EVE Search - level V skill requirements with a bonus per level: why?

All Channels

Skill Discussions

level V skill requirements with a bonus per level: why?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 580	Posted - 2014.08.09 13:05:00 - [211] - Quote Rain6637 wrote: congratulations on your gordian knot of semantic fallacies. how is it choice and mandatory Congratulations on not making any sense. Please explain how any of my past skill training decisions were mandatory and what fallacies I have made in my little narrative.
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 761	Posted - 2014.08.09 13:05:36 - [212] - Quote Rain6637 wrote: congratulations on your gordian knot of semantic fallacies. how is it choice and mandatory Congratulations on not making any sense. Please explain how any of my past skill training decisions were mandatory and what fallacies I have made in my little narrative.
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 580	Posted - 2014.08.09 13:07:00 - [213] - Quote Robert Morningstar wrote: the counterpoint to that is that her suggestion would actually benefit ccp more as people would be more likely to buy plex to get into the ships they are not properly skilled to fly and would be more likely to loose them which then means more likely to buy additional plex to replace and so on for as far as there budget allows. This would make EVE pay to win as T2 ships are generally better than T1 in their specialized role. If I wanted to pay to win I would go play Farmville.
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 761	Posted - 2014.08.09 13:07:08 - [214] - Quote Robert Morningstar wrote: the counterpoint to that is that her suggestion would actually benefit ccp more as people would be more likely to buy plex to get into the ships they are not properly skilled to fly and would be more likely to loose them which then means more likely to buy additional plex to replace and so on for as far as there budget allows. This would make EVE pay to win as T2 ships are generally better than T1 in their specialized role. If I wanted to pay to win I would go play Farmville.
RavenPaine RaVeN Alliance 855	Posted - 2014.08.09 15:03:00 - [215] - Quote Robert Morningstar wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: OP i get what you're saying, and its a valid point, but getting into a T2 ship should feel like a major step. It will feel less major if you could undock the thing at day 1 as long as you bought it with a PLEX or something. Leave it alone. the counterpoint to that is that her suggestion would actually benefit ccp more as people would be more likely to buy plex to get into the ships they are not properly skilled to fly and would be more likely to loose them which then means more likely to buy additional plex to replace and so on for as far as there budget allows. Your point is almost correct...almost. Those people WOULD lose those ships, because A: They'd still be terrible pilots, and B: they don't have the skills to back that hull up. And after a few stunning losses they would quit, because they would have nothing invested in eve at that point, and because pay to win isn't working for them. When you have a year or two invested in training, it starts to have a personal value. The time investment is a huge part of the 'hook' of eve. That real time investment is also what gives your character value. Old vets understand this, and that is what they want to protect/preserve.
RavenPaine RaVeN Alliance 893	Posted - 2014.08.09 15:03:31 - [216] - Quote Robert Morningstar wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: OP i get what you're saying, and its a valid point, but getting into a T2 ship should feel like a major step. It will feel less major if you could undock the thing at day 1 as long as you bought it with a PLEX or something. Leave it alone. the counterpoint to that is that her suggestion would actually benefit ccp more as people would be more likely to buy plex to get into the ships they are not properly skilled to fly and would be more likely to loose them which then means more likely to buy additional plex to replace and so on for as far as there budget allows. Your point is almost correct...almost. Those people WOULD lose those ships, because A: They'd still be terrible pilots, and B: they don't have the skills to back that hull up. And after a few stunning losses they would quit, because they would have nothing invested in eve at that point, and because pay to win isn't working for them. When you have a year or two invested in training, it starts to have a personal value. The time investment is a huge part of the 'hook' of eve. That real time investment is also what gives your character value. Old vets understand this, and that is what they want to protect/preserve.
