Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 31 post(s) |
Claudius Dethahal
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:20:00 -
[151] - Quote
Could a replacement skill modify or interact with the multi-run discount to offer more options for competition there (ideally options that allowed casual industry to focus on per unit efficiency at a greater time cost and heavy industry to focus on throughput)? |
Messenger Of Truth
Butlerian Crusade
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:23:00 -
[152] - Quote
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: [...]refunds[...]requires a fairly substantial investment to write the necessary DB scripts, run upgrade tests and correct any errors[...]
Wow, just wow. As a DB Admin, i can't even put in words how deeply you just shamed your team.
Really? Even an almost trivial change can be a 1 or 2 day job when you factor in project management, testing, fixing any bugs, blah blah. |
Rena Senn
Resurrection Ventures Un.Bound
108
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:23:00 -
[153] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote: - We don't want to have skills that are as in-practice mandatory as the old Material Efficiency skill in the Industry skillset
Problem is, the skill was mandatory. For all the people who already trained it, which is just about everyone who seriously devoted themselves to industry, having that skill forced upon them in its new form will still be mandatory.
CCP Greyscale wrote: - skills are supposed to be about specialization, not about jumping through hoops
As above, people have already jumped through hoops. Not refunding the SP is only going to force industrialists and bazaar traders to keep jumping through more hoops by playing SP catchup and re-adjusting sale values for a now far less useful skill. Skills are also supposed to be about player choice, not retroactively enforcing unwanted specialization.
CCP Greyscale wrote: - we dislike skillpoint reassignment as the act of reassignment incrementally devalues the perceived value of skillpoints accumulated over time
Repurposing skills into less worthy iterations also devalues the perceived value of skillpoints over time, especially when CCP is sending the message that any SP you already invested may suddenly change in operation and hence value with every new patch.
CCP Greyscale wrote: - We are in any case too close to the release to implement a refund at this time, and that is a non-disputable statement of fact precluding us from doing so even if we wanted to (which we don't)
Even so, this still demonstrates a highly flawed development and release schedule that did not properly accommodate for testing and customer feedback. Saying "We've already spent too much effort accelerating this car to 160 mph and it's going crash in the next minute regardless of whether we wanted to slow down or not (which we don't)" still makes you a reckless driver.
In short, an iterative and incremental development model is not a carte blanche excuse to do less planning and be more callous towards preventable product faults. Regardless of how you've shaken up your content release schedule to make it 'more agile' or what have you, if the result is a loss of customer satisfaction, then you're doing it wrong. |
Masao Kurata
Z List
57
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:40:00 -
[154] - Quote
Wow, the entitlement in this thread. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
697
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:41:00 -
[155] - Quote
Rena Senn wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: - we dislike skillpoint reassignment as the act of reassignment incrementally devalues the perceived value of skillpoints accumulated over time
Repurposing skills into less worthy iterations also devalues the perceived value of skillpoints over time, especially when CCP is sending the message that any SP you already invested may suddenly change in operation and hence value with every new patch. You speak of this as if it was a new thing. This has been the general contract between player and MMO designer since time immemorial. Things get nerfed. A line of acquisition or skill in which occurred heavy investment is suddenly for naught. There are precious few ways to make meaningful change in an MMO without this sort of potential. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
penifSMASH
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
431
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:42:00 -
[156] - Quote
1% manufacturing time saving per level is pretty uninspiring and is really only useful for long jobs such as titans
Here are a few alternative ideas: - 2 or 3% manufacturing time saving per level - additional manufacturing slot per level - some kind of discount on job costs - some kind of discount on bidding on those team thingies |
Denidil
The Scope Gallente Federation
633
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:42:00 -
[157] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote: - We are aware that you're are unhappy with how far the new skill is moving from its original value proposition, and we'll have another look at it this week. *If* we decide to make changes, they may not be viable for the initial Crius release, but would be unlikely to trail by more than a week or two
We're dissatisfied with how USELESS the skill is, unless you're building caps. For Level 5 in a Rank 3 skill I should get more. Furthermore since it is now impossible to saturate a facility a time reduction doesn't gang me anything, just increases the time in which my industry POS will be sitting idle.
Up thread I proposed an alternative repurposing of the skill to reduce the cost of lines, possible just production, possible all type.
Facility Efficiency - 5% reduction per level in research and production line costs per level.
this would be a meaningful reward - specialized industrialists can make a profit in more active systems (most likely closer to trade hubs) for example, or by specializing and staying in the boonies they see a lower (but still real) benefit from the skill.
Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
697
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:47:00 -
[158] - Quote
It's very unlikely that CCP is going to agree to any sort of cost reductions as a potential replacement to this skill. At its core, Material Efficiency is a cost reduction skill, and the whole idea of removing its current effect is to reduce the number of mandatory skills needed to drive costs down. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Rena Senn
Resurrection Ventures Un.Bound
109
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:52:00 -
[159] - Quote
Querns wrote:Rena Senn wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: - we dislike skillpoint reassignment as the act of reassignment incrementally devalues the perceived value of skillpoints accumulated over time
Repurposing skills into less worthy iterations also devalues the perceived value of skillpoints over time, especially when CCP is sending the message that any SP you already invested may suddenly change in operation and hence value with every new patch. You speak of this as if it was a new thing. This has been the general contract between player and MMO designer since time immemorial. Things get nerfed. A line of acquisition or skill in which occurred heavy investment is suddenly for naught. There are precious few ways to make meaningful change in an MMO without this sort of potential. Of course it's not new, but it is hypocritical when CCP is using this line of reasoning to justify doing the exact opposite. If you don't want to devalue the perceived value of skillpoints accumulated over time, then don't rework old spent skillpoints in a way that makes them completely devalued. |
Denidil
The Scope Gallente Federation
633
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:53:00 -
[160] - Quote
Querns wrote:It's very unlikely that CCP is going to agree to any sort of cost reductions as a potential replacement to this skill. At its core, Material Efficiency is a cost reduction skill, and the whole idea of removing its current effect is to reduce the number of mandatory skills needed to drive costs down.
That's why i'm talking about production line costs, not material costs. This is exactly the same Skill as Broker Relations, except it applies to production and research lines instead of market orders. Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design. |
|
Lady Zarrina
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
140
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:55:00 -
[161] - Quote
I am all for these new industry changes, but taking something as important as this skill was and making it a joke (99% of time) is seriously flawed. I think this is definitely a case where a skill refund is required. damn it is hard to delete my signature |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
697
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 21:02:00 -
[162] - Quote
Denidil wrote:Querns wrote:It's very unlikely that CCP is going to agree to any sort of cost reductions as a potential replacement to this skill. At its core, Material Efficiency is a cost reduction skill, and the whole idea of removing its current effect is to reduce the number of mandatory skills needed to drive costs down. That's why i'm talking about production line costs, not material costs. This is exactly the same Skill as Broker Relations, except it applies to production and research lines instead of market orders. Costs are costs are costs. It doesn't matter what "side" of the equation receives the levies; the levies themselves are being targeted. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Wolf Kraft
Underground Smellroad
4
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:08:00 -
[163] - Quote
Querns wrote:Wolf Kraft wrote:mynnna wrote:5% faster building is 5% more isk per time, 5% faster that you can pivot and make something else based on changing market conditions. Mynna, your example (and this skill) are functionally useless because of all the other changes coming in Crius. There is very little point in having a 5% time reduction because you will literally be able to set up as many jobs as you want (though I'm sure there is a technical/code limit somewhere) in a single station since the production/research line limit is being removed from the game. Capital producers may enjoy getting products out marginally faster, but everyone else likely won't notice the difference. However, I fully agree that the skill, in its current iteration, needs to be changed. Unfortunately, the proposed change is far from being a proper specialization skill that CCP is hoping for. I suppose, in your world, you have an unlimited number of characters. The number of concurrent jobs per station is being removed, but the number of concurrent jobs a single character can run is still limited to 11. Reducing the time that a job takes allows you to cycle your ISK through the market that much faster.
The only people that this skill will truly help, are those handful of individuals that run industry jobs 24/7 without interruption on all 11 jobs or if you produce capitals/supers. If you have more than an hour of dead time in between jobs each day (or 11hrs on a single job) on a single character, this skill very quickly becomes useless for the amount of SP required for V. Whereas with a single account, where you can have 33 jobs running, now that the line limit is being removed you can centralize all those characters into a single station of your choosing that has the necessary services. That itself is going to be a much more significant way to save time because now you're greatly simplifying the logistics of moving materials and products around while you're actually playing the game. Barring that, this allows industrial corporations to benefit from this centralization as well.
Like I said, this was a skill that needed to be changed. However, this is not a good way to change it. Especially considering they could have adjusted the skill to interact with the new team dynamic that's being introduced with the industry changes. |
H3llHound
Koshaku Tactical Narcotics Team
31
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:11:00 -
[164] - Quote
Gaston Miromme wrote:I feel extra burned because I just trained up an industry character in preparation for Crius. If this change had been announced along with other Crius changes (While there were intimations that the skill would change, I didn't expect it to become such a niche skill.), I certainly wouldn't have spent the time to train ME to V.
A job queue, while an additional feature, would make this skill more palatable.
If you would have read the indy devblogs you would have known that CCP will change the skill. So really its just your own fault. |
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1303
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:15:00 -
[165] - Quote
Greyscale, I'm afraid your list is complete rubbish. One can clearly see you're horrendously and depressingly detached from the things which actually matter to industrialists to even begin to think that a 25% ME upgrade is in any way comparable to saving 14 minutes per day per level from a build job.
Did someone accidentally delete the scripts you've used the past times you've removed (significantly more) skills than this?
It's a poor show all round. |
Winter Archipelago
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
266
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:26:00 -
[166] - Quote
H3llHound wrote:Gaston Miromme wrote:I feel extra burned because I just trained up an industry character in preparation for Crius. If this change had been announced along with other Crius changes (While there were intimations that the skill would change, I didn't expect it to become such a niche skill.), I certainly wouldn't have spent the time to train ME to V.
A job queue, while an additional feature, would make this skill more palatable. If you would have read the indy devblogs you would have known that CCP will change the skill. So really its just your own fault. Everyone knew it was going to be changed, but we thought it would be something that would still be relevant to everyone. As it stands, the current iteration is only useful to the most dedicated, and if you aren't running your lines 24/7, you aren't able to really put the skill to use (you save 72 minutes per day with the skill at level V). A small-time or casual industrialist won't be able to put the skill to use, so unless we ramp up our time on our industrialist (in lieu of other things we'd prefer to be doing), the skill is wasted SP for us. Ransoms are accepted in Isk, Ships, Mods, and Dolls. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
697
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:27:00 -
[167] - Quote
Wolf Kraft wrote:The only people that this skill will truly help, are those handful of individuals that run industry jobs 24/7 without interruption on all 11 jobs or if you produce capitals/supers. If you have more than an hour of dead time in between jobs each day (or 11hrs on a single job) on a single character, this skill very quickly becomes useless for the amount of SP required for V. Whereas with a single account, where you can have 33 jobs running, now that the line limit is being removed you can centralize all those characters into a single station of your choosing that has the necessary services. That itself is going to be a much more significant way to save time because now you're greatly simplifying the logistics of moving materials and products around while you're actually playing the game. Barring that, this allows industrial corporations to benefit from this centralization as well.
Like I said, this was a skill that needed to be changed. However, this is not a good way to change it. Especially considering they could have adjusted the skill to interact with the new team dynamic that's being introduced with the industry changes. Do they not have multiple runs where you live? Most of my jobs take five to seven days to run. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Hashi Lebwohl
Oberon Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:29:00 -
[168] - Quote
I am amazed people are surprised that CCP Greyscale has done this - the guy has prior form - he's the dev that made all the shield compensation skills effectively useless except those few individuals who passive shield tank...
...and no there was no compensation that time either. |
Bam Stroker
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
207
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:44:00 -
[169] - Quote
H3llHound wrote:If you would have read the indy devblogs you would have known that CCP will change the skill. So really its just your own fault. "The Material Efficiency skill will be repurposed, stay tuned for more information on that in a future blog." From https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/researching-the-future/
and
"We're looking to cap the maximum bonus of this using the old Material Efficiency skill, which will no longer be affecting waste (see previous blog)." from https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/the-price-of-change/ where it was implied the change to ME would be to reduce the cost of installing subsequent jobs - nothing about production time.
As far as I can tell those are the only references to a change to the ME skill from the Crius-related dev blogs. Yes, they indicate a change is coming but exactly what that change was didn't emerge until the 11th hour when now it's too late to incorporate community feedback:
CCP Greyscale wrote:We are in any case too close to the release to implement a refund at this time, and that is a non-disputable statement of fact ... *If* we decide to make changes, they may not be viable for the initial Crius release That said I'm happy to be corrected if this change was made explicit somewhere earlier. Just show me where. EVE Down Under 2014 (Australia's very own fanfest) 21st to 23rd November 2014 in Sydney, Australia www.evedownunder.com |
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1900
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 23:06:00 -
[170] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!
