|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 22 post(s) |
Aphoxema G
Teraa Matar
230
   |
Posted - 2012.03.06 18:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
With changes this fundamental (every other skill stems from what you want to fly), simply refunding for the ship skills is completely unacceptable. The minimum we deserve to be given is a complete respec (refund all SP and return the skillbooks to the redeeming system) to requalify ourselves for what we are interested in using.
People like me with 2004 characters wouldn't be hurt so badly, I can stick to one race if I have to. I can switch to drones or missiles or any turret or armor rep or shield rep. Players less than three years old won't be so fortunate and by forcing them to stick to one race, they'll generally be screwed-over with the kind of skilltraining new users are prone to. After all, no one starts playing EVE knowing everything any person needs to know to survive.
I hereby demand on behalf of all players that the only appropriate result of this kind of change is the chance to start over.
Warp drive failure indicator:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=887805#post887805 |
Aphoxema G
Teraa Matar
231
|
Posted - 2012.03.06 18:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
Anja Talis wrote:The link on the Caldari progression image is broken.
(also, can you resize those images? I can't actually read them in a browser, because they are either too big, or too small!)
Yeah, and on the Minmatar one they got the Scimitar and Rapier mixed up.
Warp drive failure indicator:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=887805#post887805 |
Aphoxema G
Teraa Matar
243
|
Posted - 2012.03.06 21:30:00 -
[3] - Quote
I just plain don't see the point. Destroyers are special frigates, battlecruisers are special cruisers. We've never had "Minmatar Assault Ships" or "Amarr Covert Ops", so what isn't arbitrary about these changes?
What's been suggested doesn't add anything to the game, it only causes confusion and stress for most players.
Warp drive failure indicator:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=887805#post887805 |
Aphoxema G
Teraa Matar
247
|
Posted - 2012.03.06 22:09:00 -
[4] - Quote
Manssell wrote:Aphoxema G wrote:We've never had "Minmatar Assault Ships" or "Amarr Covert Ops", so what isn't arbitrary about these changes?
#***#! **&&$$$! ***$#@@! Shhhhhh Don't remind them.
Damnit, what have I done?!
I guess the only thing left to do is tie myself to a board and wait for the community to mercilessly flay me alive.
Warp drive failure indicator:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=887805#post887805 |
Aphoxema G
Teraa Matar
254
|
Posted - 2012.03.08 20:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
What I see here isn't really proposing one frustrating thing, it's proposing one thing that makes the ugly ducklings find their lost swan siblings and another thing that is kind of infuriating because it doesn't really seem to make any sense.
Ship roles balance on a triangle of defense, offense and mobility to help "lesser" T1s pull their weight in the valuable minerals that have otherwise been wasted on them is a wonderful idea. I'd love to see the Bantams and the Scythes matter for once.
That digs deeply here is the arguable necessity in restructuring the way we train (as in, wait) to use non tech-1 ships. If we're going for homogeneity, it would be practical to the players to eliminate racial training entirely. What isn't practical is dictating a place for things the players have already long decided.
However, if we're going to go with racial specialization, please at least make Racial Destroyer a 1x skill and Racial Battlecruiser a 2x or 3x skill. These ships really are just frigate +1 or cruiser +1, they still rely on small and medium sized rigs and modules (with the exception of BC3s) and their prices scale up fairly well with their fittings.
Warp drive failure indicator:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=887805#post887805 |
|
|
| |
|