armor Layering" is just not a good change. It seems to imply ADDING armor and making it heavier, as opposed to HOLLOWING armor, giving it a honeycombed interior, and making it lighter which "Armor Honeycombing" describes exactly.
There is no need to change "Armor Honeycombing" at all, it immediately conveys what the skill does through the name.
also there is a mod called layered plating in the game that adds armour HP .. but they are crap so he probably forgot they existed Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

Siresa Talesi
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
70
|
Posted - 2013.08.05 18:56:00 -
[507] - Quote
Balzac Legazou wrote:Siresa Talesi wrote:Bad grammar is still wrong. No, it isn't. In the expression "a killing", I suppose you think "killing" is also an adjective, or maybe a verb...? It's not, it's a noun. Likewise, it's perfectly valid to talk about "the targeting (of enemies)", or just "targeting", as a noun describing the act of targeting (verb) those enemies. And that's the context in which "targeting" was used in the original suggestion. But this is completely off-topic; consult a dictionary if you have any doubts that "targeting" (or "killing", or "opening") can be nouns.
You're listing unique cases where a word that is typically a verb can also be a noun; "targeting" is not one of those cases. The exception does not disprove the rule. Still wrong, still bad grammer. |

Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
128
|
Posted - 2013.08.05 20:13:00 -
[508] - Quote
I'd really rather see you invest your time in something else. Especially since the outcome is cringe worthy.
|

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
299
|
Posted - 2013.08.05 21:34:00 -
[509] - Quote
I hope to god that there's no future plans to turn eve into some third person flight sim where the players pilot the ship console style as implied in the 'space ship piloting' former name change, not to mention recent promo from CCP.
They would have been better showing the pilot attached to the pod, hanging limply in pod goo, it's much more intriguing and better sci fi than the recent promo. Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |

Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
636
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 09:42:00 -
[510] - Quote
My God.....CCP, what is WRONG with you people ?
This is completely pointless and adds nothing. Why donGÇÖt you spend your time fixing stuff that is broken, and not just sit there trying to thinking up the next pointless thing to do.
FFS fix broken stuff before messing with things that DO NOT need fixing.
Jeez.
|

Ben Fenix
CapStream
16
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 10:56:00 -
[511] - Quote
GUIDED MISSILE PRECISION
Quote:Guided Missile Precision Skill at precision missile homing. Proficiency at this skill increases the accuracy of a fired missile's exact point of impact, resulting in greater damage to small targets.
5% decreased factor of signature radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill.
So as stated by the description, this is what the skill should do: (simplified) Bringing the missile closer to the target, so that the missile explosion can deal more damage to it.
What the skill actually does ingame: Giving a bonus to a missile's explosion radius attribute by -5%
Conclusion: It means that the skill isn't described accordingly to the actual game mechanic or in other words: The appliance of a bonus of -5% to the missile's explosion radius has nothing to do with the accuracy, the point of impact and the signature radius of a missile.
Proposal: Adjusting the skill name and description accordingly to the actual game mechanic.
Solution
Quote:Densifyed Missile Explosions Skill at adjusting missile explosion. Proficiency at this skill increases the density of a fired missile's explosion, resulting in greater damage to small targets.
5% decreased factor of explosion radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill. _______________________________________________________________________________________________
TARGET NAVIGATION PREDICTION
Quote:Target Navigation Prediction Proficiency at optimizing a missile's flight path to negate the effects of a target's speed upon the explosion's impact.
10% decrease per level in factor of target's velocity for all missiles.
So as stated by the description, this is what the skill should do: (simplified) It predicts a target's navigational course to intercept the target in order to negate the target's velocity in order to apply full damage to it.
What the skill actually does ingame: Giving a bonus to a missile's explosion velocity attribute by +10%
Conclusion: It means that the skill isn't described accordingly to the actual game mechanic or in other words: The appliance of a bonus of +10% to the missile's explosion velocity has nothing to do with the optimization of a missile's flight path and the negation of a target's velocity.
Solution
Quote:Projected Missile Explosions Skill at adjusting missile explosion. Proficiency at this skill increases the velocity of a fired missile's explosion, resulting in greater damage to fast targets.
10% increased factor of explosion radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill. CapStream Because Cap Is Life |

Soteria Ariste
Defiant Diddlers
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 20:08:00 -
[512] - Quote
A quick +1 to leaving Spaceship command and missile launcher operation as they are.
Overall i love the fact that someone thought it would be time to take the shield skills out of engineering.
And another +1 for changing the Energy management and operation to capacitor management. |

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Against ALL Authorities
61
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 21:07:00 -
[513] - Quote
Rommiee wrote:My God.....CCP, what is WRONG with you people ?
This is completely pointless and adds nothing. Why donGÇÖt you spend your time fixing stuff that is broken, and not just sit there trying to thinking up the next pointless thing to do.
FFS fix broken stuff before messing with things that DO NOT need fixing.
Jeez.
who the hell pissed in your cheerios? it probably took like 20 minutes to do this, and it has no negative impact so quit whining. |

Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1071
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 23:04:00 -
[514] - Quote
Ben Fenix wrote:GUIDED MISSILE PRECISION Quote:Guided Missile Precision Skill at precision missile homing. Proficiency at this skill increases the accuracy of a fired missile's exact point of impact, resulting in greater damage to small targets.
5% decreased factor of signature radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill. So as stated by the description, this is what the skill should do: (simplified) Bringing the missile closer to the target, so that the missile explosion can deal more damage to it.
What the skill actually does ingame: Giving a bonus to a missile's explosion radius attribute by -5%
Conclusion: It means that the skill isn't described accordingly to the actual game mechanic or in other words: The appliance of a bonus of -5% to the missile's explosion radius has nothing to do with the accuracy, the point of impact and the signature radius of a missile.
Proposal: Adjusting the skill name and description accordingly to the actual game mechanic.
Solution Quote:Densifyed Missile Explosions Skill at adjusting missile explosion. Proficiency at this skill increases the density of a fired missile's explosion, resulting in greater damage to small targets.
5% decreased factor of explosion radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill. _______________________________________________________________________________________________ TARGET NAVIGATION PREDICTION Quote:Target Navigation Prediction Proficiency at optimizing a missile's flight path to negate the effects of a target's speed upon the explosion's impact.
10% decrease per level in factor of target's velocity for all missiles. So as stated by the description, this is what the skill should do: (simplified) It predicts a target's navigational course to intercept the target in order to negate the target's velocity in order to apply full damage to it.
What the skill actually does ingame: Giving a bonus to a missile's explosion velocity attribute by +10%
Conclusion: It means that the skill isn't described accordingly to the actual game mechanic or in other words: The appliance of a bonus of +10% to the missile's explosion velocity has nothing to do with the optimization of a missile's flight path and the negation of a target's velocity.
Solution Quote:Projected Missile Explosions Skill at adjusting missile explosion. Proficiency at this skill increases the velocity of a fired missile's explosion, resulting in greater damage to fast targets.
10% increased factor of explosion radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill.
I like the thinking here, not happy with the word 'densify'. Not sure of an alternative solution yet. |

Ben Fenix
CapStream
17
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 00:59:00 -
[515] - Quote
Solhild wrote:I like the thinking here, not happy with the word 'densify'. Not sure of an alternative solution yet.
Yeah me neither. That's due to the fact that English isn't my mother tongue but it was the closest I could come up with.  CapStream Because Cap Is Life |

Hehaw Jimbojohnson
Frontier Explorer's League Sadistica Alliance
66
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 02:54:00 -
[516] - Quote
Sorry, but I personally think this is a waste of time. This causes as many problems as it solves (such as breaking up logical skill groups like PI and subsystems, along with splitting up skills that require the same attributes to train). A lot of the skill names sound like they are designed to appeal to 10 year olds who barely understand English (Spaceship Piloting, really?)
There are hundreds of other things broke in the game that could use work, why waste time on name changes that aren't particularly broken and don't fix anything? |

Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 04:41:00 -
[517] - Quote
Hehaw Jimbojohnson wrote:SThis causes as many problems as it solves (such as breaking up logical skill groups like PI and subsystems,
Read the other dev posts, not just the first one. PI and subsystems are staying in their own groups.
Hehaw Jimbojohnson wrote:There are hundreds of other things broke in the game that could use work
Anything you consider a priority, someone else will consider a minor detail.
Skill names are a mess; this is an important change in terms of UI streamlining and information accessibility. Besides, it's mostly just editing a few text files; I doubt it will steal much (if any) time from the game's core development. Eve isn't made by a single person, and different people (ex., writers and coders) can work on different things at the same time.
|

Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 04:43:00 -
[518] - Quote
Rafael Tonka wrote:Dumbing down the game for the less mentally agile yet again?
If your sense of achievement in Eve comes from having memorized skill names, I have a Golden Magnate Navy Issue I'd like to sell you...
|

Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
128
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 05:57:00 -
[519] - Quote
Magnus Coleus wrote:If your sense of achievement in Eve comes from having memorized skill names, I have a Golden Magnate Navy Issue I'd like to sell you...
There's this real life skill called reading comprehension.. you may want to look it up.
He didn't present it as an accomplishment, he rightly pointed out that taking the time to understand what you put in the skill queue is an absolutely trivial thing.
Those who apparently have trouble figuring out what "Spaceship Command" or "Energy Management" means would be far more likely to fall for a scam. Because they are idiots.
|

jwingender
Tar Valon Research and Development
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 06:16:00 -
[520] - Quote
If you are trying to clean up the skills then why wouldn't KEEP the subsystem category with all its own little skills. Hiding them in with the rig skills makes zero sense. It seems like you are creating a job for someone 2-3 years down the line when they "remove subsystem skills into their own category." Save that guy the time and just don't do this now.
Also: +1 for keeping Spaceship Command category, Electronics skill, and Engineering skill. They sound so much better than your proposed alternatives and are already quite intuitive.
Everything else sounds brilliant. |

Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1071
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 10:48:00 -
[521] - Quote
OP should be updated to reflect other posts. This thread is confusing now. |
|

CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
2233

|
Posted - 2013.08.07 10:51:00 -
[522] - Quote
Solhild wrote:OP should be updated to reflect other posts. This thread is confusing now.
Indeed it is, forgot about the OP Just updated it right now from the changes listed there. |
|

TehCloud
Carnivore Company 24eme Legion Etrangere
80
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 12:02:00 -
[523] - Quote
Thanks for keeping Spaceship Command :3
Still I feel that "Armor" and "Shield" just feel wrong. But still, I'm happy. My Condor costs less than that module! |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
433
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 12:29:00 -
[524] - Quote
please change mechanics and hull upgrades .. they don't explain what they are and is hard to remember the difference.. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |

Frenjo Borkstar
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 14:53:00 -
[525] - Quote
Things don't need to be changed, they are perfectly fine, and not everyone that plays eve is in need of things being "dumbed down", as for Armor Layering, NO WAY, armor honeycombing is pretty good. Things have been this way for 10 years, don't change them now and get everybody confused. |

Mongo Edwards
Hounds Of War WHY so Seri0Us
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 15:57:00 -
[526] - Quote
Capacitor Emission Systems and Capital Capacitor Emission Systems sounds kind of silly. A capacitor is a peice of hardware used to store energy. The modules requiring the skills transfer giga joules (energy) to another ship not the hardware used to store the energy.
Please leave the skills named Energy Emission Systems and Capital Energy Emission Systems as it is more descriptive of what they effect. |

Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 18:29:00 -
[527] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:he rightly pointed out that taking the time to understand what you put in the skill queue is an absolutely trivial thing.
Not sure how you get "he rightly pointed out [anything]" when all the post says is this:
Rafael Tonka wrote:Dumbing down the game for the less mentally agile yet again?
Correcting ambiguous terms is not "dumbing down", it's improving the interface (or documentation, etc.). It's precisely the "less mentally agile" people who oppose any change (even when it makes the terminology more concise) because it means they will have to learn something new.
|

Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 18:32:00 -
[528] - Quote
Mongo Edwards wrote:Capacitor Emission Systems and Capital Capacitor Emission Systems sounds kind of silly. A capacitor is a peice of hardware used to store energy. The modules requiring the skills transfer giga joules (energy) to another ship not the hardware used to store the energy.
Please leave the skills named Energy Emission Systems and Capital Energy Emission Systems as it is more descriptive of what they effect.
I agree "capacitor emission" sounds a bit weird, but you are effectively emitting energy from a capacitor to another capacitor, not to or from the energy grid, so the term needs to make that clear.
I would suggest something like "Remote Capacitor Charging".
|

Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 18:56:00 -
[529] - Quote
Siresa Talesi wrote:Show me the dictionary that lists "targeting" as a noun.
DOD DoMT, Joint Education and Doctrine Division, J-7 wrote: targeting (n.) The process of selecting and prioritizing targets and matching the appropriate response to them, considering operational requirements and capabilities. See also joint targeting coordination board; target.
That's from the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms (which anyone who's served in the US probably came across at some point). Authoritative and appropriate enough for ya? I can also show you military manuals with entire chapters dedicated to "the targeting of" various things. Wouldn't be surprised if there are even some parts about "multi-targeting" (which is really just a better-sounding abbreviation of "multiple targeting").
Maybe English isn't your first language, but no native speaker has any doubt that "targeting", "opening", or hundreds of other words ending in "ing" can be nouns. Heard of Shakespeare? He wrote "The Taming of the Shrew". I guess that illiterate oaf didn't know that "taming" isn't a noun...
Now please stop spamming about "bad grammer" (or at least learn to spell "grammar").
CCP admitted it sounded bad and changed the term about five pages ago, anyway. |

jwingender
Tar Valon Research and Development
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 19:27:00 -
[530] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote: "Armor layering" implies adding armor, which isn't what the skill does. "Armor honeycombing" implies making the armor lighter, which is exactly what the skill does.
Not sure why you need to change that one...
Totally agree. Layering is counter-intuitive with what the skill actually does. Another change to get reversed later...

|

Mongo Edwards
Hounds Of War WHY so Seri0Us
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 20:26:00 -
[531] - Quote
They could also just change the "Energy Grid Upgrades" skill to "Power Grid Upgrades" it seems to fit better with what the skill actually does. |

CW Itovuo
The Executioners Insidious Empire
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 03:28:00 -
[532] - Quote
How many times did CCP change the names of Missiles to make the game moar bettah? Yeah. Brilliant.
Just leave the skill names as they are.
Changing them is counter productive to the hundreds of people who maintain webpages.
|

Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
128
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 07:03:00 -
[533] - Quote
Magnus Coleus wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:he rightly pointed out that taking the time to understand what you put in the skill queue is an absolutely trivial thing. Not sure how you get "he rightly pointed out [anything]" when all the post says is this: Rafael Tonka wrote:Dumbing down the game for the less mentally agile yet again? Correcting ambiguous terms is not "dumbing down", it's improving the interface (or documentation, etc.). It's precisely the "less mentally agile" people who oppose any change (even when it makes the terminology more concise) because it means they will have to learn something new.
Again, look up reading comprehension. I was offering an exposition of the crux of his statement.
You are misreading our objections. It's not learning new, purposely self-explanatory names that is the issue here.
The main objective, at least on my part, is that the alternatives offered for the current skill names range from cringe worthy to absolutely -»etarded.
|

Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 07:52:00 -
[534] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:I was offering an exposition of the crux of his statement. Thanks for the chuckle.
Moneta Curran wrote:the alternatives offered for the current skill names range from cringe worthy to absolutely -»etarded. So, tell me, renaming "Nanite Control" (a skill that affects boosters, and not nanite paste use) to "Neurotoxin Control"... is that "cringe worthy" or "absolutely -»etarded" ?
What about changing "Energy Management" (which affects your capacitor, and not your energy grid) to "Capacitor Management"? "Cringe worthy" or "absolutely -»etarded" ?
What about "Rigging" for the group that contains rigging skills? What about "Neural Enhancement" for the group that contains skills related to boosters and implants? Where do those fall in your scale? And so on...
I'm just trying to get to the crux of your rating system. |

Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
163
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 08:29:00 -
[535] - Quote
Glad Spaceship Command is back. Changes look mostly sensible except armor layering which as pointed out above sounds like it adds armor. Armor Honeycombing is a better name. |

Balzac Legazou
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 08:45:00 -
[536] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:please change mechanics and hull upgrades .. they don't explain what they are and is hard to remember the difference..
The problem there is that "Hull Upgrades" actually improves armor (and also allows you to install lots of different upgrades, some armor-related, some not), while "Mechanics" improves structure (which in some places is called "hull"), and is also required for some very different modules (some armor-related, some not).
Simply changing the names won't really fix the problem(s). The reason why it's hard to remember which is which is that they both overlap in many places.
And if they can't fix it properly, they might as well keep the current names. |

Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
129
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 09:04:00 -
[537] - Quote
Magnus Coleus wrote:So, tell me, renaming "Nanite Control" (a skill that affects boosters, and not nanite paste use) to "Neurotoxin Control"... is that "cringe worthy" or "absolutely -»etarded" ?
Neither. That's one of the few exceptions that proves the rule. It actually makes sense.
Magnus Coleus wrote:What about changing "Energy Management" (which affects your capacitor, and not your energy grid) to "Capacitor Management"? "Cringe worthy" or "absolutely -»etarded" ?
Cringe worthy. I'm not sure why anyone would think that the power grid is involved here. Why should we cater to those who can't be arsed to read the skill descriptions? You cannot fix stupid anyway.
Magnus Coleus wrote:What about "Rigging" for the group that contains rigging skills? What about "Neural Enhancement" for the group that contains skills related to boosters and implants? Where do those fall in your scale? And so on...
I can point out a dumb suggestion for every remotely sensible one you have cherry-picked here. There's just no real need to change these either. It's a waste of development time. So, bearing in mind the bigger picture, it's -»etarded. |

Siresa Talesi
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
73
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 19:34:00 -
[538] - Quote
Magnus Coleus wrote:Siresa Talesi wrote:Show me the dictionary that lists "targeting" as a noun. DOD DoMT, Joint Education and Doctrine Division, J-7 wrote: targeting (n.) The process of selecting and prioritizing targets and matching the appropriate response to them, considering operational requirements and capabilities. See also joint targeting coordination board; target.
That's from the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms (which anyone who's served in the US probably came across at some point). Authoritative and appropriate enough for ya? I can also show you military manuals with entire chapters dedicated to "the targeting of" various things. Wouldn't be surprised if there are even some parts about "multi-targeting" (which is really just a better-sounding abbreviation of "multiple targeting"). Maybe English isn't your first language, but no native speaker has any doubt that "targeting", "opening", or hundreds of other words ending in "ing" can be nouns. Heard of Shakespeare? He wrote "The Taming of the Shrew". I guess that illiterate oaf didn't know that "taming" isn't a noun... Now please stop spamming about "bad grammer" (or at least learn to spell "grammar"). CCP admitted it sounded bad and changed the term about five pages ago, anyway.
Actually, I've served in the military enough to know that they are hardly any sort of authority on proper English. Some of the terms and phrases they come up with are downright ridiculous and would be laughed at by any high school English teacher. Besides, I've referenced the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms on multiple official military sites, and no copy I've seen includes the (n.) designation; so I can only assume that you added that yourself.
Include a reference from a respected and known English dictionary; Websters, Rogets, etc., someone whose business it actually is to set the standards of the English language.
I never claimed that words ending in "ing" couldn't be nouns, only that "targeting" specifically is a verb in the case in which it was used.
Again, CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!!! Context will always determine the form fo the word. In the skill names, the name "Multiple Targeting" was specifically given to describe the action of acquiring multiple targets; in this case there should be no question that the use of targeting here is a verb. |

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Against ALL Authorities
73
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 00:02:00 -
[539] - Quote
Siresa Talesi wrote:Magnus Coleus wrote:Siresa Talesi wrote:Show me the dictionary that lists "targeting" as a noun. DOD DoMT, Joint Education and Doctrine Division, J-7 wrote: targeting (n.) The process of selecting and prioritizing targets and matching the appropriate response to them, considering operational requirements and capabilities. See also joint targeting coordination board; target.
That's from the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms (which anyone who's served in the US probably came across at some point). Authoritative and appropriate enough for ya? I can also show you military manuals with entire chapters dedicated to "the targeting of" various things. Wouldn't be surprised if there are even some parts about "multi-targeting" (which is really just a better-sounding abbreviation of "multiple targeting"). Maybe English isn't your first language, but no native speaker has any doubt that "targeting", "opening", or hundreds of other words ending in "ing" can be nouns. Heard of Shakespeare? He wrote "The Taming of the Shrew". I guess that illiterate oaf didn't know that "taming" isn't a noun... Now please stop spamming about "bad grammer" (or at least learn to spell "grammar"). CCP admitted it sounded bad and changed the term about five pages ago, anyway. Actually, I've served in the military enough to know that they are hardly any sort of authority on proper English. Some of the terms and phrases they come up with are downright ridiculous and would be laughed at by any high school English teacher. Besides, I've referenced the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms on multiple official military sites, and no copy I've seen includes the (n.) designation; so I can only assume that you added that yourself. Include a reference from a respected and known English dictionary; Websters, Rogets, etc., someone whose business it actually is to set the standards of the English language. I never claimed that words ending in "ing" couldn't be nouns, only that "targeting" specifically is a verb in the case in which it was used. Again, CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!!! Context will always determine the form fo the word. In the skill names, the name "Multiple Targeting" was specifically given to describe the action of acquiring multiple targets; in this case there should be no question that the use of targeting here is a verb. Target is a noun and a verb. being a verb allows you to add "-ing" to it which shows that it is an immediate or continuous action. so while it isn't a standalone word in the dictionary it's still legitimate English. there you go. back to the topic at hand. |

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Against ALL Authorities
73
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 00:05:00 -
[540] - Quote
I'm surprised that a simple clean-up like this got so much rage. |

Garth Pollard
Spirits of Essence
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 00:39:00 -
[541] - Quote
Siresa Talesi wrote:
Include a reference from a respected and known English dictionary; Websters, Rogets, etc., someone whose business it actually is to set the standards of the English language.
Should be pointed out that there is no such thing as an "authority" that decides what is and is not "proper" english. All Websters et. al. do is to record how words appear to be used, and what contexts they are in, but they are by no means exhaustive and it is not their job to "set the standards" of a varied, living language, only to act as recorders and historians.
|

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Against ALL Authorities
74
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 00:43:00 -
[542] - Quote
Garth Pollard wrote:Should be pointed out that there is no such thing as an "authority" that decides what is and is not "proper" english. I think the grammar ***** would freak if they realized they had no Furher
e: Is the term for the ruling party of the German government during WW2 really not allowed here? wtf |

Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
636
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 07:44:00 -
[543] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Rommiee wrote:My God.....CCP, what is WRONG with you people ?
This is completely pointless and adds nothing. Why donGÇÖt you spend your time fixing stuff that is broken, and not just sit there trying to thinking up the next pointless thing to do.
FFS fix broken stuff before messing with things that DO NOT need fixing.
Jeez.
who the hell pissed in your cheerios? it probably took like 20 minutes to do this, and it has no negative impact so quit whining.
Well that's 20 minutes they could have spent fixing broken stuff, not doing pointless **** like this. |

Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1128
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 10:29:00 -
[544] - Quote
I'm very happy with the changes now.
I'm actually ok with Armor Layering as it suggests that unnecessary thickness is removed where it isn't needed. Armor honeycombing also makes sense from the point of view that Armor would be voided internally to save weight - this term is probably less appropriate and confusing to some people. |

Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
129
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 10:58:00 -
[545] - Quote
Because to layer stuff means taking a bit off of a stack, right. When I put on an additional layer of clothing I am actually stripping.
Yes, very good. |

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Against ALL Authorities
77
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 12:00:00 -
[546] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote: When I put on an additional layer of clothing I am actually stripping.
Yes, very good.
*pulls out dollars |

Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1128
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 12:37:00 -
[547] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote: Because to layer stuff means taking a bit off of a stack, right. When I put on an additional layer of clothing I am actually stripping.
Yes, very good.
Presumably you know which layers to take off if you're too hot? |

Tlat Ij
Hedion University Amarr Empire
41
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 17:42:00 -
[548] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Electronic Warfare Systems: is the old GÇ£electronicsGÇ¥ group. Now only contains offense EW related skills. fixd.
If the group only has EW related skills the name should reflect that since you are trying to make the naming more obvious and whatnot. |

Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1154
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 22:24:00 -
[549] - Quote
Tlat Ij wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Electronic Warfare Systems: is the old GÇ£electronicsGÇ¥ group. Now only contains offense EW related skills. fixd. If the group only has EW related skills the name should reflect that since you are trying to make the naming more obvious and whatnot.
You look like you're from East Hull. |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
307
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 08:06:00 -
[550] - Quote
Armour honeycombing is better though as it implies fitting armour with the plates interiors hollowed out to lighten it whilst retaining strength. Layering conveys the opposite. Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |

Emiko P'eng
51
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 19:27:00 -
[551] - Quote
Overall:
Honeycomb Armour is an Internationally recognised term. That covers a whole multitude of composite armours that are both light weight and strong. While Armour Layering sounds like you are adding armour!
Also I agree withe the earlier comment that Electronic Warfare Systems is better than Electronic System. |

B33R
Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 02:09:00 -
[552] - Quote
Is the Primary and Secondary attributes going to change (or matchup or whatever) when you change the names and locations? because if so i want some additional remaps... |

Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2241
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 03:24:00 -
[553] - Quote
CCP, ALL of these name changes are 100% pointless and arbitrary. Please spend time on things that are actually beneficial. |

Creca
O.Z. Prizon
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 17:22:00 -
[554] - Quote
Put Salvaging in Scanning group please. Since is more connected to scanning/exploration thing than to industry. |

Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
266
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 17:57:00 -
[555] - Quote
Hull Upgrades and Remote Hull Repair Systems in Armor category?
Could they\would they not be better suited to a Structure\Hull category? What about standardising the name to Remote Structure Repair as Hull?
Just logged onto SiSi to test 1.1 and had this to feedback. Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up! |

Abishai
103
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 18:22:00 -
[556] - Quote
"Capacitor Emission Systems"
Jettisoning capacitors will surely damage my shipGÇÖs computers. Can I emit the energy from them instead?
|

Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
267
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 19:19:00 -
[557] - Quote
Targeting Skill Group:
Gravimetric Sensor Compensation? Ladar Sensor Compensation?
In targeting? Wouldn't these be better placed in Electronic Systems or in a New Group:
"Electronic Counter Systems" or "Electronic Counter-Warfare (Systems)" or "Electronic Counter-Warfare Systems"
Along with a group called:
"Electronic Warfare Systems" Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up! |

Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
267
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 19:29:00 -
[558] - Quote
Can't you just "Sub-Group" all skills and make them into a more "Top Level"\logical ordering?
"Electronic Systems" > -------------------------------Electronic Systems > -------------------------------Electronic Warfare > -------------------------------Electronic Reinforcement > ----------------------------------------------------------------------LADAR Compensation
"Weapons Systems" > -------------------------------Gunnery > -------------------------------Missiles > ----------------------------------------------Cruise Missiles > ----------------------------------------------------------------------Cruise Missile Specialisation --------------------------------------------- Heavy Missiles > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Heavy Missile Specialisation -------------------------------Disruption > ------------------------------------------------Weapon Disruption Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up! |

Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
267
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 19:48:00 -
[559] - Quote
What about adding an option to Character Sheet > Skills > Settings to "Hide Level 5 Skills" a bit like the "Show All Skills" options?
This would remove some of the scrolling required for those with lots of Level 5\Maxed Skills? Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up! |

Rob Crowley
State War Academy
122
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 20:38:00 -
[560] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Energy Management, Energy Emission Systems and Energy Systems Operation: have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation". I just noticed on SiSi that the Capital Energy Emission Systems skill is unchanged and not consistent with the new naming. Though I have to say I like Energy Emission better, cause energy is what you're actually emitting. |

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3953
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 02:39:00 -
[561] - Quote
Time to decide on the colour of the bike shed!
Armor: the "armor layering" vs "armor honeycombing" skill discussion doesn't take into account hair dressing. As any hair dresser knows, you can reduce the bulk of hairdo by "layering" which means reducing the amount of hair present at lower or higher strata. Thus a hair dresser knows exactly what "armor layering" means: you chop away the bits that are too bulky and don't add to the value of the armor plating job. Outdoor sports people also know about layering: it means that you refine just how much you wear to suit the conditions.
Electronic System: Since this group is the Electronic Warfare set of skills, why not call it "Electronic Warfare"? Rename the "Electronic Warfare" skill to "Target Jamming" since that's the set of modules that it interacts with. I'd like to see "ECM" removed from the places where it is redundant: "ECM Target Jamming" should just be "Target Jamming" or "Electronic Counter Measures".
Engineering: Rename "Energy Grid Upgrades" to "Engineering Upgrades" - power diagnostic systems are energy grid upgrades, but they impact shields.
Production: Consider renaming "Industry" to "Material Efficiency".
Resource Processing: these are a mix of harvesting and processing skills. Perhaps "Resource Extraction" might help, since you do need a mixture of the harvesting and processing skills to operate T2 mining lasers and crystals. Ice Harvesting, Gas Cloud Harvesting, Mining and Astrogeology do not relate to "processing" but they do relate to "extraction".
Scanning: what about "Exploration" since that's the career path that these skills support? The hacking minigame is not scanning, neither is it related to scanning (Astrometrics and Survey skills have no impact on the outcome of a hacking mini-game, other than finding the game in the first place).
Overall, a well thought-out set of changes to the skill tree nomenclature. Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3953
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 02:41:00 -
[562] - Quote
Rob Crowley wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Energy Management, Energy Emission Systems and Energy Systems Operation: have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation". I just noticed on SiSi that the Capital Energy Emission Systems skill is unchanged and not consistent with the new naming. Though I have to say I like Energy Emission better, cause energy is what you're actually emitting.
I concur: better names would be "Energy Emission Systems" or "Capacitor Transfer Systems". Since CCP wants to have the name of the skill (and the equipment tree) reflect the attribute of the target that you are impacting, I'd prefer "Capacitor Transfer Systems".
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |

Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
73
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 02:56:00 -
[563] - Quote
I vote for keeping the old "missile launcher operation" just like you are keeping spaceship command. Really, do I want missiles, or do I want to OPERATE (Hell Yes) Missile Launchers! The latter defiantly sounds cooler. A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver. |

jeproghnem
Sacred Skies
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 05:34:00 -
[564] - Quote
I like it, it all sounds good, except for one thing, which is kinda bothering me, namely:
energy emission systems should be left alone (don't change it to capacitor emission systems), as you do not emit your energy storage, your superconducting battery does not get thrown into the other guy's ship, you send the capacitor's charge into the other ship. |

Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
4521
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 07:58:00 -
[565] - Quote
Please Use the Electronic Warfare Systems as a skill group or Electronic Warfare,
Its how the US Navy separates things that things that involve sensory deprivation have little to do with the rest of the craft's electronics outside of feeding it power.
Electronics themselves are more into the control of the craft via electrical signals. Ie Push Joystick go forward is electronics at work. Where as Radio dish counter matches beamed frequency is a electronic warfare art. Dust 514's CPM 0 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.-á |

