Ok this thread needs some love now.


SKILLS:

• Destroyer and Battlecruiser reimbursement: it has been said before, but allow us to repeat again, that we do not want to cut ships you can already fly. Thus, having BC skill at 5 would mean you get all four variations at 5.


• BS skill at IV for capitals: alright, there is good feedback on that. Point is to make the progression consistent by requiring a skill at 4 to train for the next, higher size class, and 5 for tech 2 ships. If we feel it becomes suddenly too easy to train for capitals, we can always compensate by adding that time back on one of the other, support skill prerequisites for them. Same reasoning applies for freighters. The point of this blog is to specifically discuss such matters before moving forward with them, and for this, you are welcome.

CONFUSING BLOG PICTURES:

• Confusion between the skill tree change and the ship tree charts: the skill change displays where we want to bring you in the long term future with the overhaul, while the ship tree chart display the current, in-game TQ ship tree. We will show the updated, long term ship trees in the next blogs when they have been fleshed out a bit.

CSM NOT INCLUDED?!:

• I will be honest by saying this is due to my own failure here, please do not blame CCP, or any other employee on that matter. I just plainly and simply forgot to include them in the feedback process; I know that sounds incredibly stupid, unbelievable or even naive, but you have to realize that between various work duties, procedures that have to be followed, internal meetings and reviews, random design emergencies, questions that pop-up from your team, plus being split into different projects that have to be finished in time, you are bound to forget things in the heat of the moment for being tremendously busy.

I will not attempt to justify myself however, this was a professional blunder on top of showing a serious lack of courtesy toward them as individuals, but also as elected representatives of the player base.

Yes, I do fully acknowledge the value they could have brought to this blog before it was released. Trust me, had I remembered about it, this would have been done as it would have saved a lot of confusion here .

That is why, not only as a CCP employee, but also as an individual, I would sincerely like to apologize to every and each member of the CSM I forgot to include here. CSM, feel free to smack me in the back of my head during Fanfest to remind me that being absent-minded has life threatening, rage inducing consequences that should be avoided at all costs.

We will keep monitoring this thread and post updates in the next days if there are more issues coming up.

Claiming forgetfulness and/or individual fail works once, maybe twice. But the pattern has and is showing itself to be, well, a typical pattern. In other words; we see this as a bullshit lie and excuse to try and cover CCP's typical way of business.

tl;dr Don't **** down my neck and tell me it's raining

Dude, we talked about some of this stuff at the summit, it's not like it came out of nowhere. I appreciate the apology but there's no need to fall on your sword like this in front of everyone. It's fine.

It's a planning blog, and an interesting one - I'd have enjoyed seeing a draft, but it's not like the anomaly nerf which was HERE IS A CHANGE IT IS IN THE GAME HA HA. Since things are still in the design stages we remain in 'feedback land' instead of 'it is on TQ and you are screwed' land.

Ok this thread needs some love now.


SKILLS:

• Destroyer and Battlecruiser reimbursement: it has been said before, but allow us to repeat again, that we do not want to cut ships you can already fly. Thus, having BC skill at 5 would mean you get all four variations at 5.


• BS skill at IV for capitals: alright, there is good feedback on that. Point is to make the progression consistent by requiring a skill at 4 to train for the next, higher size class, and 5 for tech 2 ships. If we feel it becomes suddenly too easy to train for capitals, we can always compensate by adding that time back on one of the other, support skill prerequisites for them. Same reasoning applies for freighters. The point of this blog is to specifically discuss such matters before moving forward with them, and for this, you are welcome.

CONFUSING BLOG PICTURES:

• Confusion between the skill tree change and the ship tree charts: the skill change displays where we want to bring you in the long term future with the overhaul, while the ship tree chart display the current, in-game TQ ship tree. We will show the updated, long term ship trees in the next blogs when they have been fleshed out a bit.

CSM NOT INCLUDED?!:

• I will be honest by saying this is due to my own failure here, please do not blame CCP, or any other employee on that matter. I just plainly and simply forgot to include them in the feedback process; I know that sounds incredibly stupid, unbelievable or even naive, but you have to realize that between various work duties, procedures that have to be followed, internal meetings and reviews, random design emergencies, questions that pop-up from your team, plus being split into different projects that have to be finished in time, you are bound to forget things in the heat of the moment for being tremendously busy.

I will not attempt to justify myself however, this was a professional blunder on top of showing a serious lack of courtesy toward them as individuals, but also as elected representatives of the player base.

Yes, I do fully acknowledge the value they could have brought to this blog before it was released. Trust me, had I remembered about it, this would have been done as it would have saved a lot of confusion here .

That is why, not only as a CCP employee, but also as an individual, I would sincerely like to apologize to every and each member of the CSM I forgot to include here. CSM, feel free to smack me in the back of my head during Fanfest to remind me that being absent-minded has life threatening, rage inducing consequences that should be avoided at all costs.

We will keep monitoring this thread and post updates in the next days if there are more issues coming up.

This looks to me like the start of "lets balance all the classes and dumb the game down"

Strange that the only time i ever need to read these forums is when other people tell me ingame that soundwave wants to make stupid changes.

You should get a grip tbh.

You promised/insinuated a gradual progression in ships and equipment from t1-t2-t3 and beyond, you deliver t3 cruisers and thats it.

You talk about balancing broken ships by increasing training time instead of tweaking the broken ships.

You promised/insinuated that we'd be fighting in space ships within a planets atmosphere, you deliver an FPS.

You promised/insinuated mining revamps to "bring back the gold rush" and deliver nothing.

You set up faction war round tables and dont turn up.

Instead of cunjuring up more crazy ideas how about doing some of the stuff you as a company have been saying your going to do for nearly a decade?

How about dealing with the remote repair agro mechanic thats been pissing folk off for nearly a decade?

Nah dont bother, get yourself back to the pub and magic your next stupid idea out of your arse.

Man you should go to csm just for that post

SKILLS:

[list]

Destroyer and Battlecruiser reimbursement: it has been said before, but allow us to repeat again, that we do not want to cut ships you can already fly. Thus, having BC skill at 5 would mean you get all four variations at 5.

Woa! Wait a minute!
I I have not trained Destroyer to lvl4 then I can not fly cruisers and battlecruisers? (which today I can).
Not sure I like this.

I don't blame you *at all*. I have requested (and been denied) that CSM be part of the Dev blog review process. This blog is proof that some thought should be paid to that suggestion.

This is a really small amount of training.

Woa! Wait a minute!
I I have not trained Destroyer to lvl4 then I can not fly cruisers and battlecruisers? (which today I can).
Not sure I like this.

Woa! Wait a minute!
I I have not trained Destroyer to lvl4 then I can not fly cruisers and battlecruisers? (which today I can).
Not sure I like this.

words words words

The training times for these is heinous, so we'd like to get as much lead time as possible to know how to address this.

Thanks

Why are you ignoring Black Ops Battleships? Why does it take less time to get into a ******* powerful dreadnought than a gimped overpriced shitmobile?

I think having Battleship v as a requirement for training capital ships is pretty frigging necessary. Here's a graph on how raw hit points increase per ship class, notice how it just dwarfs the rest of the ship classes:

This is why racial battleship V needs to stay in the prerequisites of everything capital!

Surely that sort of massive increase in raw HP warrants a little bit longer training time? Or do you really want this game to turn even more into a capital borefest than it is already?

Ok this thread needs some love now.


SKILLS:

[list]

Destroyer and Battlecruiser reimbursement: it has been said before, but allow us to repeat again, that we do not want to cut ships you can already fly. Thus, having BC skill at 5 would mean you get all four variations at 5.

Thank you for that ansver....
But....
I would like to hear that from CCP