The Rules: 3. Ranting is prohibited.
A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counterproductive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
30. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.
CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, GÇ£outingGÇ¥ of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties. Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.
ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
Menero Orti
Jedran Space Services Headshot Gaming
31
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 23:17:00 -
[171] - Quote
What i really hate about all of this is the fact that CCP changes stuff constantly without updating there blogs and stuff and when the expansion is about to hit you have all this conflict informations coming from all over the place. Seriously this is really bad. Wish you guys did a better job |
Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
3240
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 23:18:00 -
[172] - Quote
Good change for the game, bad change for me (as every one of my production characters has ME 5).
Still, I'm behind this change overall. My loss, the game's gain. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=346564 - a proposal to overhaul the Logistics skill https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. www.minerbumping.com - ganking miners and causing chaos |
Decarthado Aurgnet
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
9
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 23:28:00 -
[173] - Quote
ISD Ezwal wrote:I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!
You went a bit overboard. Much of what you removed was actually constructive. You would've done much better to wipe all the entries which said, "sp refund, plz," and nothing else in their posts and then to also make a list of those players' names in your own post as a matter of thread cleanup.
So, I'll say it again in a more concise manner: Refunding SP's for skills which are changed in contravention to the expectations of those who spent time adding them to their characters would be a good thing to consider changing as a matter of policy. There can certainly be a system scripted to handle this kind of thing in a nearly hands-free manner which would also notify players which skills had their SP's rolled back to 0 whenever it happens. Given that CCP expects to be online for another ten years, there's certainly some long-haul time savings to be had in making such a system. |
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1900
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 23:35:00 -
[174] - Quote
As there seems to be a bit of confusion as to why certain posts get deleted even if they are perceived not to be rule breaking, a little bit of explanation might be in order. If a post is found to be rule breaking it either gets edited or it gets deleted. If the latter, all posts quoting them (or replying to them without direct quoting) AND all post reacting on those quotes/replies get deleted as well for thread consistency. Even if those posts are not rule breaking in and of themselves.
For example: Post A is rule breaking and gets deleted. B replies to A, C replies to A, D however replies to B and E to K reply to D. The entire string of posts gets deleted because A is the origin of that string of posts.
Please accept this explanation as is and do not reply to it. That would be off the topic of this thread. If you are perceiving a problem with ISD behaviour on the forum or are disagreeing with the way (your) posts are being moderated, please feel free to read the CCP policies and follow the procedure found under the header 'Complaints'. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Decarthado Aurgnet
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
9
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 00:12:00 -
[175] - Quote
Follow-up after talking with my corp members about the Crius changes: At least one of my newbies is seriously considering not renewing his initial 6-month subscription because he feels like he's being screwed on this. Good on you (and I mean that), CCP Greyscale, for addressing this as a Dev, but I thought you should be aware. Please make your reconsideration a good one for the sake of new players who are much less tolerant of this kind of a change than are those of us who've been around for a while. |
Kahawa Oban
CompleXion Industries CompleXion Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 01:00:00 -
[176] - Quote
penifSMASH wrote:1% manufacturing time saving per level is pretty uninspiring and is really only useful for long jobs such as titans
Here are a few alternative ideas: - 2 or 3% manufacturing time saving per level - additional manufacturing slot per level - some kind of discount on job costs - some kind of discount on bidding on those team thingies
+1 to this.
I was just reading this thread and I can deal with the loss of the material % decrease, but I don't see that a 1% buff to reduced time enough of a trade off. 2-3% per level is something that can be more significant.
Keeping in mind that almost all indy characters have this skill trained up to 5 as a prerequisite to just manufacturing at cost effective margins. |
Shinzann
Dead poets society The Laughing Men
7
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 01:06:00 -
[177] - Quote
I'm not a very serious industrial type person, I'll be the first to admit that. I'm still a little frustrated that almost 3/4 of the SP I put into the production branch is going to go from "rather useful to have" to "useful as teats on a bull" though and I have to wonder if there wasn't some other, more useful, option that could have been chosen.
Just my 0.02ISK |
Rust Connor
Industrias PapaCapim
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 01:09:00 -
[178] - Quote
My biggest issue is: do we need more reduction on production time? tl;dr: we are increasing production output, but demand is the same. So nerf all bps! Or change the skill again.....
Mynnna said that 5% increase in production means 5% more isk... Actually "5% increase in production" means, prepare to be amazed, 5% increase in production! We would get more isk if market absorb this production increase. But does it? I dont think demand will be any higher, so if we increase supply but demand is the same what will we get?
And there is another thing: now it's easier to jump on board of the industrial train (or ship) so we can expect even more people producing and another increase in supply. And team is another source of time reduction...
So my incredible unpopular suggestion is: If you want to give us a new time reduction skill, first increase production time on all blueprints so that we get a similar level of industrial production output. =)
--- x ---
Other ideas that I would love do discuss: - I particulary hate ideas about install cost. Let it be. - ME bonus is always nice and benefits everybody. 1%/level sounds ok, right? Not powerful enough to be 'required' and not weak enough to be useless. Level 3 to 5 is the same benefit of a POS array.... Sounds fair. Better than current version that from level 0 to 5 is the same benefit of an implant..... Or a mediocre team.... - Team bonus sounds fun! 5% increase/level? - give production a chance to pop a t2 bpc... 1% chance/level to generate a t2 bpc if you are building a t1 item. (Crazy, huh?)
--- x ---
And as a diplomatic action, I would also give some skillpoints bonus to everyone with ME skill (10% the sp spent on ME). Is that easier? |
Gideon Enderas
Dirty Butt Pirates
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 01:12:00 -
[179] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Hi everyone,
Here are some bullet points: - Sorry for the delay in keeping up with this, we've been busy :/ - We're aware of the unhappiness being expressed here - We don't want to have skills that are as in-practice mandatory as the old Material Efficiency skill in the Industry skillset - skills are supposed to be about specialization, not about jumping through hoops
That's cool that you're busy and everything, but it's a terrible excuse for not communicating changes such as this with your player base. When I trained ME 5 I was jumping through that hoop that you want to get rid of, now I'm stuck with a "specialization" I neither need nor want.
Quote: - We are very keen to avoid doing refunds *wherever* possible, hence the desire to repurpose this skill rather than delete it (reasons: we dislike skillpoint reassignment as the act of reassignment incrementally devalues the perceived value of skillpoints accumulated over time; and deleting and refunding requires a fairly substantial investment to write the necessary DB scripts, run upgrade tests and correct any errors, and time we can reduce for work on things we don't want to do allows us to spend more time on work on things we do want to do; this is an imperfect statement of our position as I'm writing it on the fly to give you an approximate idea of *why* we don't want to do a refund here, but the statement that we don't want to do a refund *is* essentially perfect and out of scope for discussion in this thread, much as you may unfortunately disagree with it.)
You claim that you want to avoid devaluing skill points, however the last drone changes (which were communicated just as poorly) completely devalued the Combat Drone Operation Skill. "Repurposing" the skill comes across as a lazy band aid solution. I understand that it may not be easy to do, but why make a decision based on what is easy?
Quote: - We are in any case too close to the release to implement a refund at this time, and that is a non-disputable statement of fact precluding us from doing so even if we wanted to (which we don't) - We are aware that you're are unhappy with how far the new skill is moving from its original value proposition, and we'll have another look at it this week. *If* we decide to make changes, they may not be viable for the initial Crius release, but would be unlikely to trail by more than a week or two - We're not delaying the release for this issue; I assume everyone understands that but it's always better to be explicit :)
Why am I finding out about such a big change from a post on Reddit that didn't link to a Dev Blog? Why is the ME skill being repurposed instead of done away with? Was the CSM aware of these changes? |
Summer Isle
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
33
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 01:51:00 -
[180] - Quote
Rust Connor wrote: - ME bonus is always nice and benefits everybody. 1%/level sounds ok, right? Not powerful enough to be 'required' and not weak enough to be useless. Level 3 to 5 is the same benefit of a POS array.... Sounds fair. Better than current version that from level 0 to 5 is the same benefit of an implant..... Or a mediocre team.... Even 1% per level would be too strong, and would become another required skill. There are plenty of T1 items out there whose margins are within 1%, and probably the overwhelming majority are within 10%, so in order to be competitive, a person would absolutely have to train the skill, even if it were a 1% / level material reduction.
I'm actually very happy to see ME get axed, and would hate to see another skill (even a much weaker version) be put up in its place.
My gripe with Advanced Industry still remains that it's only the most active industrialists who can put it to use.
A 1% / level reduction in install cost would be perfectly nice. So would a 1% / level increase in time that teams are available. Changing the skill and "giving" it to players who had ME is fine, just make it a skill all of them would actually be able to put to use, as opposed to only the most active. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |