Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
196
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 15:14:00 -
[121] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:If you want an option for "turned it all the way up to 11" then that's fine. But keep it distinct from the core certificate system that is meant to be used as a learning guide.
For something like this I can't help but feel that Certificate V should be excellence in the field. Not "Spent months training skills to V which no-one would train to V except to say they'd trained them".
- Consider levels 1-3 as core certificate system used as a learning guide.
- Consider level 4 as "excellence in the field".
- Ignore the existence of level 5.
- ???
- Profit!
|
Batelle
RisingSuns
167
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 15:17:00 -
[122] - Quote
These changes are all good. I only have one small thing to quibble over, and that's regarding ship masteries. Based on the megathron example, it appears that there is some kind of rule that level 1 mastery requires all relevant certificates at 1, level 2 mastery requires all relevant certificates at 2, and so on and so forth. If this is the case, this is overly simplistic and in my opinion defeats the purpose of having a separate classification of masteries. The shield reinforcement requirement on the megathron perfectly illustrates this. Let's say that level 2 megathron mastery does not require shield reinforcement, but level 3 does. In that case shield reinforcement shouldn't just start out as a level 3 certificate requirement, it should be at least one level lower than the armor requirement for the same level of mastery, to reflect that for a megathron, armor skills are WAY more important than shield skills, while still acknowledging that some shield skills are important, primarily because they are the low hanging fruit to increase your EHP once you already have good armor skills. The entire point of the certificate system is to make sure people grab the low hanging fruit before they train blaster spec 5 (and yes, I have met people that were training large blaster spec 5 while only having basic core skills at level 4).
Also, THIS:
Sentient Blade wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote: Why do you require useless skills like "Astronautics Rigging" 5 for level 5 Certificates / Masteries? Level 5 Certificates and Masteries mean that the player has totally maxed all skills available for that ship hull, no matter their relevance. It's meant as a very-high level goal and status symbol. [/b] Except you removed the public option, so it's really not much of a symbol at all. If you want an option for "turned it all the way up to 11" then that's fine. But keep it distinct from the core certificate system that is meant to be used as a learning guide. For something like this I can't help but feel that Certificate V should be excellence in the field. Not "Spent months training skills to V which no-one would train to V except to say they'd trained them".
I've had this issue since the day the certificate system was introduced. I understand that "all skills maxed" is a design choice CCP has made. What we're trying to say is: This is a terrible design choice.
You are LITERALLY giving a gold star in exchange for people making suboptimal training choices. Considering that the point of the system is to quantify good training choices, this is a bad standard. Fighting is Magic |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
2738
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 15:25:00 -
[123] - Quote
Tippia wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote: In the blog, why do all Turrets require "Large / Medium / Small Turret" at 4 except for Amarr turrets, that are at 5? It's a typo, they all require level 5. If you look on the same screenshot, under the sub-requirements, level 5 is needed as part of the specialization skill anyway. GǪjust want to point out that Gǣneeded for the specialisation anywayGǥ doesn't mean it's actually needed for the weapon in question, so make sure this typo doesn't go live. The difference is, of course, that as they were written in that image, you could lose the fifth level of hybrids and projectiles and still be able to use the T2 weapons, but not be able to do the same with lasers. After all, a pre-req to a pre-req is meaningless in terms of restricting your access to the item once you've passed that layer. It may not make a difference for the training required to use something, but it makes a hellalot of difference for maintaining that ability and actually using the item.
Already in the process of changing that to be consistent to 5 right now |
|
Luc Chastot
Daktaklakpak.
535
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 15:27:00 -
[124] - Quote
So the only relevant change here is the turret skills. Ok.