Graygor
1kB Realty 1kB Galactic
51358
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 11:52:00 -
[566] - Quote
All good but I share Nova Fox's feelings about the EWS skill group.
As others have mentioned, Armour Honeycombing is a more practical name than layering. To me layering suggests adding weight rather than removing it which is what honeycombing would do.
Still, it looks good on sisi and makes a lot of sense. After 7 years of EVE it took all of 2 minutes to get used to it... so hopefully there will not be screams of rage and much gnashing of teeth. "I think you should buy a new Mayan calendar. Mine has muscle cars on it." --áKenneth O'Hara
"I dont think that can happen, you can see Gray has his invuln field on in his portrait." - Commisar Kate |

Soporo
35
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 12:50:00 -
[567] - Quote
Quote:Another thumbs down on Spaceship command new name. Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. - H.L. Mencken |

Rich Uncle PennyBags
EVE Online Monopoly
13
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 15:23:00 -
[568] - Quote
Soporo wrote:Quote:Another thumbs down on Spaceship command new name.
Adding my support.
Keep Spaceship Command. |

Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1180
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 16:33:00 -
[569] - Quote
Agree that it should be Electronic Warfare Systems.
(Electronic Systems confusingly suggests that the hardware installed in the ship to help it function) |

Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1180
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 16:42:00 -
[570] - Quote
Rich Uncle PennyBags wrote:Soporo wrote:Quote:Another thumbs down on Spaceship command new name. Adding my support. Keep Spaceship Command.
It is Spaceship Command for 'now' rather than Spaceship Piloting.
I agree (with Fox & others) that is should stay as spaceship command as the skills affect much more than, 'how to pilot a particular type of spaceship'. These skills have bonuses for weapon damage & rof, agility & velocity, cargo capacity, tank hitpoints, etc. etc. In fact the bonuses that kick in from these skills truly make a capsuleer a commander of their starship rather than merely the driver! |

Karl Stranne
Hollow And Naught But Ash
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 16:53:00 -
[571] - Quote
Keep Spaceship Command and Armor Honeycombing. They make sense and sound cool (which is what it's all about).
Other than that, good stuff. |

Yaturi
The Scope Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 19:11:00 -
[572] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Rigging: has all the skills related to rigs that previously were in the GÇ£MechanicsGÇ¥ skill group.
Contains the Armor Rigging, Astronautics Rigging, Drone Rigging, Electronic Superiority Rigging, Energy Weapon Rigging,Gallente Defensive Systems, Hybrid Weapon Rigging, Jury Rigging, Launcher Rigging, Projectile Weapon Rigging and Shield Rigging skills.
( pâ+pü+pâ+ ) |

DetKhord Saisio
Seniors Clan Get Off My Lawn
25
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 21:19:00 -
[573] - Quote
Edward Olmops wrote:A few comments.
CCP should really make an effort to make EVE more beginner-friendly, no doubt. Some skills like Multitasking and Nanite Control ought to be renamed, because the name is utterly misleading. But.
You are going way to far with this concept.
As many before me have already stated, many of the proposed name changes are uninspiring. Space Ship Command should really be spaceship command. Really, what's the point?
Also: Every name change that you do also has a NEGATIVE impact on the playability. Simply because all ressources on the web will be outdated. I have experienced that over and over again with previous renamings (e.g. Auto-Targeting Missiles). Maybe a newbie didn't get what a F.O.F. missile was. But a newbie with some minimum cleverness managed to throw that expression into Google and whoa - here we go. But try to find something if the name has changed during the last two years... I am really sad about what happened (not) to Evelopedia. I used that A LOT, that was one of my primary ressources when I was a noob. But now it's utterly useless, because each and every single ship and item has been rebalanced. That should of course not imply that you stop rebalancing because of Evelopedia - God forbid! But it shows the effect. There should be only things renamed when it'S REALLY necessary. And maybe it would also be noob-friendly to update Evelopedia.
That said, I for example always thought it was good that some skills (Electronics, Engineering, Social...) had the same name as their category. That way I would always know which one was the "basic" skill in the category which I needed to train first. The one that has the most impact on what I was doing. Compare Electronics (+5% CPU) to Target Breaker Amplification (+?% weird nonsense). Anything that makes it more likely that new players put their energy into the important skills to let them get into the game faster is a good thing. Either keep Spaceship Command as is... or rename it Piloting. Listen to the logic.
IMHO, a majority of this game is the learning curve. With that in mind, I suggest you build an Odyssey 1.1 Evelopedia prior to 1.1 going live. Test it. I mean actual testing. You guys do know what that entails, right? |

Amateratsu
The Pegasus Project
50
|
Posted - 2013.08.14 20:47:00 -
[574] - Quote
I think " Electronic System " ( Singular ) should be " Electronic Systems " ( Plural ) since the group has skills that effect more than 1 electronic system.
The same goes for the group " Mechanic " which should be " Mechanics "
Poor Chribba is gonna have his work cut out updating Eveboard after these changes |

Garth Pollard
Spirits of Essence
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 02:07:00 -
[575] - Quote
Amateratsu wrote:Poor Chribba is gonna have his work cut out updating Eveboard after these changes 
Naah, Chribba strikes me as a halfway decent programmer, so I doubt he did something so foolish as to hardcode names on everything.
....right?
|
|

Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
9183
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 06:21:00 -
[576] - Quote
Garth Pollard wrote:Amateratsu wrote:Poor Chribba is gonna have his work cut out updating Eveboard after these changes  Naah, Chribba strikes me as a halfway decent programmer, so I doubt he did something so foolish as to hardcode names on everything. ....right? Most is indeed import the dump, run a few scripts and it's pretty much up to date 
|
|

Treborr MintingtonJr
The Knights of Spamalot The Methodical Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 14:30:00 -
[577] - Quote
I need a 'Project Management' skill please |

Frenjo Borkstar
EVE Corporation 98237921
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 17:36:00 -
[578] - Quote
In response to the last CCP post, it's not that we're "stuck to an old andoutdated interface" it's that the current interface is fine, and the playerbase doesn't want It changed. |

Randey Miromme
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 12:08:00 -
[579] - Quote
I have not read all the posts in this thread but I really hope this is some kind of lame joke. To me it sounds like you are dumbing down.... Next thing you know you will have the ability to use animals from the south pole as your avatar.
Please reconsider.... |

Thexx Littlechurch
Black Whole Industries
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 21:54:00 -
[580] - Quote
Change the groupings. Move Thermodynamics and Weapon Upgrades to Engineering etc. Thats a good idea.
DO NOT chage the names of the skills! Thats a bad idea. Stop dumbing this game down. We play this game because its the only complicated MMO left out there. It's really starting to worry me CCP.
Please?
FFS anyone who would come to EVE and stay because the skills are easy to remember is just going to quit when they get owned/scammed repeatedly anyway. These are the people that try the game and ragequit because its "too hard" or my favorite "it's boring". When they say "it's boring" that's poseur-gamer speak for "I don't understand".
MAKE OUR GAME HARDER NOT EASIER.
Maybe I should just go back to tabletop gaming....  |

Barzhad
Hoplite Brigade White-Lotus
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.17 10:28:00 -
[581] - Quote
Can we pretty please have Neurotoxin Recovery and Nanite Control skills properly explain what they do AND how much percent of the effect they give? why can't descriptions be like nowaday's T1 frigs and cruisers: concrete traits and only then flavor text?!? |

Barzhad
Hoplite Brigade White-Lotus
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.17 10:31:00 -
[582] - Quote
Thexx Littlechurch wrote:Change the groupings. Move Thermodynamics and Weapon Upgrades to Engineering etc. Thats a good idea. DO NOT chage the names of the skills! Thats a bad idea. Stop dumbing this game down. We play this game because its the only complicated MMO left out there. It's really starting to worry me CCP. Please? FFS anyone who would come to EVE and stay because the skills are easy to remember is just going to quit when they get owned/scammed repeatedly anyway. These are the people that try the game and ragequit because its "too hard" or my favorite "it's boring". When they say "it's boring" that's poseur-gamer speak for "I don't understand". MAKE OUR GAME HARDER NOT EASIER. Maybe I should just go back to tabletop gaming....  That's one stupid argument. so people wouldn't have to google the recommended list of skills is gonna make them sob when they make mistakes? sure..
all the changes looks perfectly good to me. finally Science won't be the dumping ground for every new uncategorized skill. |

Ben Fenix
CapStream
17
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 18:11:00 -
[583] - Quote
Looking at the current build on SISI "Target Navigation Prediction" and "Guided Missile Precision" are also still not fixed. POST
Besides that - with all the issues the players bring up in this thread it seems that the whole skill renaming was just barely being looked at with the necessary sense for detail. I'd really like to see this whole thing being done completely and not just half-baked. So that it is done once and for all instead of the player always to be remembered that this whole renaming thing will come up again and again because the details where skipped in the first place. CapStream Because Cap Is Life |

Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
166
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 23:44:00 -
[584] - Quote
Spaceship piloting - no. It's really childish, and bad English. Spaceship Command - yes Starship Command - yes
Weapons Upgrades and Advanced Weapons Upgrades is a tricky one. It's not engineering, it's weaponry. But it affects both missiles and guns. Unfortunately there are no other "weaponry" skills you can lump into a new category to make that work in a satisfactory way. Probably best left where it is.
In general, my user experience is that the categorisation of skills has never been an issue that has caused me any confusion or complication within the game. With the greatest respect, in my view it's not a good use of developer time to tinker with it.
Fixing certificates in a way I mentioned in this post probably is:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3507856#post3507856
|

Xola Zuni
The Tuskers
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 10:28:00 -
[585] - Quote
Please let us keep "Armor Honeycombing". Coolest skill name (directly followed by "Spaceship Command"). |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
323
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 16:59:00 -
[586] - Quote
Well I've discovered why they were so keen on starship piloting!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=270956&find=unread
Eve Valkyrie is coming.
The feedback about this has been really good, but I'm a bit worried as to how it will integrate with the rest of the eve universe and have other questions such as 'will there be a PC client' or is this yet another 'console only' affair.
Can we have an official dev response on this please. Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |

Garth Pollard
Spirits of Essence
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 20:42:00 -
[587] - Quote
> game based entirely around use of the Occulus Rift > wants to know if it's console-exclusive
Also in the announcement interview they said that it won't tie /directly/ into EVE, not like DUST. |

Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
486
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 09:31:00 -
[588] - Quote
Awaiting for following changes:
"Gunnery" into "Gun damaging" "Rapid fire" into "Gun shooting" "Motion prediction" into "Gun hitting"
Will be well in line with name changes made by CCP last year. And hey, less confusing for newbros!1
P. S. Okay, some were good. |

Kenny Drein
Big Shadows Initiative Mercenaries
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 01:10:00 -
[589] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: Rigging: has all the skills related to rigs that previously were in the GÇ£MechanicsGÇ¥ skill group.
Contains the Armor Rigging, Astronautics Rigging, Drone Rigging, Electronic Superiority Rigging, Energy Weapon Rigging, Gallente Defensive Systems, Hybrid Weapon Rigging, Jury Rigging, Launcher Rigging, Projectile Weapon Rigging and Shield Rigging skills.
Wait what? I do hope this is a typo, otherwise I'd have to call you people racists, preferring Gallente over the others ;) |

Smelly PirateWhore
Reikoku The Retirement Club
6
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 11:23:00 -
[590] - Quote
"If there's one thing that's always bothered me about EVE online, it's the names of the skills"
|

Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
192
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 15:43:00 -
[591] - Quote
I felt so enraged by some of these name changes that I had to repeat this here (also posted as a side-comment in the command ships thread):
I spend hours of my life living in the scientific wonderland of Eve and now they're giving all my stuff play-school names?
Spaceship Piloting? A pilot is a noun. It's a ship or light for providing guidance. It's not a verb. The verb is "command", "control", "guide", "operate", even "fly". It should be "starship command" or "spaceship (at a push) command".
"Capacitor Transferer"? Do me a favour and f*ck right off! "Energy Transfer Array" is the correct name.
Maybe we'd like to rename the projectile weapons to "Bullet Transferrers", or the Laser weapons to "Light shiners", or maybe tractor beams could be renamed "Wreck puller thingies". Yes, let's rename missile launchers to "things what chuck out other things that go BANG!".
Someone in CCP needs to take a long, hard shamefaced look in the mirror, and then pick up a book and educate themselves.
Out-f*cking-rageous!
|

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
323
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 16:18:00 -
[592] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:I felt so enraged by some of these name changes that I had to repeat this here (also posted as a side-comment in the command ships thread):
I spend hours of my life living in the scientific wonderland of Eve and now they're giving all my stuff play-school names?
Spaceship Piloting? A pilot is a noun. It's a ship or light for providing guidance. It's not a verb. The verb is "command", "control", "guide", "operate", even "fly". It should be "starship command" or "spaceship (at a push) command".
"Capacitor Transferer"? Do me a favour and f*ck right off! "Energy Transfer Array" is the correct name.
Maybe we'd like to rename the projectile weapons to "Bullet Transferrers", or the Laser weapons to "Light shiners", or maybe tractor beams could be renamed "Wreck puller thingies". Yes, let's rename missile launchers to "things what chuck out other things that go BANG!".
Someone in CCP needs to take a long, hard shamefaced look in the mirror, and then pick up a book and educate themselves.
Out-f*cking-rageous!
+10
Dude if I could click the like button more than once I would. Cold -Gas, Arc Jet Thrusters forever... No to more dumbing down! Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |

Stjaerna Ramundson
Unknown Dimension Alpha Volley Union
44
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 21:37:00 -
[593] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:[...] [...]
- Energy Management, Energy Emission Systems and Energy Systems Operation: have been renamed "Capacitor Management", "Capacitor Emission Systems" and "Capacitor Systems Operation".
[...]
Don't forget to rename the Implants too, please. :) (So they are easer found, cause of the name) 1. Eigenen Beitrag mit sachliche Argumentationen, Problemschilderung, Erkl+ñrung, L+¦sungsans+ñtzen formulieren. 2. Beitrag enth+ñlt eine eigene Meinung im Fazit zum Thema. 3. Negative +äu+ƒerungen, Drohungen usw. gegen++ber Nutzern haben in der Meinung nichts zu suchen. |

Hell Bitch
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 08:47:00 -
[594] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:I felt so enraged by some of these name changes that I had to repeat this here (also posted as a side-comment in the command ships thread):
I spend hours of my life living in the scientific wonderland of Eve and now they're giving all my stuff play-school names?
Spaceship Piloting? A pilot is a noun. It's a ship or light for providing guidance. It's not a verb. The verb is "command", "control", "guide", "operate", even "fly". It should be "starship command" or "spaceship (at a push) command".
"Capacitor Transferer"? Do me a favour and f*ck right off! "Energy Transfer Array" is the correct name.
Maybe we'd like to rename the projectile weapons to "Bullet Transferrers", or the Laser weapons to "Light shiners", or maybe tractor beams could be renamed "Wreck puller thingies". Yes, let's rename missile launchers to "things what chuck out other things that go BANG!".
Someone in CCP needs to take a long, hard shamefaced look in the mirror, and then pick up a book and educate themselves.
Out-f*cking-rageous!
Whilst skill names have never bothered me before I must agree with Mournful here, as an electronics engineer it really winds me the **** up to see capacitor transfer, wtf, does that invlove decoupling my own ships capacitor and then throwing it out the hold of my ship so a buddy can haul it in and plug it into his ship?
HELL NO - when i give someone a jump start I transfer electric energy from my cars battery, not transfer capacitors
Can we re-name informorph psychology to clone transfer, mining to rock transfer and contracting to stuff transfer please?
|