Venjenz Sake School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 25	Posted - 2014.08.09 15:43:00 - [217] - Quote Rain6637 wrote: are you suggesting the unique level V skill requirements for the various T2 hulls are meant to promote responsible skilling? I am saying those Vs are the opportunity cost associated with big payoffs. Back to my Scythe / Scimitar example: If I jump into a Scythe on Day 1, and start skilling the things that make that particular ship more powerful, I care about a couple things: how much do I rep per second, how long can I keep repping before my cap runs out, and how far from the excitement can I stay and still be repping? Right off the bat, I care about those things. So look at the bonuses: Every level of Minmatar Cruiser gives me 1) more rep per second and 2) more cap lifetime. I get 1,000% longer remote rep range, which for medium boosters is 66km max (pretty sure), but my max targeting range on the ship is 52.5km. Long Range Targeting V would push my targeting range to almost exactly 66km (65.63 actual) That's just right off the bat "what would I do immediately to max the power of this ship I am improving incrementally" thinking....and you'd cover two of three skills needed to be V for a Scimitar. What's the remaining skill needed? Oh, the one that is so generally useful everyone should make it one of the first ten skills they take to V - Signature Analysis, since 25% faster locking time is so generally useful across every class of ship, role, kind of game play, etc. IN almost every area of EVE, he who locks fastest has the upper hand. Damn CCP all to heck and back for forcing such generally useful requirements into unlocking Logistics. So 3 things you would have maxed to make that T1 ship the best it can be unlocks the T2 version, which now let's you take that role even further. Is a Scimitar a much better Logistics option than a Scythe? Of course, but the Scythe is an option and can rep close to 200hp/sec before drones are accounted for. By the time you max that Scythe, you need like 3 hours to Logistics 2 to make the Scimitar superior. There's your incremental update again. Do fleets/corps say "T2 only, take your T1 nonsense and go pound sand"? Sure they do, but again, that's not CCP limiting you, but other players. CCP gives you the cheaper, easier to skill for, incrementally updated version of everything. If you find yourself in an environment where only T2 is acceptable ever, then change environments. Rain6637 wrote: you're right, it's not game breaking, and there are cheaper options available. I really do agree with that point--keeping ships cheap makes gameplay more fun. I have a set of Ospreys that get a surprising amount done, and they are named: Give them nothing Take from them Everything And I spent a year in the same Hawk, until 13 months later I felt ready to fly a Drake. My Logi alt is almost to 14 million SP and has never left her starting dock. I am in no hurry
Venjenz Sake School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 27	Posted - 2014.08.09 15:43:07 - [218] - Quote Rain6637 wrote: are you suggesting the unique level V skill requirements for the various T2 hulls are meant to promote responsible skilling? I am saying those Vs are the opportunity cost associated with big payoffs. Back to my Scythe / Scimitar example: If I jump into a Scythe on Day 1, and start skilling the things that make that particular ship more powerful, I care about a couple things: how much do I rep per second, how long can I keep repping before my cap runs out, and how far from the excitement can I stay and still be repping? Right off the bat, I care about those things. So look at the bonuses: Every level of Minmatar Cruiser gives me 1) more rep per second and 2) more cap lifetime. I get 1,000% longer remote rep range, which for medium boosters is 66km max (pretty sure), but my max targeting range on the ship is 52.5km. Long Range Targeting V would push my targeting range to almost exactly 66km (65.63 actual) That's just right off the bat "what would I do immediately to max the power of this ship I am improving incrementally" thinking....and you'd cover two of three skills needed to be V for a Scimitar. What's the remaining skill needed? Oh, the one that is so generally useful everyone should make it one of the first ten skills they take to V - Signature Analysis, since 25% faster locking time is so generally useful across every class of ship, role, kind of game play, etc. IN almost every area of EVE, he who locks fastest has the upper hand. Damn CCP all to heck and back for forcing such generally useful requirements into unlocking Logistics. So 3 things you would have maxed to make that T1 ship the best it can be unlocks the T2 version, which now let's you take that role even further. Is a Scimitar a much better Logistics option than a Scythe? Of course, but the Scythe is an option and can rep close to 200hp/sec before drones are accounted for. By the time you max that Scythe, you need like 3 hours to Logistics 2 to make the Scimitar superior. There's your incremental update again. Do fleets/corps say "T2 only, take your T1 nonsense and go pound sand"? Sure they do, but again, that's not CCP limiting you, but other players. CCP gives you the cheaper, easier to skill for, incrementally updated version of everything. If you find yourself in an environment where only T2 is acceptable ever, then change environments. Rain6637 wrote: you're right, it's not game breaking, and there are cheaper options available. I really do agree with that point--keeping ships cheap makes gameplay more fun. I have a set of Ospreys that get a surprising amount done, and they are named: Give them nothing Take from them Everything And I spent a year in the same Hawk, until 13 months later I felt ready to fly a Drake. My Logi alt is almost to 14 million SP and has never left her starting dock. I am in no hurry
IIshira School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 1085	Posted - 2014.08.09 16:09:00 - [219] - Quote I can understand that it's silly to give bonuses on a skill required to be at 5. I still think the requirements for T2 ships should be max skill of the T1 ship. Reason? To make the requirements difficult. T2 is a whole lot better than T1 and the skills needed should be as well. Does this mean I could train for a Golem with absolutely no skills to fly it other than the skill to get in it? Of course but you can do that with a T1 Raven as well. I could argue that having the T1 skill to 5 isn't needed because it doesn't do anything but I could also do this with the "Spaceship Command" skill. Are we going to remove this as well for a requirement? Bottom line is skills are a time sink to make it where you can set goals to fly stuff. That's what keeps subscribers.