Rubicon is shaping up to be yet another disappointment. Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
519
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 15:43:00 -
[125] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Tippia wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote: In the blog, why do all Turrets require "Large / Medium / Small Turret" at 4 except for Amarr turrets, that are at 5? It's a typo, they all require level 5. If you look on the same screenshot, under the sub-requirements, level 5 is needed as part of the specialization skill anyway. GǪjust want to point out that Gǣneeded for the specialisation anywayGǥ doesn't mean it's actually needed for the weapon in question, so make sure this typo doesn't go live. The difference is, of course, that as they were written in that image, you could lose the fifth level of hybrids and projectiles and still be able to use the T2 weapons, but not be able to do the same with lasers. After all, a pre-req to a pre-req is meaningless in terms of restricting your access to the item once you've passed that layer. It may not make a difference for the training required to use something, but it makes a hellalot of difference for maintaining that ability and actually using the item. Already in the process of changing that to be consistent to 5 right now
any chance of reducing the need of sharpshooter skill? lv5 seems too much for LR guns when lv3 would do fine instead of forcing another lv5 skill to be trained? 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. |
Mashie Saldana
BFG Tech
734
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 15:45:00 -
[126] - Quote
Batelle wrote:You are LITERALLY giving a gold star in exchange for people making suboptimalterrible training choices. Considering that the point of the system is to quantify good training choices, this is a bad standard. Maybe put the gold star on level 4, and a dunce cap for level 5. You are free to stop training at level 4 but don't prevent the rest of us that want to turn things to 11 from having our shiny gold stars.
CCP Ytterbium, any chance we can have the number of Mastery 5's listed under our forum portraits? Mashie Saldana Dominique Vasilkovsky
|
Ransu Asanari
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union The Predictables
19
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 16:04:00 -
[127] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium can you address the concerns with the Gunnery Tiercide changes removing a previous distinction/advantage to the Missiles skill progression? Since it's not directly related to the changes to the certificate system, we can start a separate thread, or maybe it should have been kept separate in the first place. |
Texty
State War Academy Caldari State
77
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 16:46:00 -
[128] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: It's meant as a very-high level goal and status symbol. I get your point, but I feel having skills like Astronautics Rigging at 5 would make me look rather stupid. Instead of admiring me for my "uberness," people would simply laugh at me for my wasting time. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
196
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 17:39:00 -
[129] - Quote
Texty wrote:I get your point, but I feel having skills like Astronautics Rigging at 5 would make me look rather stupid. Instead of admiring me for my "uberness," people would simply laugh at me for my wasting time. I dunno, endgame achievements are almost always rather useless wastes of time in all games, yet they are still generally more admired than laughed at I would say.
Are people being laughed at for having say "Specialist Drone Operator Elite" or "Planetology Elite" currently? At least I haven't noticed. On the contrary people are being revered for achieving the holy grail of certificates "Hull Tanking Elite". |
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
233
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 17:40:00 -
[130] - Quote
Ransu Asanari wrote:CCP Ytterbium can you address the concerns with the Gunnery Tiercide changes removing a previous distinction/advantage to the Missiles skill progression? Since it's not directly related to the changes to the certificate system, we can start a separate thread, or maybe it should have been kept separate in the first place. This please. Missile training time is now (even more) awful compared to gunnery than it was before. |
|
Aliventi
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
507
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 17:41:00 -
[131] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium any comment on the base missile skill SP rebalance now that turrets no longer need to train the smaller size turrets anymore? "tbh most people don't care about removing local from highsec. They want it gone from nullsec. I want to be able to solo roam hunt without everyone knowing I am there without them actually seeing me jump through the gate. Effortless intel is bad." ~Me |
ExookiZ
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
95
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 18:05:00 -
[132] - Quote
are corp certificates a real thing? or are you just teasing us with a possible feature you thought would be cool but have no plans of implementing? whether or not I care at all about this dev blogs depends on the answer to that question. The Wormhole Kid |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
5821
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 22:30:00 -
[133] - Quote
Totally called the weapons skill changes. My YouTube Videos Latest video: August 25, 2013 |
Kasumi 'Goto
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 02:48:00 -
[134] - Quote
I would really appreciate a response from a dev on the imbalance of missile training aswell. This makes it quite disadvantageous to train missiles when you can get a turret system trained much sooner. |
Daler Farmon
Dark Angel's Legion Nite's Reign
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 04:23:00 -
[135] - Quote
As newbie in this game I want to say, you have done a great damn job by taking out all other medium and small specs from T2 guns and etc relevant ones. That's amazing decision, cuz I was looking at requirements for T2 Railgun and I was like 82 days away.. now it should be done in 24+days which is perfect!!. Thanks so much from beginners of this game;) |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
2751
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 09:42:00 -
[136] - Quote
Sorry, there is nothing planned for missile requirements right now. However, we'll need to have a full module tiericide at some point, and this could be a good thing to look at then.