DetKhord Saisio
Seniors Clan Get Off My Lawn
25
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 06:05:00 -
[595] - Quote
Ben Fenix wrote:Solhild wrote:I like the thinking here, not happy with the word 'densify'. Not sure of an alternative solution yet. Yeah me neither. That's due to the fact that English isn't my mother tongue but it was the closest I could come up with.  Would Explosion Radius Density work? |

DetKhord Saisio
Seniors Clan Get Off My Lawn
25
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 06:21:00 -
[596] - Quote
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:I felt so enraged by some of these name changes that I had to repeat this here (also posted as a side-comment in the command ships thread):
I spend hours of my life living in the scientific wonderland of Eve and now they're giving all my stuff play-school names?
Spaceship Piloting? A pilot is a noun. It's a ship or light for providing guidance. It's not a verb. The verb is "command", "control", "guide", "operate", even "fly". It should be "starship command" or "spaceship (at a push) command".
"Capacitor Transferer"? Do me a favour and f*ck right off! "Energy Transfer Array" is the correct name.
Maybe we'd like to rename the projectile weapons to "Bullet Transferrers", or the Laser weapons to "Light shiners", or maybe tractor beams could be renamed "Wreck puller thingies". Yes, let's rename missile launchers to "things what chuck out other things that go BANG!".
Someone in CCP needs to take a long, hard shamefaced look in the mirror, and then pick up a book and educate themselves.
Out-f*cking-rageous!
+10 Dude if I could click the like button more than once I would. Cold -Gas, Arc Jet Thrusters forever... No to more dumbing down! I think everyone may want to consider CCP is based in Iceland, and these guys are doing fairly well with English under the circumstances. Though it would be nice to inject a bit more common sense into a producer's mind allow them to just keep these name changes simple, the voice of reason may be trumped by other things. Or maybe they just need moar Quafe (pronounced cawfee? lol). |

Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
143
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 10:14:00 -
[597] - Quote
And using CCP resourses to organize skills is needed because there are other parts of the game aren't broken anymore?
All this seems abit silly but ok. |

Thexx Littlechurch
Black Whole Industries
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.26 22:09:00 -
[598] - Quote
Barzhad wrote:Thexx Littlechurch wrote:Change the groupings. Move Thermodynamics and Weapon Upgrades to Engineering etc. Thats a good idea. DO NOT chage the names of the skills! Thats a bad idea. Stop dumbing this game down. We play this game because its the only complicated MMO left out there. It's really starting to worry me CCP. Please? FFS anyone who would come to EVE and stay because the skills are easy to remember is just going to quit when they get owned/scammed repeatedly anyway. These are the people that try the game and ragequit because its "too hard" or my favorite "it's boring". When they say "it's boring" that's poseur-gamer speak for "I don't understand". MAKE OUR GAME HARDER NOT EASIER. Maybe I should just go back to tabletop gaming....  That's one stupid argument. so people wouldn't have to google the recommended list of skills is gonna make them sob when they make mistakes? sure..all the changes looks perfectly good to me. finally Science won't be the dumping ground for every new uncategorized skill.
No.
That's one stupid arguement. At least it would be if it was coherent. |

Sylvous
Bigger than Jesus
122
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 21:48:00 -
[599] - Quote
Couldn't engineering and electronics keep their current skill names? |

Frenjo Borkstar
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 13:58:00 -
[600] - Quote
As hundreds of people have said, it doesn't need fixing, it isn't broken. CCP should really start working on aspects of the game which are broken, and not trivial things such as skill names. This may be one of the updates that will actually stop me playing Eve.
Possible CCP Responses:
"It's just because people are stuck to an old and outdated interface." - No, it's not an old and outdated interface, it's just people don't want it changed.
"The playerbase is stuck to it as it hasn't been changed in a while, if ever." - No, we're not stuck to it, it's just that we're happy with what we've got and we don't want it changed. Simple.
(Those are all that I could think of.)
+1 if you don't want anything changed. |

Elizabeth Aideron
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
146
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 21:46:00 -
[601] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:I felt so enraged by some of these name changes that I had to repeat this here (also posted as a side-comment in the command ships thread):
I spend hours of my life living in the scientific wonderland of Eve and now they're giving all my stuff play-school names?
Spaceship Piloting? A pilot is a noun. It's a ship or light for providing guidance. It's not a verb. The verb is "command", "control", "guide", "operate", even "fly". It should be "starship command" or "spaceship (at a push) command".
"Capacitor Transferer"? Do me a favour and f*ck right off! "Energy Transfer Array" is the correct name.
Maybe we'd like to rename the projectile weapons to "Bullet Transferrers", or the Laser weapons to "Light shiners", or maybe tractor beams could be renamed "Wreck puller thingies". Yes, let's rename missile launchers to "things what chuck out other things that go BANG!".
Someone in CCP needs to take a long, hard shamefaced look in the mirror, and then pick up a book and educate themselves.
Out-f*cking-rageous!
A scientific wonderland of spaceships with max velocities. |

Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
259
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 21:57:00 -
[602] - Quote
... and bouncy hulls, magically strong armour, planets and moons that don't orbit, sentry drones that cannot drift away or suffer recoil (or run out of ammo)...
I know, I know  A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |

Kithran
65
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 19:11:00 -
[603] - Quote
Something not answered in the patch notes - where will the following skills appear post the moving around and renaming:
Mobile Factory Operation Mobile Refinery Operation
I presume the first should be under Production and the second under Resource Processing.
Kithran |

Valorius Rageway
EyEs.FR Dominatus Atrum Mortis
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 10:48:00 -
[604] - Quote
Quote:Shields - This group has all the skills related to shields that previously were in the Engineering group have been moved there. Capital Shield Emission Systems. Capital Shield Operation. EM Shield Compensation. Explosive Shield Compensation. Kinetic Shield Compensation. Shield Compensation. Shield Emission Systems. Shield Management. Shield Operation. Shield Upgrades. Tactical Shield Manipulation. Thermic Shield Compensation.
Can someone explain me why this group is named "Shields" and not only "Shield" ? It is hurting my eyes because when you scroll over your ships hitpoints over the shield, you clearly see "Shield Status : X %" !
There is only one shield so pleaaase rename it correctly Shield.
The Armor skillgroup is named well so wtf with the shield ? |

Valorius Rageway
EyEs.FR Dominatus Atrum Mortis
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 11:16:00 -
[605] - Quote
I also would like to summarize all the good ideas i read in this topic :
Quote:I think " Electronic System " ( Singular ) should be " Electronic Systems " ( Plural ) since the group has skills that effect more than 1 electronic system.
The same goes for the group " Mechanic " which should be " Mechanics "
Quote:"Armor layering" implies adding armor, which isn't what the skill does. "Armor honeycombing" implies making the armor lighter, which is exactly what the skill does.
Not sure why you need to change that one...
Quote: Agree that it should be Electronic Warfare Systems.
(Electronic Systems confusingly suggests that we're referring to the hardware installed in the ship to help it function)
CCP please listen to your customers, we are playing and living the game so we actually know what is best for us. |

Melek D'Ivri
617 Squadron
25
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 05:54:00 -
[606] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Update here - updated this post in consequence. Hello people, As hinted .....and a lot of this
Slow clap. It all makes suddenly makes sense. |

Capt Canada
Risk Breakers Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 07:21:00 -
[607] - Quote
This has probably been asked and answered but as there are multiple threads dealing with this and i don't want to have to read it all.
Does the new placement of skills in groups also mean the attributes for their training will change?? I noticed weapon upgrades is to be moved to engineering yet it has different prerequisites to, pretty much everything else in that category. Things may be a little wayward now but at least when you look at a category the prereq's are similar so you know by setting a remap for X . X you can train X group of skills. It seems with the proposed changes, there will be a need to check every skill to see will suit as far a 12 month training plan goes. |