IIshira School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 1314	Posted - 2014.08.09 16:09:20 - [220] - Quote I can understand that it's silly to give bonuses on a skill required to be at 5. I still think the requirements for T2 ships should be max skill of the T1 ship. Reason? To make the requirements difficult. T2 is a whole lot better than T1 and the skills needed should be as well. Does this mean I could train for a Golem with absolutely no skills to fly it other than the skill to get in it? Of course but you can do that with a T1 Raven as well. I could argue that having the T1 skill to 5 isn't needed because it doesn't do anything but I could also do this with the "Spaceship Command" skill. Are we going to remove this as well for a requirement? Bottom line is skills are a time sink to make it where you can set goals to fly stuff. That's what keeps subscribers.
Hoshi Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 33	Posted - 2014.08.10 10:07:00 - [221] - Quote Let's look at why T2 ships have a per level bonus that requires the skill to be at 5 in the first place. Another way to do it would be to either include the bonus as part of the ship stats themselves if possible (can only be done with some types of bonuses) or add it as a Role bonus. If CCP created the T2 ship line today I think that's how they would have done it. But back when T2 ships in 2003 there where much more limitations to what type of bonuses a ship could have, their code did not support many of the things that it do today. For example back then the concept of Role Bonuses did not exist, it was added much later. Over the years many of the things that where once per level bonuses have been moved into either the base stats of the ship or become a role bonus instead. Covert Ops Cloak and Probe Launchers are good examples of how they have changed things because they got more options with the type of bonuses they could give to a ship or module. Covert Ops Cloak used to take several thousand CPU and the covert ops ships used to have a bonus that said something like 90-100% CPU reduction. The reason for this was that back then they could not limit a module to be able to be fitted to only certain ships other than through the fitting requirements so they had to work around it with the tools they had available. There used to be so that they couldn't limit a ship to fit 1 module of a certain type so when they wanted to stop people from fitting 2 probe launchers (because doing so would brake the probe system released in revelations) they did it by a special bonus to the launcher that would increase the CPU usage of all other probe launchers to several thousand. This is also the reason why the Damage Control is an active module, they could not limit you to fit only one but they had the ability to limit you to have only one active at a time. So why not change all those bonuses to role bonuses today? I guess they don't see it as important enough change to do. To the players it would only be a cosmetic change while back end changes needed would probably be fairly large. TLDR: Why do we have per level bonuses for a a skill that requires level 5? It's for legacy reasons, when the T2 ships where initial added to the game it was not possible to do it in any other way because their code did not support all the types things it does today. "Memories are meant to fade. They're designed that way for a reason."
Hoshi Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 49	Posted - 2014.08.10 10:07:26 - [222] - Quote Let's look at why T2 ships have a per level bonus that requires the skill to be at 5 in the first place. Another way to do it would be to either include the bonus as part of the ship stats themselves if possible (can only be done with some types of bonuses) or add it as a Role bonus. If CCP created the T2 ship line today I think that's how they would have done it. But back when T2 ships in 2003 there where much more limitations to what type of bonuses a ship could have, their code did not support many of the things that it do today. For example back then the concept of Role Bonuses did not exist, it was added much later. Over the years many of the things that where once per level bonuses have been moved into either the base stats of the ship or become a role bonus instead. Covert Ops Cloak and Probe Launchers are good examples of how they have changed things because they got more options with the type of bonuses they could give to a ship or module. Covert Ops Cloak used to take several thousand CPU and the covert ops ships used to have a bonus that said something like 90-100% CPU reduction. The reason for this was that back then they could not limit a module to be able to be fitted to only certain ships other than through the fitting requirements so they had to work around it with the tools they had available. There used to be so that they couldn't limit a ship to fit 1 module of a certain type so when they wanted to stop people from fitting 2 probe launchers (because doing so would brake the probe system released in revelations) they did it by a special bonus to the launcher that would increase the CPU usage of all other probe launchers to several thousand. This is also the reason why the Damage Control is an active module, they could not limit you to fit only one but they had the ability to limit you to have only one active at a time. So why not change all those bonuses to role bonuses today? I guess they don't see it as important enough change to do. To the players it would only be a cosmetic change while back end changes needed would probably be fairly large. TLDR: Why do we have per level bonuses for a a skill that requires level 5? It's for legacy reasons, when the T2 ships where initial added to the game it was not possible to do it in any other way because their code did not support all the types things it does today. "Memories are meant to fade. They're designed that way for a reason."
Saleika Issikainen Sassikainen 11	Posted - 2014.08.19 10:17:00 - [223] - Quote digitalwanderer wrote: if the system wasn't what it is and I could do what I can without training all of this to lvl 5, I would have gotten bored of the game a long time ago, since the challenge wouldn't be there. I admit, I laughed. I genuinely hope this entire post is a satire on how scrubby dad gamers play EVE.
Saleika Issikainen Sassikainen 13	Posted - 2014.08.19 10:17:11 - [224] - Quote digitalwanderer wrote: if the system wasn't what it is and I could do what I can without training all of this to lvl 5, I would have gotten bored of the game a long time ago, since the challenge wouldn't be there. I admit, I laughed. I genuinely hope this entire post is a satire on how scrubby dad gamers play EVE.
Rain6637 Team Evil 15872	Posted - 2014.08.26 21:53:00 - [225] - Quote completely honest: some ideas I throw out there purely for the exercise in written argument or sophistry. post stuff, see what sticks. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub \| Rainfleet on Twitch \| Twitter \| Rainfleet mk.III \| Imgur
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 25140	Posted - 2014.08.26 21:53:49 - [226] - Quote completely honest: some ideas I throw out there purely for the exercise in written argument or sophistry. post stuff, see what sticks. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub \| Twitter \|-ámk.III \| Imgur \| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined \|
Christopher Mabata Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project 160	Posted - 2014.08.26 23:37:00 - [227] - Quote Honestly As an older player i say keep the train times, not because i trained them to 5 and i dont want other people to train them to 5 or take less time but because when you can fly a t2 ship well and you get good in it it makes everything feel that much better and every second you spent training pays off. Like training into an arazu and dropping bombers on a ratting battleship it just feels good. Is it bad if your friend says "that was a Metaphor" and you say "Meta 4? Get Tech II or faction" ?I love the sound of silent explosions in Space.-á
Christopher Mabata Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project 320	Posted - 2014.08.26 23:37:32 - [228] - Quote Honestly As an older player i say keep the train times, not because i trained them to 5 and i dont want other people to train them to 5 or take less time but because when you can fly a t2 ship well and you get good in it it makes everything feel that much better and every second you spent training pays off. Like training into an arazu and dropping bombers on a ratting battleship it just feels good. #USA #PODSQUAD #Waitthisisn'ttwitterthenewlookconfusedme
Ruffy Liqueur The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 0	Posted - 2014.11.17 18:24:00 - [229] - Quote Rain6637 wrote: In the case of T2 ships that receive a bonus per level of a skill, but also have the skill level V as a requirement such as the scimitar and Minmatar cruiser skill V In your opinion, what are the pros and cons of the SP barrier? I am of the opinion that level V skill requirements are too prohibitive, when training each level provides a benefit anyway, and the main reason for training a skill should be the bonus. ...and as a hard requirement and a barrier, it places the incentive of flying the ship too far off. What I'm suggesting is skill level V requirements should be reduced to IV or lower. This would result in a wider spread of effectiveness in ships such as logistics and T2, from what they are now with full skills to partially-skilled and less capable in their role. don't worry about sparing my feelings. I'd like to have this discussion, and/so strong language and opinions are OK. That's a good idea. But CCP should handout penalties... really heavy penalties (reduced power grid, CPU, capacitor, lower tracking speed, etc.) to a point that they''re forced to be in a fail fit and a liability. So you want to fly that Guardian? Here fly a Guardian with half the capacitor and half repair range. That's a win/win/win situations.
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 25150	Posted - 2014.11.17 18:51:12 - [230] - Quote This is a relief, that someone gets it. Let that player fly the level III across the board Guardian. Lately CCP has been on a kick about "because choice," which I think level V skill prereqs fall under. I'm not exaggerating for the sake of my point, I honestly think it qualifies as part of the "lack of choice" category of things to change. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub \| Twitter \|-ámk.III \| Imgur \| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined \|
Tau Cabalander Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs 4342	Posted - 2014.11.17 18:54:16 - [231] - Quote Way to necro a 3 month old thread
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 25186	Posted - 2014.11.17 21:47:01 - [232] - Quote Yeah, Ruffy, forgot to thank you for the bump President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub \| Twitter \|-ámk.III \| Imgur \| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined \|
Ras Al-Gul The Scope Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2014.11.26 21:09:46 - [233] - Quote In the case of lvl 5 skill requirements also being listed as a "per lvl bonus" on a specific ship hull why not just leave the requirment at lvl 5 but apply the full bonus to the hull? People still need to jump the hurdle and logically it would make more sense. But to lower t2 ship reqs only to allow more players to be able to hope into them quicker wouldnt work as an improvmemt because eve in general is a game built around skill points opening doors and having something displayed externally to other pilots that projects at least some air of accomplishment. I totally get what your saying but this path leads to all ships having lvl 1 reqs.
Saturday Beerun Lost Ark Enterprises 28	Posted - 2014.12.12 15:40:12 - [234] - Quote The skill system in eve is broken.In some areas badly.Whereas some make real sense and are worthwhile.Wording of skill descriptions is terrible,ambiguous and confusing.My skill set for my banned char tells me I can fly a Fenrir,but I cant train the skill to fly it.Thats the only one I can remember right now.Can't be arsed to log on and trawl through the crap. I Want The Black Vindicator Back
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 26986	Posted - 2014.12.12 15:46:06 - [235] - Quote Ras Al-Gul wrote: I totally get what your saying but this path leads to all ships having lvl 1 reqs. that's the point, yes. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub \| Twitter \|-ámk.III \| Imgur \| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined \|
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 810	Posted - 2014.12.12 16:22:04 - [236] - Quote Rain6637 wrote: that's the point, yes. And that is why it's a bad idea.
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 26990	Posted - 2014.12.12 17:50:36 - [237] - Quote do you think it is a bad idea for reasons, or do you feel it is a bad idea and then think of reasons to support it. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub \| Twitter \|-ámk.III \| Imgur \| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined \|
Quanah Comanche Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2014.12.12 19:54:03 - [238] - Quote This necro thread is full of win.
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 812	Posted - 2014.12.12 21:22:23 - [239] - Quote Rain6637 wrote: do you think it is a bad idea for reasons, or do you feel it is a bad idea and then think of reasons to support it. For reasons I have already made very clear earlier in the thread. BRAAAIIINNNNNSSSSS......
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 26993	Posted - 2014.12.12 21:48:53 - [240] - Quote if youre right, then hey not much i can say. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub \| Twitter \|-ámk.III \| Imgur \| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined \|

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.