Also remember, training a Tech2 turret faster doesn't necessarily mean you can effectively use it without the support skills. |
|
Kasumi 'Goto
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 11:51:00 -
[137] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Sorry, there is nothing planned for missile requirements right now. However, we'll need to have a full module tiericide at some point, and this could be a good thing to look at then.
Also remember, training a Tech2 turret faster doesn't necessarily mean you can effectively use it without the support skills.
If someone training missiles wants all 3 tiers and there long and short range variants they have to spend aprox. 2.5 mill more in SP. This is weeks of training turret users don't have to spend for a single turret system. This gives them weeks of time to train other skills such as support skills for turrets. CCP's attitude towards missiles is very discouraging. |
Jim Parsons
Bazinga Incorporated
8
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 16:18:00 -
[138] - Quote
The Gunnery Tiericide should be implemented in a seperate patch sooner than the expansion (within the next 2 weeks). It's not fair to those training Large (gun) Turret V right now without having trained Small and Medium yet to have to decide whether to wait until the expansion to be able to use Large T2 guns. The other option is to reimburse skillpoints for any levels trained in both Small and Medium (gun) Turret if Large (gun) Turret is at V when the expansion is released. |
Aliventi
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
507
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 18:34:00 -
[139] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Sorry, there is nothing planned for missile requirements right now. However, we'll need to have a full module tiericide at some point, and this could be a good thing to look at then.
Also remember, training a Tech2 turret faster doesn't necessarily mean you can effectively use it without the support skills. How far away is that? You have a better idea of all the ships that still need to be rebalanced before a mod tiericide and how long that will take than most anyone else. It seems like such a shame to have missile users train twice as hard, to the tune of over 2.3 mil SP which is over a month to two months of training time if they train all levels, to be just as effective as their turret based counterparts in the mean time. "tbh most people don't care about removing local from highsec. They want it gone from nullsec. I want to be able to solo roam hunt without everyone knowing I am there without them actually seeing me jump through the gate. Effortless intel is bad." ~Me |
JamnOne
Jammin Corp
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 19:09:00 -
[140] - Quote
Hey CCP Ytterbium,
I have a question about this part.
"if you have Amarr Cruisers at level 1 but lose Amarr Destroyers 3 for some unlikely reason, it will keep showing 0 days since you can still fly the Arbitrator."
If I am reading this right it sounds like that if my clone isn't up to date and I die (as I usually do...lol) and lose Destroyer 3 I can still fly cruisers. Does this mean I can still level up Cruisers since I have already trained it to one and then progress to HACs without ever having to train the Destroyer ship again? |
|
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
233
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 19:39:00 -
[141] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Sorry, there is nothing planned for missile requirements right now. However, we'll need to have a full module tiericide at some point, and this could be a good thing to look at then.
Also remember, training a Tech2 turret faster doesn't necessarily mean you can effectively use it without the support skills. Except that missile users still have to train support skills.
Congratulations on completely missing the point. Before, missiles were faster to specialize in one specific thing but slower to get everything. Now, turrets are always faster.
If missile split skills aren't getting changed to match gunnery yet, gunnery T2 progression shouldn't be changed to match (actually,be significantly faster than) T2 missile progression yet. |
Ransu Asanari
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union The Predictables
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 19:59:00 -
[142] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Sorry, there is nothing planned for missile requirements right now. However, we'll need to have a full module tiericide at some point, and this could be a good thing to look at then.
Also remember, training a Tech2 turret faster doesn't necessarily mean you can effectively use it without the support skills.
Thanks for confirming this. I'll start a separate thread to discuss, so it doesn't distract from the certification changes.
