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) |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
466
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:23:00 -
[211] - Quote
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.
Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things. I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction. You really think players would prioritize that skill? With the margins I deal with, I wouldn't notice 0.04% cost reduction. It's less than an rounding error. I would barely notice 5-10% cost reduction. What will happen to those margins come Crius remains to be seen, obviously.
I would certainly train this skill to 4, but never to 5. I would even go so far as to laugh at people who trained it to 5, it's so underwhelming.
It really sounds like you guys are grasping for something, anything, to avoid reimbursing the skill. An aspect of the game that used to exist,for which this skill was trained, no longer exists. Just reimburse the skill. If it's too late to get it into Crius release, do it in a point release.
Sometimes you do have to HTFU and make changes that you may not want to make and deal with customer support responses for the few issues that arise, not necessarily because it makes everyone happy, but because it's the proper and correct thing to do. Getting rid of the mandatory skill is the right thing to do. Reimbursing for its removal is also the right thing to do.
|
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2452
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:26:00 -
[212] - Quote
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.
Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things. I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction. You really think players would prioritize that skill?
Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost). |
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
502
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:26:00 -
[213] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Celor Ma'fer wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Hi everyone,
We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.
It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit. I'd have to say that for the SP put into the skill I'd also say that 10% total bonus is too low. I know that the skills are different, but for the base Industry skill (1x) you get a 4% per level reduction and for the Advanced Industry (3x) you get a 2% reduction per level. Doesn't quite make sense. I would say it should be at least 4% per level. They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.
Don't potentially unbalance your game trying to mix and match the market based on the skill chain. You are almost at a good part but by changing the skill as listed here will break your strategy of it not being a requirement.
Give the skillpoints that would have been used to refund the skill and hand it out as unallocated skill points, then leave the people who trained the skill with the skill. My concern with the change is that I trained the original skill up because that meant I would have to haul less material to make what I wanted. Now that is not an issue anymore.
That is the only thing that will make people feel better. This isn't a minor change, this is a completely different skill. Yaay!!!! |
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1904
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:29:00 -
[214] - Quote
I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.
The Rules: 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.
ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
287
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:33:00 -
[215] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master. I still like the logic of having industry, and then advanced industry skill giving a slightly lower bonus to time efficiency. That makes a lot of sense. I just think the 1% bonus originally proposed per level is laughable.
Cost bonus is ok though, but I'd prefer it to give 2% bonus to manufacture time still. There are already enough things affecting install cost without adding another skill to the equation. |
Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
36
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:34:00 -
[216] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:No SP refund. Their was no refunds during ship balancing.
And there were no eliminations of a skills purpose. The earlier analogy made by someone else of taking Surgical Strike, which confers a significant bonus to all turret based systems, and re-purposing it confer a marginal valued fall off bonus, is an apt analogy. Give me one concrete example where this kind of thing happened and I'll agree with you.
Yes, ship balancing changed ships bonuses, but no skills were changed.
|
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
466
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:38:00 -
[217] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Depends what you're building where .... If you're building components for a dread That's just the thing. This is a skill everyone had to train. The only reasonable changes only benefit a small subset of people.
I do T2 production. Anything under 100% profit margin is too small for me to worry with, unless the market is completely saturated. I still remember how I started and what I was thinking about at the time as well: If I use this particular (T1) module, I'm sure others do as well, so it may be profitable to make some of these and sell them. And it was.
That's how your new, prospective industrialists are going to get into industry, and what many people who have this skill trained are still currently thinking. They're not going to build Titans. |
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
85
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:39:00 -
[218] - Quote
CCP, look at your other market related skills that effect a % of another % based cost
Accounting: 10% per level Reduction in transaction tax. (3x skill)
Broker Relations: 5% per level Reduction in market order costs. (2x skill)
Now look at your new idea....it just doesn't hold water. |
Throwaway Sam Atild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:39:00 -
[219] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.
Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things. I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction. You really think players would prioritize that skill? Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost).
This is in line with my thinking, and almost certainly too thin to be of any worth to anyone. You're saving 20M per ship if you train the skill all the way to the top. Training it 4 -> 5 is going to save you 4M per ship. Training it 3->5 8M per ship.
At a glance, you'd be using all 10 lines for at the very least 3 days. So you'd be saving 8M per 3 days doing dread construction.
My wild guess would be that there is no question that someone building at this scale isn't going to care about 3M per day. I don't see any compelling reason for someone to train this skill to V under any circumstances.
Also this is a pretty extreme case. The argument you seem to be making is that a very small portion of the population may find some benefit in this skill. That's great, but the problem that we started with is that a very large portion of the population has already trained this skill when it did something entirely different.
|
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
86
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:53:00 -
[220] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost).
But if you are building your cap parts in a system with low cost....how much more are you saving? If someone is sooo concerned about saving .04% of their install costs, they will likely be the ones moving their 'home base' to the systems that yield the best rates... |
|
X ATM092
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
337
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:53:00 -
[221] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.
Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things. I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction. You really think players would prioritize that skill? Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost). I think this is an excellent compromise. |
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1303
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:59:00 -
[222] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.
Advanced weapon upgrades is maybe a bad example. Weapon Upgrades deals with 5% CPU which first and foremost tends to effect your ability to wedge in the tanking modules which consume heavy CPU. Advanced Weapon Upgrades deals with something different, the power grid of weapons, which allows you to have the extra fitting stats to add the T2 weapons with their greater requirements. Most people don't need that level V for it, except as a barrier to something completely different, siege mode and marauders.
The main problem is that it's an awful lot of skill points to go from level IV to V. For an optional, specialist skill, such as a time reduction, most people would only train it to IV. This is due to training it to V being sp-inefficient, and industrialists do love their efficiency.
There are plenty of options available for interesting specialized skills, but not ones people would, en-mass, willingly invest 750,000+ skill points in training to V, and there in lays the problem.
I liked the idea of a time reduction, although I think the percentage offered was underwhelming and definitely put it in the "Not worth Ving" category.
Reducing installation cost, it's certainly an idea, but like you mentioned, it would disproportionately benefit people who build in major trade hubs, which is the opposite of what should be encouraged. I fully expect Jita to simply buy up every single team every time, I don't think a reduction in costs there would be a good thing.
I'm suck for solutions. Now the skill is no longer essential, I think the only way you're going to come around a way of making something worth level Ving, is to have the bonus be an exponent to give the higher level, higher SP investment more of an impact, which I can't see happening. |
Celor Ma'fer
Jouhinen Inc
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 13:02:00 -
[223] - Quote
X ATM092 wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.
Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things. I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction. You really think players would prioritize that skill? Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost). I think this is an excellent compromise.
A compromise to what?
|
Celor Ma'fer
Jouhinen Inc
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 13:08:00 -
[224] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.
Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things. I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction. You really think players would prioritize that skill? Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost).
So you are essentially trying to push all big Industrialists to manufacture in the main trade hubs then? Surely that's not a good idea as most if not all of the teams will end up being in the trade hubs, leaving none for those of us who manufacture away from them.
Also if no-one is manufacturing outside of trade hubs, cause that's where the best teams are and where you get the most out of this skill. Then there will be a drastic reduction in the amount of hauling required. Freight companies will suffer and dare I even say gankers, as most people will just be flying from their POS to the station in the same system.
I could be completely wrong on the 2nd part... |
Poison Ivy Rorschach
The Surfin Dead
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 13:12:00 -
[225] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Hi everyone,
We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.
It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit.
Nice start, though I think a bit more per level would make it worth training to level 5 so that the people working underutilized systems should benefit as well. Part of your intent in this expansion was to give people another reason to spread out, right? |
Kyoso Shintaro
THI Command Templis Heavy Industries
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 13:27:00 -
[226] - Quote
I may be insane, but what about a 1% per level me reduction. New characters can still compete at smaller items where the effect of this skill would be more pronounced while larger items would require this skill to compete.
This would probably also fix the cap issue where once perfect bpo are now far from perfect |
Casey AtThe Bat
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 13:31:00 -
[227] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.
Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things. I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction. You really think players would prioritize that skill? Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost).
2% per level of ALL manufacturing and research/science jobs. Also improves effects of teams by 2% per level.
I'd still prefer you refund the skillpoints as you're gutting one skill and replacing it completely. |
Arec Bardwin
1461
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 13:31:00 -
[228] - Quote
Welcome to 'Tactical Shield Manipulation V' - land
That skill does absolutely nothing and the prerequisite for capital shield boosters was removed, leaving them who trained it prior to that with around 1mill useless sp invested in the training of that skill. |
Celor Ma'fer
Jouhinen Inc
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 13:34:00 -
[229] - Quote
Kyoso Shintaro wrote:I may be insane, but what about a 1% per level me reduction. New characters can still compete at smaller items where the effect of this skill would be more pronounced while larger items would require this skill to compete.
This would probably also fix the cap issue where once perfect bpo are now far from perfect
There is no chance at all they will make a skill have a ME reduction, otherwise they wouldn't have changed the skill in the first place.
Also once perfect BPOs are still perfect under the new rules as they will be converted to the highest levels of reduction you can have. It's just that if you spent a year researching them, they will be the same as if you had only researched them to 10 ME |
Valterra Craven
268
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 13:54:00 -
[230] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Hi everyone,
We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.
It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit.
Or... how about this: You listen to your paying customers. I know its a crazy concept and a tiny bit radical, but hey, trying new things isn't that scary!
(Sorry for the heavy sarcasm) I just don't understand how CCP can be so reasonable on some things and be so off the mark on others.
Eve is not like most games, there is no "passive" learning to them. You pay to play them and you only grow in the time that you play them. But in Eve your paying to play and you are paying for that passive growth.
Think about it this way: How many accounts do you think CCP would lose over night if players couldn't passively grow their characters without playing the game. I know that you have 3 of my subs right now that you wouldn't without this feature. In other words, I'm passively growing my accounts for later play, but I'm not actually actively playing the game to do so. So if I couldn't passively grow my characters and I'm not actively playing the game, then why on earth would I give you my money?
That's why SP value is SOOO important and it is so crucial that you guys act responsibly toward it. |
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
44
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 14:08:00 -
[231] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Hi everyone,
We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.
It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit. Or... how about this: You listen to your paying customers. I know its a crazy concept and a tiny bit radical, but hey, trying new things isn't that scary! (Sorry for the heavy sarcasm) I just don't understand how CCP can be so reasonable on some things and be so off the mark on others. Eve is not like most games, there is no "passive" learning to them. You pay to play them and you only grow in the time that you play them. But in Eve your paying to play and you are paying for that passive growth. Think about it this way: How many accounts do you think CCP would lose over night if players couldn't passively grow their characters without playing the game. I know that you have 3 of my subs right now that you wouldn't without this feature. In other words, I'm passively growing my accounts for later play, but I'm not actually actively playing the game to do so. So if I couldn't passively grow my characters and I'm not actively playing the game, then why on earth would I give you my money? That's why SP value is SOOO important and it is so crucial that you guys act responsibly toward it.
but didn't you get the memo?? A phantom dev blog will some how appear stating that they're removing all SP's and instead implementing the sequel to teams... we'll have to bid for TEACHERS to train us in order to obtain levels. sounds fun right? sign right on up.. 14 day trial buy a plex for a tutor.
I agree with your comment.
|
James Dean Rockafella
Catastrophic Operations Black Pearl Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 14:13:00 -
[232] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Hi everyone,
We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.
It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit.
How will this affect nullsec industry systems where fees are set to zero? |
Summer Isle
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
33
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 14:16:00 -
[233] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Hi everyone,
We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.
It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit. I would be happy with something like this. It's something that everyone is able to put to use, not just the most active, which has been my point of contention with the time reduction since the beginning. |
H3llHound
Koshaku Tactical Narcotics Team
31
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 14:19:00 -
[234] - Quote
Greyscale, has your team considered changing the skill to 1% absolute reduction of baserate per level? So from 10% -> 5% at lvl5. or 0.75% or somewhere there
Would that be a too big a bonus again? |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2454
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 14:20:00 -
[235] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:I agree with the sentiment expressed here. 1% per level seems like it was just added as an afterthought.
How about Industry gives 3% per level, then advanced industry gives 2% per level.
Current @ Lvl V = 0.8
New @ Lvl V = 0.85 * 0.9 = 0.765
It's a slight buff to production time, and both skills are more worthwhile for a dedicated industrialist.
Anyone have an opinion on this as an option? Feels a little thin to me but it's entirely doable.
James Dean Rockafella wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Hi everyone,
We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.
It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit. How will this affect nullsec industry systems where fees are set to zero?
Taxes are zero, fees are still present :)
[edit] Also, what are opinions on doing something now vs leaving this for the initial Crius release and having a proper discussion now about potential longer-term solutions? |
|
Valterra Craven
269
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 14:24:00 -
[236] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:I agree with the sentiment expressed here. 1% per level seems like it was just added as an afterthought.
How about Industry gives 3% per level, then advanced industry gives 2% per level.
Current @ Lvl V = 0.8
New @ Lvl V = 0.85 * 0.9 = 0.765
It's a slight buff to production time, and both skills are more worthwhile for a dedicated industrialist.
Anyone have an opinion on this as an option? Feels a little thin to me but it's entirely doable. [edit] Also, what are opinions on doing something now vs leaving this for the initial Crius release and having a proper discussion now about potential longer-term solutions?
Its still not worth the SP investment compared to what the skill did before like not even in the same ballpark.
Delay this like you did the industry changes. |
Suzuka A1
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
21
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 14:31:00 -
[237] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:If the skill remains a prerequisite for Capital Ship Construction, which it probably will, refunding it will cause an ENORMOUS mess. So no, I can't see a refund coming.
If CCP keeps the mentality of "If you could fly it then you can fly it now" then everything would work out fine with a refund. Never forget the battle of Z9PP-H-á What actually happened: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgcUwTmHY74 Battle Report: http://www.kugutsumen.com/showthread.php?42836-They-Might-Be-Giants-The-Southwest&p=497626&viewfull=1#post497626 |
Kyoso Shintaro
THI Command Templis Heavy Industries
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 14:35:00 -
[238] - Quote
Celor Ma'fer wrote:
Also once perfect BPOs are still perfect under the new rules as they will be converted to the highest levels of reduction you can have. It's just that if you spent a year researching them, they will be the same as if you had only researched them to 10 ME
You obviously don't build caps. Carriers used to be perfect at an me of 7 or 8. These once perfect bpo are becoming me9%. Coupled with the rest of the changes, it now means that a those once perfect bpo are now only 40% of the way to perfect.
As for the rest, what if it was decreased to say .5% me decrease. This is still an me skill but nowhere near required. The skill would benefit about as much as a POS then
|
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
287
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 14:39:00 -
[239] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:I agree with the sentiment expressed here. 1% per level seems like it was just added as an afterthought.
How about Industry gives 3% per level, then advanced industry gives 2% per level.
Current @ Lvl V = 0.8
New @ Lvl V = 0.85 * 0.9 = 0.765
It's a slight buff to production time, and both skills are more worthwhile for a dedicated industrialist.
Anyone have an opinion on this as an option? Feels a little thin to me but it's entirely doable. If it is on the table, then keep Industry at 4%, and then advanced industry could give 3%. I just thought that might be too much of a reduction in manufacture time, as ends up as a possible 0.68x reduction.
I definitely think that would be nice though. Obviously it is not as good as 25% reduction in material costs, so most people are still going to complain whatever you change it too.
CCP Greyscale wrote:[edit] Also, what are opinions on doing something now vs leaving this for the initial Crius release and having a proper discussion now about potential longer-term solutions? I wouldn't mind this, although 2 % or 3 % TE per level would be fine for me. It makes logical sense to have advanced industry allowing you to specialise from the industry skill. I just don't think it is good to make it 1%, as then the skill isn't worth training. |
Poison Ivy Rorschach
The Surfin Dead
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 14:40:00 -
[240] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:I agree with the sentiment expressed here. 1% per level seems like it was just added as an afterthought.
How about Industry gives 3% per level, then advanced industry gives 2% per level.
Current @ Lvl V = 0.8
New @ Lvl V = 0.85 * 0.9 = 0.765
It's a slight buff to production time, and both skills are more worthwhile for a dedicated industrialist.
Anyone have an opinion on this as an option? Feels a little thin to me but it's entirely doable. James Dean Rockafella wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Hi everyone,
We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.
It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit. How will this affect nullsec industry systems where fees are set to zero? Taxes are zero, fees are still present :) [edit] Also, what are opinions on doing something now vs leaving this for the initial Crius release and having a proper discussion now about potential longer-term solutions?
Delay and do it right for the long term... if you don't mean CCP sits on this for two years before a revisit.
Stil... I think a refund is a better idea, especially if there's going to be a wait. You'll have the time you said you needed and we would be able to choose our replacement skills (which may be this one if you guys fix it right). I don't buy the value loss to SP since this is already going to lower the value of our characters. |
|
|
|
|
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 |