Padraig O'Mahone
Grey Area Protective Services THE H0NEYBADGER
2
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 23:47:00 -
[608] - Quote
So, the skill name changes have been made. There were many opinions, as is appropriate within a community as diverse as ours.
But the VAST majority of the comments on the "Armor Honeycombing" to "Armor Layering" change were that it was counter intuitive, it implies the OPPOSITE of what the skill does, and should not be changed. The original name was a good one.
CCP changed it anyway. Nice to see they didn't listen to an overwhelming trend in EVE player opinions, that this change was a bad idea. We're only the ones playing the game after all.... |

Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
299
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 23:52:00 -
[609] - Quote
Padraig O'Mahone wrote:So, the skill name changes have been made. There were many opinions, as is appropriate within a community as diverse as ours.
But the VAST majority of the comments on the "Armor Honeycombing" to "Armor Layering" change were that it was counter intuitive, it implies the OPPOSITE of what the skill does, and should not be changed. The original name was a good one.
CCP changed it anyway. Nice to see they didn't listen to an overwhelming trend in EVE player opinions, that this change was a bad idea. We're only the ones playing the game after all....
I agree that the name change was a mistake. I would also be interested as to why it was changed in the face of public opinion and common sense.
Thanks for not using "spaceship piloting" - phew! Winter marauders - Mutant Ninja Space Turtles
|

Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
148
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 14:03:00 -
[610] - Quote
The majority of changes are fine, I'm just not keen on having a substantially longer list of skill groups. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |

Red Sains
Red Serpent Industries
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 21:54:00 -
[611] - Quote
Sadly I only found this thread only now after the milk is spilled ......
.... actually i started looking for it after i wittnessed some of the changed skill names - and had to learn that even more horrible changes were in the developers pipeline before. Things like "spaceship piloting" ..... As others pointed out, this is the kind of naming that a 6 year old might come up with.
But hey, guess what? It doesnt add too the games atmosphere !
In fact it feels dumbed down in its very primitive descriptive appoach ... And now dear CCP ask youself some serious questions: For whom do you do this dumbing down? What kind of players do you think play your game? Do you really believe that some name change (for ?easier? approach) would be enough to open the gates for the floods of new players waiting outside all this time (because the were enstranged by the word "engineering" of couldnt get the meaning behind the skill "electronics"? Now the surely will flock in and feel at home here for years, yup!
In general, its often a bit tricky when new guys change original core concepts and names that the game designers of old have sweated and thougt over for maybe a long time:
trap one: Too much dumbing down gives an awkward and dumb feeling and kills the atmosphere example: the above discussed "spaceship piloting" (Thank you to all who helped to prevent this at least!)
trap two: Falling short of the original (overall) meaning that was inherent to the old name examples: "electronics" --> "CPU Management" and "engineering" --> "Power Grid Management" These two were the ones that caught my eye ingame, and I really was "wtf, whats that, are they stupid?" Sure in its privitive descriptive way those new names seem to describe what the skill does, nicely dumbed down. But it falls short of the original meaning and concept of those skills. Have the developers totally lost that these are base skills that support a whole tech tree? Its not only about tweaking your cpu or running your powergrid in overload - they come back to you (and by then have to be mastered) when you want to research and produce avanced technologies, be it t2 or t3 - and then the meaning is not "leaning where the overclock button is" but "having profound knowlege in engineering / electronis" , well conveyed in the original name, totally overlooked in the new ones ....... 
trap three: getting it all wrong, changing an intuitive name into a meaningless and even counter intuitive one example: "armor honeycombing" --> "armor layering" (nuff said in other posts above)
THIS WAS NO MASTERPIECE - consider changing it back, before someone gets used to it. |

William Bradley
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 12:06:00 -
[612] - Quote
Valorius Rageway wrote:Can someone explain me why this group is named "Shields" and not only "Shield" ? It is hurting my eyes because when you scroll over your ships hitpoints over the shield, you clearly see "Shield Status : X %" !
There is only one shield so pleaaase rename it correctly Shield.
The Armor skillgroup is named well so wtf with the shield ? For lack of a better way to describe it, it's just the common sci-fi terminology used when describing a fictional spaceship's protective force field. I suppose you could blame Star-Trek if you want; they probably started it. |

Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
350
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 12:14:00 -
[613] - Quote
William Bradley wrote:Valorius Rageway wrote:Can someone explain me why this group is named "Shields" and not only "Shield" ? It is hurting my eyes because when you scroll over your ships hitpoints over the shield, you clearly see "Shield Status : X %" !
There is only one shield so pleaaase rename it correctly Shield.
The Armor skillgroup is named well so wtf with the shield ? For lack of a better way to describe it, it's just the common sci-fi terminology used when describing a fictional spaceship's protective force field. I suppose you could blame Star-Trek if you want; they probably started it.
I take exception to the implication that Star Treck is fiction. Winter marauders - more replies than any other thread, for a ship that no-one flies :-)
|
|

CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
2673

|
Posted - 2013.09.11 09:49:00 -
[614] - Quote
Unpinning, 1.1 has been released. |
|

DetKhord Saisio
Seniors Clan The NME Alliance
30
|
Posted - 2013.10.07 19:06:00 -
[615] - Quote
DetKhord Saisio wrote:Edward Olmops wrote:A few comments.
CCP should really make an effort to make EVE more beginner-friendly, no doubt. Some skills like Multitasking and Nanite Control ought to be renamed, because the name is utterly misleading. But.
You are going way to far with this concept.
As many before me have already stated, many of the proposed name changes are uninspiring. Space Ship Command should really be spaceship command. Really, what's the point?
Also: Every name change that you do also has a NEGATIVE impact on the playability. Simply because all ressources on the web will be outdated. I have experienced that over and over again with previous renaming (e.g. Auto-Targeting Missiles). Maybe a newbie didn't get what a F.O.F. missile was. But a newbie with some minimum cleverness managed to throw that expression into Google and whoa - here we go. But try to find something if the name has changed during the last two years... I am really sad about what happened (not) to Evelopedia. I used that A LOT, that was one of my primary resources when I was a noob. But now it's utterly useless, because each and every single ship and item has been rebalanced. That should of course not imply that you stop re-balancing because of Evelopedia - God forbid! But it shows the effect. There should be only things renamed when it'S REALLY necessary. And maybe it would also be noob-friendly to update Evelopedia.
That said, I for example always thought it was good that some skills (Electronics, Engineering, Social...) had the same name as their category. That way I would always know which one was the "basic" skill in the category which I needed to train first. The one that has the most impact on what I was doing. Compare Electronics (+5% CPU) to Target Breaker Amplification (+?% weird nonsense). Anything that makes it more likely that new players put their energy into the important skills to let them get into the game faster is a good thing. Either keep Spaceship Command as is... or rename it Piloting. Listen to the logic. IMHO, a majority of this game is the learning curve. With that in mind, I suggest you build an Odyssey 1.1 Evelopedia prior to 1.1 going live. Test it. I mean actual testing. You guys do know what that entails, right? Did CCP update the Item Database yet? I believe they know about content/name changes first. It is just shameful that they do not have the foresight/intelligence to update the item database before releasing a patch. Odyssey 1.1 dropped very recently, but the content likely changed in their minds up to 6 months or a year ago. Updating both the live game server and item database needs to happen in tandem, since many external apps/addons rely upon the item database.
|

DetKhord Saisio
Seniors Clan The NME Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 09:00:00 -
[616] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:The goal is to make skills and their associated groups easier to find, classify, and understand as a whole.  We also plan on improving game play via improved addon support. This is done through the following 4 points:
- Renaming some individual skills
- Creating, or renaming existing skill groups and moving skills around
- Matching all changes of skill groups in the Market groups as well
- Ensure name changes mesh with in-game item names and addon item names - because, let's be honest... the item database is fuq'd up
FTFY |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: [one page] |