I think it's been said by a few people, but this change to the Gunnery skill progression further highlights the disparity between the Missile weapon system in its current state. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
196
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 20:52:00 -
[143] - Quote
JamnOne wrote:If I am reading this right it sounds like that if my clone isn't up to date and I die (as I usually do...lol) and lose Destroyer 3 I can still fly cruisers. Does this mean I can still level up Cruisers since I have already trained it to one and then progress to HACs without ever having to train the Destroyer ship again? Yep, you don't even have to train it to 1, just injecting the cruiser skill while you still have Destroyer 3 is enough. After that you don't need the nested prerequisite again. |
polvo zangado
Super Muppets Accumulated Space Holding Inc
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 22:08:00 -
[144] - Quote
Great you make changes after I collected all the certificates. |
Daler Farmon
Dark Angel's Legion Nite's Reign
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 03:40:00 -
[145] - Quote
A question to officials: Does the tech2 Ammo requirements will be also changed for t2 guns? Because they all have the same per-requsites to be used.. It will be very strange to get t2 gun faster then t2 ammo, hopefully u will make requirements for t2 ammo the same as t2 guns.
Thanks |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
197
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 08:06:00 -
[146] - Quote
Daler Farmon wrote:A question to officials: Does the tech2 Ammo requirements will be also changed for t2 guns? Because they all have the same per-requsites to be used.. It will be very strange to get t2 gun faster then t2 ammo, hopefully u will make requirements for t2 ammo the same as t2 guns. Yes.
CCP Ytterbium wrote:How about Tech2 ammunition, will the skill requirements change too? Yes, all the Tech2 ammos require the Turret specialization skills, which are the ones being changed in the first place - sorry, should have been clearer in the blog. |
Jaden Soniel
Nasranite Watch OLD MAN GANG
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 11:13:00 -
[147] - Quote
You better upgrade that clone Baguetteman before someone pods you... |
Mocam
EVE University Ivy League
320
|
Posted - 2013.10.07 05:11:00 -
[148] - Quote
I think it lacks some ability to share or just be stupid.
Whatever can be seen like this should be sharable. "Show me" style in-game.
Example of "stupid" - a guy in a public channel heading for Jita talking about his pimp fit tengu then links it. 6 billion worth of fittings on it. *THAT* is stupid but it happens.
Nothing like this is in the design.
Not really stupid - you join up with an incursion (this gen or some future gen of it) and they want certain skills at certain levels to insure success. Is it possible to show them vs claims and such (thinking meta fits)?
In general - what may be exposed via the API - see that at least "current state" can also be exposed/shared in the game by that player. This doesn't seem to have that "share" factor in it. |
Nomistrav
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
193
|
Posted - 2013.10.07 20:44:00 -
[149] - Quote
These things might have already been mentioned, my bad if they were - I didn't read through the eight pages of previous posts.
Starting from the Rookie Ship:
- Rookie ship shouldn't have rigging skills in it's certifications being as it doesn't have rig slots anyway. Almost all of the certifications require multiple different rigging skills. - Why have all forms of sensor strengths if the ship only uses one type? - Micro Jump Drive Operation on a frigate???
Shuttle:
- Rigging skills again - Micro Jump Drive Operation... - Afterburner Operation..?
This applies to all frigates. Skills for things that the ship doesn't utilize (micro jump drive and sensor skills being the greatest common factor). Certain skills that aren't privy to what the ship is supposed to do (science for a Navitas???) [EDIT: Realized this was for Electronics Upgrades but.. Still kinda odd for the Navitas.] Advanced Targeting Management V for Frigates is redundant since there aren't any frigates that can utilize that many locked targets (that I'm aware of).
Essentially getting Mastery in a certain ship means that you invested a bunch of time into skills that have absolutely nothing to do with the ship itself, detracting new players from skilling into the things they truly need and focusing on the things that are useless to the ship itself. |
Viscount Hood
Gallivanting Travel Company Rebel Alliance of New Eden
65
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 05:56:00 -
[150] - Quote
are there any new certificates for capital ships?
something for us old timers to achieve? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |