Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
912
   |
Posted - 2016.09.10 21:02:35 -
[1] - Quote
When we look at the information available for a ship or module, there is a tab that tells us what skills we need to learn before we can use it.
Proposal
- Rename "Requirements" tab to "Relevant Skills".
- Split the contents of that tab into "Requirements" and "Improvements" sections.
The "Improvements" section should contain all the skills that will improve the performance of the ship or item in some way
e.g. Reactive Armor Hardener
Requirements- Hull Upgrades Level 3
- Mechanics Level 1
Improvements
Why?
This will be helpful to everyone.
Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.
|
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
912
|
Posted - 2016.09.11 12:34:50 -
[2] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:and the skills that are both required to learn and are used to improve?
Put them in both sections - they don't have to be mutually exclusive!
Scipio Artelius wrote:On the second suggestion, this is where ship mastery comes in.
I agree that ship mastery is supposed to do this, but there is no equivalent for modules. I think this would be easier to implement and more straightforward than "Module Mastery".
Iain Cariaba wrote:Here's my questions:
Why do you need CCP to spoon feed you information?
Why are you unable to discuss these things with corpmates, or do research on your own?
Why should those who have invested the time and effort into learning these things now suddenly have all that flushed down the toilet?
And here are my replies:
- It's not spoon feeding, it's making the information more easily accessible to new players
- Discussing with corp / alliance mates is always good, but they don't always have all the answers
- This would make it easier to "do research on your own" by presenting the relevant information all in one place
- Making information more accessible to new players will not somehow remove that information from your brain. Nothing is being "flushed down the toilet". The idea that we put in the hard work to learn X, Y, Z therefore new players should have to do the same amount of hard work is a non-starter. If CCP subscribed to that mentality, EVE would never receive any quality of life improvements e.g. multi-buy.
Some good discussion, thanks everyone. Not being able to respond to criticism is often a good indicator that your idea is lacking in merit so I'm glad to have this opportunity to show that mine does.
Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.
|
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
912
|
Posted - 2016.09.17 12:42:09 -
[3] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:I find the market to be the best place to find out what skills do what.
THIS is the problem!
When the best tool for learning about our game is a market browser that was never intended for that purpose, it is clear to me that the tools which ARE designed for learning about the game are inadequate.
Iain Cariaba wrote:Wanting to preserve a slight advantage I have because I've taken the time to read through the skill descriptions to learn that skill x impacts module y or ship z is neither useless nor irrelevant.
Let's make something absolutely clear: knowledge barriers are toxic to new player retention. Any attempts to create or "preserve" barriers of that kind between new and existing players have a negative impact on the playerbase.
Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.
|