Nope nope nope nope nope nope nope nope nope nope nope.

You're right, as an almost purely Frigate pilot of over a year now looking to use T2 Frigates for the long-term this is my hidden agenda.

It has nothing to do with the fact what you're suggesting offers such insane ISK efficiency for such ridiculous ship bonuses.

It definitely also has nothing to do with, just as importantly, what you're suggesting would in the long run lead to a complete homogenization of ships seen in space.

Actually scratch that, let me train the one weapon system I haven't for Frigs (lasers) for my infinite AFTerceptors.

Additionally, training all weapon systems to V should open up the Uber Weapon Systems skill that offers a flat 10% damage increase per charge, per level. Choosing to have diversity and flexibility should not only do exactly that for you - making you more versatile - it should also make you flat out more effective than someone who strictly specializes in an area.

Train Industry and Social. I just improved your ISK effiency by a gigantic amount and wrapped up your thread for you - whilst answering your "extra training should equal higher effiency" dilemma. For the record, my not-so-long-term goal is to train all IV and Vs in all applicable skills for all racial frigates. I still think your suggestion is poorly placed even though this would be an inevitably gigantic buff to me personally.

1) It should. Specializing should get you a certain ship classes advantages faster, period. Cross-training still allows you to be more diverse and opens up faction ships. AT RIDIULUS PRICES

2) Because generally those are more effective ships and do more ISK's value in damage during their life-span. NOTE TRUE JUST COMPARE HACS / FACTION CRUISERS / TEHC I BCS

This is relative on how experienced the pilot is, mind you. DO NOT PRESUME TO TEACH ME THE REALITIES OF PVP BEFORE VISITNG BATTLECLINIC SEARCH FUNCTIONS

Larger ship classes are very valuable to fleets. SOMETIMES YES AND SOMETIMES NO. SO?

3) You're telling me to see the "big picture" butyou're choosing to ignore the wealth of skills that give you more ISK effiency. YOU ARE TALKING ECONOMIC SKILLS. YOU ARE ENTIRELY MISSING THE POINT.

4) There is no injustice or imbalance. Let me break it down for you: You want ALL THE SHINY SHIPS but not at SHINY SHIP prices NO SHINY SHIPS THAT EXIST TODAY WILL STILL BE AT THE SAME PRICE

and you don't want to train GET-SHINY-SHIP-FASTER skills because you want SHINY-GUNS skills. COMPLETELY INCOMPREHENSIBLE WHAT YOU MEAN HERE

Also, you think it's unfair that the people that get 25% of the SHINY SHIPS accomplish that faster than people who get ALL THE SHINY SHIPS. NOPE I THINK THAT GETTING THE SHINY SHIPS OF ALL RACES SHOULD CONFER AN ADVANTAGE OVER GETING THE SHINY SHIPS OF ONE RACE. EFFECTIVELY THAT WITH 4X THE SP INVESTMENT ONE WOULD HAVE AN ACTUAL RETURN OTHER THAN COLLECTOR'S PRIDE.

Guess it's my folly then, but good luck in your endeavor with this hilarious over-buff proposal.

I wouldn't mind some new ships that aren't pirate faction ships, but require more than 1 race, maybe even 3 or 4 races to fly, but does not require level 5 of each race... something that isn't more expensive than a t2 ship, but at the same time isn't better either... idk :D I am just a guy who likes variation, more ships, more designs, I don't even care if these ships "have a specific role to fill"

I probably shouldn't justify that rant with a response, but regarding the ISK efficiency segment; I should've mentioned that I was speaking relatively and "ISK damage done" wasn't the best term to use.

A small nano-gang with a half-competent FC is generally going to be very efficient. That said, in fleet engagements certain ships won't always cut it. You won't deploy a ton of cheap frigates against a Titan (assuming the Titan has a support fleet... I've known of frig blobs catching lone Titans) typically.

Maybe I can petition for Mining skills to make my Minmatar guns stronger, too. Since essentially what you're saying is that training in multiple areas should be an absolute global buff even when you're not using skills relevant to what you're flying.

No. More versatility and better nerf-proofing is reward enough in itself.

This is real progress we are making now. Yes this is exactly what I mean, not for mining skills applying to guns of course, I do hope that was merely sarcasm. Instead with gun skills in general having a smaller effect to other races guns and ship skills in general having a smaller effect in other races ships. I am looking at something as small as a 3% overall usefulness increase if need be.

Beggars can't be choosers and you got to start somewhere.

- Cross training buff would serve to widen the gap between old players and new ones. This is the prime reason it's not a good idea,/ I DISAGREE instead it would offer new players 2 viable routes instead of one.

because Eve needs to do everything it can to keep new players and attract them in order to last. I AGREE WITH SOME RESERVATIONS but let's not talk about that in here...

- Cross training already allows a wider selection of ships and in such a wider selection of solutions to your current job.
DOES IT? The difference today I submit is minimal / negligable. See post above


- Pirate faction ships do what you refer to; they could be expanded to battlecruisers and destroyers though.
NOPE Pirate faction ships are haxspensive and my idea is all about having a gain in the isk/effectivenes ratio of the ship and not a gain in the overall leetnes. Let me phrase this clearly here for all to understand: I do not want a superleet HAC (I wouldnt mind but thats another story) I want someone with all eight hacs and their systems trained to perfection to be able to fly a vessel of hac or near hac effectiveness at a tech I price. In the particular suggstion you refer to anyway.

No. More versatility and better nerf-proofing is reward enough in itself.

No, we're not making progress. No, it wasn't sarcasm. If you want to train [random skills] and get a bonus to your other skills, I want to train [random skills] and get a bonus, too.

Basically, your complaint seems to boil down to "a Titan pilot with a dedicated skill plan is much more efficient in SP than a Titan pilot who trains for literally years of skills that DON'T APPLY to his Titan". Well, no ****?

In fact I'll go so far as to say that any serious PvP pilot should at minimum cross train to at least 1 more race to at least the Cruiser V / T2 medium weapon level. The benefits are simply too large to ignore.

What are you talking about? Getting access to 5 new T2 cruisers at level 5 is an incredible incentive to train another Cruiser 5.

Plus the ships you say you want already exist in the form of Pirate faction ships.

1. Training one and only race leads to caps suprcaps and their advanteges quicker. Crosstraining offers no advantage. It should offer a competitive advantage (other than alleviating the fear of the Nerfbat. Here I ll even list your arguments for you to move things along).

2. Why train and train only to fly more expensive vessels? There also has to be a progression where more training brings more ISK effective hulls.

Please try to see the big picture:

Pure gold.

I orginally wasn't going to post... but then I saw this gem...



What are you smoking and can I have some? Crosstraining different racial ship lines opens up numerous advantages in an innumerable amount of situations by giving you a wide selection of ships, mods, and weapons to chose from (see: "tactical flexibility").

Do you need to quickly gank someone and fly away? Minmitar and Gallente gunboats are good for this.
Do you need to dish out damage over a variety of ranges while soaking up damage (i.e. fleet combat)? Amarr laserboats are what you need.
Do you want to be a force multiplier that gives your guys an advantage against numbers? Caldari ECM boats will do the trick better than anything else.

I DISAGREE PAST 2nd RACE MINIMAL ADANTAGE SEE POSTS ABOVE FOR AMMAR DRONES AND MISSILES AND OTHER INTERESTING THINGS


Now... moving on to the rest of the post...



One of the base principles in EVE is that every advantage you gain comes at exponentially increased cost (and/or risk). This is what keeps "everyone" from strictly flying T2 and T3 ships (i.e. "better" ships) and keeps T1 ships more or less viable after about 10 years of the game being in existence. YES DUDE THATS THE POINT I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS BASIC PRINCIPLE I THINK THEY SHOULD CHANGE IT. YOU THINK CCP IS INFALLIBLE?

A good example would of this would be the Vexor vs. the Ishtar

The Vexor, when fully fitted (1600 plate fit of course), costs ~40 million. It can launch 3 heavy drones, has ~35k EHP, and deals ~400 DPS.
The Ishtar, when fully fitted (let's use the 1600 plate, dual-prop fit for consistency's sake), costs close to 200 mil. It can launch 5 heavy drones, has ~50k EHP, and deals ~550 DPS.

Stat-wise the Vexor has a clear advantage over the Ishtar in terms of ISK to power ratio. However, why you can't see is that the Ishtar has WAY more flexibility in terms of how you can fit it without losing out on it's specialty.
What flexibility you ask?
Whereas the Vexor is almost strictly limited to armor tanking the Ishtar is not. You can train to use shields and fit your Ishtar to utilize kiting tactics in a way the Vexor cannot even dream of (well... not technically true... you CAN shield tank a Vexor and fit it for kiting... but if a stiff enough wind hits you, the Vexor is toast).

tl;dr... what you are paying for, in essence, is greater tactical flexibility along with higher damage potential with the Ishtar over the Vexor.


I should also note that in the past I have said "cost is not a limiting factor for anything"... but your post has enlightened me to believe that this is not always the case.

So thus I will modify my statement to say: "Cost is not always a limiting factor for everything."




I think it's the other way around. What your are proposing effective mandates that people train to use these ships as they possess a very high advantage to cost ratio against "lowly T1 ships."
They will certainly be a 2% better option than t1 ships and cheaper than tech II so many people might choose to use them if they take the huge trouble of training for them. Does this detract from the game? It simply gives an incentive to expand training to other directions that is missing today.

My answers inserted. Regrettably I am not smoking anything

I see what you mean, and I don't like it. Others have already pointed out why this is a bad idea.

Gallente, right? I blame the Quafe.

Please read the previous answers as to why factions ships are not an answer here.

Regarding what you say here I ask you to answer this:

You can fly all cruiser sized vessels of two races. You are considering what to do next. You can train BS5 for one race or you can train cruiser 5 for another 2 races (or thereabouts). You think that these two incentives are equal?

EDIT Not for Pheusia but in general. I dont mind for people to say yes I see what you are saying but I dont like the idea. First however I want to make sure that we all open our eyes and look at the true issue. Then I ll accept disagreement and bugger off.

YES DUDE THATS THE POINT I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS BASIC PRINCIPLE I THINK THEY SHOULD CHANGE IT. YOU THINK CCP IS INFALLIBLE?

I do not. But you haven't really made your case on why this is a "bad" thing.
Why shouldn't people who want an extra 15 to 25% advantage over T1 ships pay through the nose to buy/lose it?

Honestly... what you are proposing is called "power creep" and it can only end in very bad things down the road.

Because the whole of EvE is based on paying more as the only way to get better vessels. I think this si just to make us run the treadmill for CCP electricity. It might be unavoidable but the occasional respite would be nice.

What I am proposing is not a tech II ship. No increas ein slots, resists, base stats, none of that. But a vessel that requires to have mastered all races to fly it, is decidedly tech I (in prices and mindset) but better than the exisitng tech I of its class. Somewhere close to tech II but not quite there would be nice. Freely available to all dirt cheap however. Nothing like faction ships.

I think this would be a welcome change from always having to pay more to get more. Cut down the grinding a bit too. Shock horror...

First off-cross training is its own reward. Its hard to see at the T1 level but as soon as you get in to T2's having more ships to choose from multiples your ability's substantially.


Second- Your ships benefit from 5 skills, this puts the ships tech level squarely at T3(or if you will 2.999999) so about the T1 price.......no


Third- Your idea would be better as a hull series that uses any ship skill.(ex-the frigate use your caldari frigate 3 over your gallente frigate 2)


Forth- "Omni" ships will only really work out as non-combat ships. other wise they will have to belong to a race on the grounds of weapon system: a ship that use all skills or any skill will still be Amarrian if it's weapon platform is lasers, also giving a "turret" bonus that apples to all would exclude pilots that use missiles or drones.

HTFU. ISK cost is the crux that balances ships of all sizes, tiers and pilot ages.

Because the whole of EvE is based on paying more as the only way to get better vessels. I think this si just to make us run the treadmill for CCP electricity. It might be unavoidable but the occasional respite would be nice.

What I am proposing is not a tech II ship. No increas ein slots, resists, base stats, none of that. But a vessel that requires to have mastered all races to fly it, is decidedly tech I (in prices and mindset) but better than the exisitng tech I of its class. Somewhere close to tech II but not quite there would be nice. Freely available to all dirt cheap however. Nothing like faction ships.

Other people in here understand it but dont like it. You still dont understand it and you have posted IDK how many times.

... what's the phrase again... ? "Work smarter, not harder." Grinding missions is a horrible way to earn ISK when you have a decent amount of skills and game knowledge under your belt.

-I never metnioned grinding missions. Its all grinding wether it is missions with a Draek or Titan sanctum raping or whatever industry / market / scamming. You still have to do it whatever it is you do well past the point where it has become tedious.-



Soooo... basically you want a T1 ship... with all the bonuses of a T2 ship... at T1 ship price.

-Allready skilling fully a tech I ship makes it so much better than an unskilled tech I ship that the difference is bigger than the comparison between fully skilled tech I ship and fully skilled tech II ship -

Please explain to me how this will not relegate T1 ships as nothing more than "stepping stones" for these ships. Hell... how will this not obsolete Faction Navy ships?

- To get to fly all vessels of this kind -in all ships classes I mean- you would need some 10 years I guess... or is it 30?- Therefore we are talking stepping boulders and not stepping stones AFAIK-


I'm sorry... but your idea runs so counter to some of the dearest principles in EVE that you have a snowball's chance in hell of this ever becoming reality.
Here we are agreed 100%. I think the direst oposition to this comes from prejudice.


Not Supported. Still thank you for posting and brainstorming

Snip.

Posting to show my support contempt for this good bad idea.

"I'm going to twist what you said and accuse you of not understanding."

Nice Ad Hominem, but I do understand.


Notice how I didn't say ISK price was the only factor.

Note how pilot age is referring mainly to the minimum time it takes to step into x ship with relevant core skills.

I'm getting quite sick of you attacking me and not my arguments because you don't have a good response.

Then I ll attack you no more go in peace.

PS When quoting leave the original text there for all the world to see please...

I wouldn't inflict that on people's mouse wheels for the sake of that.

The fact is even now you're not properly responding to my points, instead you try to paint me as being plain wrong or an idiot even though every other person here is echoing the same things I am - except for one person who just welcomed the idea of new hulls period.

pirate faction T2's

that is all.

I can't really comment on that entire post, because it was based on the consideration that my post was about how "ISK was the only way to get the advantage". It never was. I said ISK was a central - but not the only - balancing factor concerning ship hulls. By making essentially better hulls compete with their lower tech counterparts for pricing, you're creating a huge power creep based on age / aggregate SP. It's a gap that new pilots won't be able to fill in short order, because they'd have to up their current training plan several-fold compared to what a new pilot needs now to be able to catch up to an old pilot in a specific role.

But, several people have said this besides myself, which you'd appreciate if you took the time to process what they're telling you. It isn't just me.

More versatility was a reward once upon a time my dear. In the time of Ammar drone boats, ammar missle boats, when minmatar have the best siegelaunchersonafrig / stelth bomber and many more examples of this... then this argument pales.

Nerf-proofing: Yes I agree and mentioned it above. However put on the scales on the one side a Supercap char limited to a Nyx and on the other an all BS char. Which would you choose? The scales are not even for even time investment.

edit:


You have one guy on the first page who potentially supports the idea. Everyone else has pointed out why this is bad and that the system is more or less fine "as is."

Which is precisely what I say there: "understand it but don't like it", What is it you do not understand.

edit2:


So long as the person with 10 mil in Gunnery has all the skills relevant to firing a 'Geddon's lasers at level 5, you can have 1 billion SP in gunnery and still won't be any better.

Mostly sensible arguments

I disagree that it has been like this for ages and no one complains.

As to your main thrust that actually specializing is currently less rewarded than corsstraining (I do hope you mean RACIAL crosstraining because that is what I am discussing /proposing) then I disagree

What are you talking about? Getting access to 5 new T2 cruisers at level 5 is an incredible incentive to train another Cruiser 5.

Yeah, no, that's not really what I said, so I don't know what you're disagreeing with here.
Can't tell you now I am 3 legal documents down the line too l8 in the day... read again it might help or not.

There is no other form of cross-training.
Why do you disagree?

This is the reason my PvP pilot has yet to stick a single battleship skill into her brain. Three years and nothing but frigates and cruisers. I'm running out of frigate / cruiser level stuff to train though. Ohnoes. : < I don't regret training this way - the amount of stuff I can fly is mind boggling and I have a ship for every occasion.

Even though it would benefit me, I don't see a need for a "its like every ship but better" thing floating around. Also, where would it fit in lore-wise? Would the Jovians be making these ships?

I'm not sure that they would even be flown much anyway. Specialization beats generalization, and I would rather have CCP work on ships that fill a specific role and would actually be useful. The All Four Uber Race ship just doesn't sound like it would add much to the game other than a gimmick.

I think 99% of the siruations are covered with two races and the rest is just added flavor no real advantage.

I did say however I disagree

In your 3 years spent on cruisers did you first do ALL 4 races HACs, or first a HAC then a Recon, then a Hictor then another race HAC or Recon and so on and so forth.

The thing I don't get is, I think almost every person in this thread is cross-training. It's not like this is a case of the Rock saying that Scissors is fine.

Relevant.

Ed: I might actually start linking videos of cats saying "nononono" on all bad idea threads. I'm not sure if there are more videos than threads or vice versa.

I personally don't mind faction ships that require all racial ship skills at 3-5. I'd expect the ships to be somewhere between pirate ships and T3s in both cost and ability. I'd rather have them rebalance the Tier system though.

/shrug

-Liang

Jovian faction ships?

Yo, Thukker mix, Minmatar speed/agility, Caldari missiles.

**** would own so hard.

[sarcasm]It'd be completely balanced, so you can make them as common as T1 ships, and not restrict the supply to a very small number of BPCs given out per year[/sarcasm]

The big benefit of cross-training for other race's ships is the extra options. That alone is a big benefit.

I'm not fundamentally against faction ships that require all racials. Seems like it could be cool.

... You know, so long as they aren't balanced as OP is suggesting. Also, there's a kind of bitter sweetness after seeing this thread get more support (against it) after being up for 40 hours and getting on the EVE forums (from the office, so don't even suggest sleeping).

That's what everyone keeps telling you. What isn't there to understand?

One of the base principles in EVE is that every advantage you gain comes at exponentially increased cost (and/or risk). This is what keeps "everyone" from strictly flying T2 and T3 ships (i.e. "better" ships) and keeps T1 ships more or less viable after about 10 years of the game being in existence.

YES DUDE THATS THE POINT I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS BASIC PRINCIPLE I THINK THEY SHOULD CHANGE IT. YOU THINK CCP IS INFALLIBLE?

Okay, you can tell that to every single other person in this thread saying the same thing as me rather than singling me out as you continue to do.

Except then you'd be directly contradicting the point you keep making that you think the SPs should reward you with ISK efficiency etc. etc. and all the other points you have been reinforcing throughout the thread.

Sigh.

It was a huge benefit 5 years ago, especially from having one race to having two races vessels at your disposal. Is that still the case after all weapon systems and vessels beconing more and more same-ish over the years? Is it rwardign enough to go from 3 races to 4 as well??? Compared with the advantages of gaining other ship classes in the same type?

Okay, you can tell that (that you are silly people and this was your ploy all along!) to every single other person in this thread saying the same thing as me rather than singling me out as you continue to do.

Except then you'd be directly contradicting the point you keep making that you think the SPs should reward you with ISK efficiency etc. etc. and all the other points you have been reinforcing throughout the thread.

Sigh.

Just going to leave this here since you are undoubtedly going to point out how much of an idiot and wrong I am about that, whilst disregarding everyone else who was for the all-racial idea along with me.






Yep, merely suggesting all-racial with arbitrary values.

In unrelated news, you seem to have quite the vendetta against me so I'm going to vanish before someone says something regrettable.

If you insist;

I said everyone says YES (see #86). The reason no further explanation was offered is because people have repeated the same points over and over and I don't want to beat the dead horse. Cross-training for versatility is it's own reward.

Also, the reason it feels personal is because quite a few people are echoing my own posts, but you only single mine out with the belittling and demeaning comments - and you have insisted that I am either blatantly wrong or misunderstanding the entire thread, whilst offering very little foundations for why - and when it is not really me you should be addressing, but rather EVERYONE who is replying to you.

[quote=Pheusia][quote=Crellion][quote=Nnam Pir]The big benefit of cross-training for other race's ships is the extra options. That alone

EDIT For curiosity can we hear from anyone who has say all 4 races recons and Hictors and as to what they think 4 races offer over 2 or 3.. Do you out there who has done it feel rewarded enough?

Yes, I have done this. It gives flexibility and diversity. That is the benefit.

Thank you very much FT Diomedes for your answer. Have you found this versatility very helpful in your long pvp
carrier. Were there times when six HACs at your disposal just would not cut it and you needed desperately that last race to be competitive? Did the substantial advantages of the fourth race figure prominently on the road to amassing your career kills as they appear on battleclinic?

Were there times when six HACs at your disposal just would not cut it and you needed desperately that last race to be competitive?

I'll answer that question on my own behalf: yes.

When you need a long range DPS ship to keep Falcons off the field, there's no HAC that will come close to the Cerberus. When you need a hgh speed anti-support/heavy tackle/hit-and-run ship, then other HACs are a poor subsitute for the Vagabond. When you need HAC that can use drones, then the Ishtar is the only reasonably choice. When you want to join an AHAC fleet, the Zealot is convincingly superior to the other HACs.

The Recons have distinct enough roles that the advantages of being able to use them all are too obvious to need explaining.

HICs are a little less obvious, but still, you will definitely want to be able to fly both a shield and an armour HIC. The Devoter is significantly better than the Phobos for "big fleet" work due to its resist profile and incredible EHP, while the Phobos is better for lo-sec work. There's not really much to choose between the Onyx and the Broadsword IMO.The Onyx is a little better at providing supplementary DPS, the Broadsword is more agile.


The true advantage I have been able to derive from cross-training rather than specialising is that when the FC announces "Tonight's fleet is a $DOCTRINE fleet" I am always able to fill at least one, usually more, role in the fleet in the ship best suited to it. If the FC wants to try out a concept Gallente Battlecruiser fleet, I can fly that BC. If he wants an all-Ishtar fleet, I can do that. If he's short on Interdictors, I can swap out to whatever spare dictor hull someone has lying around.

(The irony is that I am posting this with a relatively specialised alt; my main - Malcanis - is the omnitasker. But even this semi-specialised alt is busy cross-training right now, and she can fly the very few ships that Malc can't)

Racial cross-training already provides a huge benefit: you can fly ships of other races.

The question also have to be put into context, because no one (or very few) has 200 mill SPs. Therefore:
The question is NOT: "What is the incentive for training the 4th race" but rather
"What is the incentive for training the 4th race INSTEAD of something else"

Let's just repeat this one more time GÇö more benefit than this really isn't needed since it's a huge pay-off in and of itself.

The reason people keep specialising after all these years, even given the massive benefits of cross-training is that specialising lets you become good, fast. That's a completely different benefit that is more valuable in the short run. Cross-training does not do that: it lets you become versatile, slowly. The (drastically) increased value of that versatility over simply being able to get in the fight is what makes it reasonable that it takes so long.

You can get versatile quick, but you give up the benefit that specialisation provides by doing so: you don't become as good.

It's a balance act and a decisions point GÇö each way has its own distinct advantages and none of them need any specific rewards because they are all more than sufficiently rewarding for what you have to do to get them.

Because it adds significant value to what you have already trained.

Let's look at this a different way:



Some players prioritize cross training across classes - from frigate to cruiser to ballteship to capital - to gain the versatility of being able to use different ship sizes. Other players focus more on cross training across races to gain the versatility of the different racial specialities. Many do a sort of compromise, racing to battlecruisers or battleships before starting to cross train to add racial versatility. Eventually if you keep on training you'll do both kinds of cross training to their logical conclusion and be able to fly "everything".

All we're really doing is arguing about the route to the final destination. It's not obvious to me that specialising in cross-training races should get a special bonus that specialising in cross training classes doesn't, any more than going 100 yards north then 100 yards west should lead you to a different destination or take less time than going 100 yards west then 100 yards north.

I think now you are a lot closer to what I mean. Perhaps you have even hit the nail on the head...

Indeed the issue I have is that going further down the different classes corridor confers higher advantages to the player, progressively, than exploring all four rooms in every stage of the corridor.

But it's only an issue for you, because you're literally the only person who thinks it confers higher advantages. Once a character is at battlecruiser 4/T2 medium guns level, then the advantages of spending the next 3M SP on training another frigate 5 + cruiser 5 + small turret 5 + med turret 5 are so much better than spending 3M SP training battleship 5 + large turret 5 that it's almost unbalanced.

I'll readily concede that it's a good idea for a brand new player to get to battlecruisers quickly, purely because they're the optimal ISK making platform if you don't have many SP. After that, I - along with literally everyone else in this thread - am 100% in favour of cross racial specialisation.

Adding significant value does not cut it.

The whole discussion is comparison of the added vvalue form the one with the added value from the other. See my previous post.

Saying 4th race is useful is not enough IMO.

You know either you did not read the whole post or you are just saying "won't hear this lalalalalalalalalalalalalalalal"

Sure it does, since it means you do not only get what you train, but also get more for what you've already trained.

Crellion: It does not. Balance is not about "ok that is good to" but about "is it as good as". < Basic fact you keep missing.

GǪwhich is what I responded to and what you keep on missing: you already get more for this crosstraining than for training something else. I can only venture to guess that your problem lies in your unfamiliarity of the EVE skill system and you inability to separate GÇ£moreGÇ¥ from GÇ£betterGÇ¥. Each has its own set of advantages and costs GÇö deciding between the two is what makes the system work (and be great).

Crellion: Oh I am very familiar with the EvE skill system. Familiar enough to see the problems rather than just about familiar enough to hold on to common prejudice for dear life. Crosstraining after the 3rd race for te same ship classes offers a minimal advantage and is seriously imbalanced against the superior advantage gained for training something else at that point.


And you're the only one thinking that this is what you get. Again: you do not just get what you train, but more for what you've already trained. You get your baseline and added value. You get something that is useful and improve the usefulness of what you already have. If this is not enough for you, nothing ever will be.

[It does not. Balance is not about "ok that is good to" but about "is it as good as". < Basic fact you keep missing.

Oh I am very familiar with the EvE skill system. Familiar enough to see the problems rather than just about familiar enough to hold on to common prejudice for dear life. Crosstraining after the 3rd race for te same ship classes offers a minimal advantage and is seriously imbalanced against the superior advantage gained for training something else at that point.

Nope that: "You get something that is useful and improve the usefulness of what you already have" is what I am asking for. Currently getting a Paladin adds nothing to the usefulness of having a Kronos.

Especially if you allready had Kronos and Vargur and Paladin and then trained on for a Golem you got 0 practical return...

I think in 3 or 4 years you ll see my point...

I think in 3 or 4 years you ll see my point...

Woah, I could've sworn OP finally acknowledged that he was wrong and that this thread could be wrapped up.

You see that's the problem exactly. We reached that point where I said if you all agree it is uneccessary I wont insist and then people take this as a carte blanche to spew more bs... Just look at Tippias post above... I have a 1 page long reply which I can not send because it will feed the troll further.

I think enough has already been posted. Most people I assume can read carefully if they have nothing better to do and see for themselves what the point is who is avoidign it and who is making arguments for arguments sake. I am waaayy out of time to keep this up. The attempt to help people come to terms with an idea that runs contrary to their cemented beliefs demands at the very least honest and to the point dialogue which I do not think I ll have a chance of here.

Regarding the previous post,

Considering he is referring to us all as being so 'cemented' in our ways in a derogatory fashion and is completely unironic, I would say tremendous troll.

The problem is that you refuse by all means, including ridiculous arguments and tounts, what people are addressing since the beginning of your post.

Now, I'm starting to think that you're either a tremendous troll making fun of everyone or just idiot.
How can you possibly not, or refuse to understand that having the 4 fracking races trained is already a huge benefit on it self since there you will always have the best ship for no mater the situation?

What about Bhaalgorns, Vindicators, Machariels, Nightmares punting aside the awesome cruiser and frigate pirate ships lines, isn't this a huge benefit on it self for you knowing the number of guys able to do so?

Tremendous idiot works fine, too.

tl;dr for you folks just joining;

OP asks if trans-racial cross training is it's own reward.

Response is yes.

Thnak you for your opinion.

I have never refused that flying 4 races is a benefit. I have disputed that it is a big a benefit as training for an additional class.

To understand my argument you have to step back. If you are so close to the wall that you only see shades of racial training (guys with 1 race, others with 2, others with 3 and others with 4 for example) it is readily obvious to you that those with all for races have a very big advantage which you choose to call a "huge benefit"

Now take a step backwards. You ll find they all have the same SPs (in my argument) and that the one can fly:
- Set 1 Deimos, Ishtar, Vaga, Munnin, Zealot, Sacriledge, Hugin, Rapier, Arazu, Curse, Pilgrim and
the other can fly:
- Set 2 Deimos, Ishtar, Vaga, Munnin, Zealot, Sacriledge, Cerberus and Eagle.

You have said that set 2 has a "huge benefit". How does your declaration look to you now?

Or perhaps the example is not extremely fair because the SPs for reckons 4 + cloak 4 might* be more than Caldari cruiser 5 (can't rememer). Substitute then the reckons in Set 1 with Geddon, Apoc, Abbadon... the scales are still tipped the same way...

Do not be so rush to judge anything if you are not taking in the whole picture.

Still as I said before I have stoped arguing about this and accepted it is not feasible to sway people, however posts like yours are too sentimentally charged not to reply to

...I disputed the value of this reward...

stuff

Now take a step backwards. You ll find they all have the same SPs (in my argument) and that the one can fly:
- Set 1 Deimos, Ishtar, Vaga, Munnin, Zealot, Sacriledge, Hugin, Rapier, Arazu, Curse, Pilgrim and
the other can fly:
- Set 2 Deimos, Ishtar, Vaga, Munnin, Zealot, Sacriledge, Cerberus and Eagle.

You have said that set 2 has a "huge benefit". How does your declaration look to you now?

Or perhaps the example is not extremely fair because the SPs for reckons 4 + cloak 4 might* be more than Caldari cruiser 5 (can't rememer). Substitute then the reckons in Set 1 with Geddon, Apoc, Abbadon... the scales are still tipped the same way...

I have two chars at about 70 mill (as a result of years not even bothering to set skills :D :D :D) each is two race specced roughly (Gallente and Minmattar with a heavy touch of Caldari for the one Ammar with Caldari for the other) ... and I find that there is little incentive to add races to each char... Cirmusmtancially here and there I might do it... Certainly the races have lost a lot of their unique flavor which further dissuades this. On he other hand if it was only one char I had access to I might see this differenty, though I doubt it....

I effectively have one character (this well-worn forum alt doesn't count, nor do a few trade alts). For me, the benefits of cross-training are absolutely huge. I'm able to fly every sub-cap combat ship except HICs, and all of them perfectly (wrt spaceship command skills) except dictors. This means I can literally pick any sub-cap in the game and expect maximum performance from it short of some int/mem supports that are training now.

In contrast, I could have dumped my 100mil into probably two races and be able to... siege or rep poses better than I can now? To me, that just isn't compelling gameplay. I'd much rather be able to pick and choose the ship for the job at hand and not have to worry about whether I can fit and fly it or not.

I'm not sure why you're not acknowledging this benefit. It's absolutely the core of my gameplay and I wouldn't dream of trading it for capital specialization.

Curse: the deadliest reccon and probably one of the best solo ships out there, I'd even say it's the BEST provided you have the very heavy skill set necessary to full fly it with only elite certificates.
Pilgrim, another small gang/fleet monster, you can now fly another set of reccons that are really awesome and WILL be the best choice you could do in certain op's you'll do.

I'm sorry you can't see the advantage of this, plus you have now Amarr cruiser at 5 that gives you better bonus on your Blood Raiders ships. Sure you don't need that lvl5 but having it is awesome.



Ho mighty, you just unlock the powerfull scorch APOC, did you ever heard about this monster? -simply a monster.
Another monster: Abbadon wich is the BEST T1 armour tank battleship out there dishing a dam decent DPS
Another monster: Bhaalgorn, jesus did you ever looked at what distance you can cap out a battleship or several cruisers with this stuff? -it a game changer and an unique powerfull game changer with this kind of ability

Once again, you are just looking at a Rembrandt picture, but you can only see the colours but not the message. It's hard, not to say impossible, for me to explain this to you. If you DON'T want to see the benefit, there's no argument capable of changing your mind.

I am currently in the process of getting all races' Frigate skills maxed to use all T2 Frigates in the game, and afterwards will be maxing all of the Cruiser skills. I find it very rewarding, and the extra options are very worth the wait.

Did you find it helpful to train all races haulers to 5, to have the great reward of versatility or did you only do Gallente?

Can you fly Battleships, BCs, any HACs, AFs, Reckons, etc or are you waiting till you have all frigs and cruisers to start this?

Edit: From a search I see you can fly Iteron 5 and that you use haulers a lot. Did you find it helpful to train all races haulers to 5, to have the great reward of versatility or did you only do Gallente?

Actually, I can fly all races' T1 Industrial Ships, T2 Gallente Transports, and an Obelisk. I do plan on getting Industrials to 5 for all races, so that I can use all of the Freighters, and with Jump Freighters applying to all races, I'll be a very happy hauler.

There is no need for extra bonuses to ships from training other races' ship skills. The extra choice just from having more ship options is reward enough. It's not like training to level 4 takes a long time.
REPLY: Why is it "reward enough" when it is less rewarding than the alternative.

Plus, it would make it unbalanced for someone who is new and only has one race's skills even trained to run into someone who's been playing a long time who is flying the same ship, but because they've cross-trained they have a huge advantage in the form of extra bonuses.
REPLY: This is exactly the point. You are the first noob to come out and say it openly. This is the reaosn for all the hate in this thread. However it is a misconception. You see as TQ stands now thousands pf chars have 120 mill SP and can fly "all sub caps at 5". Following my suggestion it would take 300 mill SP to do the same thing. This means that for the next 15 odd years a ny newcomer can spend 6 months specialising in a class and then reasonably expect to fly that particular class BETTER than the average bittervet he comes accross daily. Shocking eh?

The suggestion of additional ships that require that much cross-training would only work if they were also quite expensive. Making a ship that can do Interceptor and Assault Frig performance for the price of a T1 Frig would instantly make all T1 Frigs obsolete. Totally unbalanced.
REPLY: Correct. Thus the initial proposal has been tempered to a vessel that requires a lot of training and stands between tech II and tech I and cosst as much as a tech I

OP,

No.

Getting the ship is its own reward. You're an idiot who doesn't realise the diversity of the different races vessels and fitting options.

I can fly almost anything under the sun and I don't want bonuses added for having all the races. Pointless and demented. Those of us with over a hundred million sp have enough of an advantage anyhow.

One thing to keep in mind about asking people if they decided to 5 all the races ships, one class after another... Most people started with their specialization first. When interceptors first came out, I already had caldari frigate 5 and amarr frigate 5. Had no reason to train gallente or minmatar until I saw how amazing the taranis could be. Of course, back then the crow was king...

I think what you missed in the persons post above me was that he was shown what a Gallente vessel could do. While yes, it took an example of that play style, harmonisation would simply lead to a broken economy. He's falling in line because within a class of vessel, different empires play in a versatile manner. Amarr vessels for example are completely different compared to the Minmatar, they are floating bricks screaming for cap and reps while blasting the enemy at 30km+. Minmater ships brawl with their opponents, delivering high alpha with faster more maneuverable.
REPLY: This sound slike quoting the ship descriptions. Actually all races can be flown in all alternatives. You cna make ammar brawlers and minmattar bricks no problems... the differences are 5% min max...

I shouldn't even have to high light this for you, while you have 2 years over me in EVE, it seems as if you've only flown doctrine fleets from the way you're speaking.
REPLY: Nope I have done say 20% fleet and 80% solo and small gang mainly because at my peak activity years my pc was not up to fleets so I d just warp to target and next frame wake up in station 0_0

Your harmonisation ideals would lead to even further isolation and redundancy of ships.
REPLY: I am not promoting a harmonisation ideal. I am compalining that tey have allready harminised the races so much that transracial training is less of reward than ever... Consider an ammar bloke of 2006. Reward for crosstraining gallente: Drones!!!. Reward for crosstrainign caldari: missles!!!! Same new char if strarting in 2010 .... uh what?

As you know, EVE is made up of the greatest min maxing people in the gaming community. They would instantly jump on board whatever harmonies are "over powered" combined with their ship for having trained multiple races. This would lead to an even worse version of what we are seeing with the WINMATAR craze that swept EVE as well as the NANO craze. Now we have seen it with the Drake craze that has lead to CCP stating that the ship does its role too well to the point of eclipsing other vessels in its class and cost range.
REPLY I am not sure what you mean by using the word harmonies there. As to whether the new suggested ship would become cookicutter: Perhaps it would... even though in general I have seen people goign for the best ability even if haxspensive but then looking at the proliferation of tier 3 BCs perhaps they would go for the new ship... Note however that
(a) This would be one vessel for each class which would still be an improvement perhaps over everyone flying the same class,
(b) This would mean all TQ crosstraining first and I am not sire if a slight advantage would be enough... perhaps it would
(c) more importantly I gave you an alternative int he thread. Instead of new vessels, bleeding small effects on the sam evessel we have now (i.e. caldati frig 5 gives 2% "racial frig increase" on tristans and rifters and whatnot) which completely negates this cookie cutter set up fear argument.


CCP has stated that a new vessel shape up is coming with ships of the line as well as role changes. Now stop trolling people who are genuinly replying. We haven't let it die as you wanted a discussion and we are providing that.
REPLY: Yes they have and perhaps this is why I am all the more interested now that with these changes they do somehting about the class v race balance. A discussion I have nothing against my last comment was to the guy in the porevious page asking why the thread has not died yet. I never troll.

Can you fly Battleships, BCs, any HACs, AFs, Reckons, etc or are you waiting till you have all frigs and cruisers to start this?

Edit: From a search I see you can fly Iteron 5 and that you use haulers a lot. Did you find it helpful to train all races haulers to 5, to have the great reward of versatility or did you only do Gallente?

Now take a step backwards. You ll find they all have the same SPs (in my argument) and that the one can fly:
- Set 1 Deimos, Ishtar, Vaga, Munnin, Zealot, Sacriledge, Hugin, Rapier, Arazu, Curse, Pilgrim and
the other can fly:
- Set 2 Deimos, Ishtar, Vaga, Munnin, Zealot, Sacriledge, Cerberus and Eagle.

This is not a class difference ..... those are ALL cruiser based hulls. This is specialisation difference (damage/tank vs ewar ruisers).

The next best comparison is racial cruisers vs racial battleships, since BCs still share the same skill set as cruisers (only the BC skill is different).

So your examples don't hold water. Going from frigs to cruisers is different than going between races for frigs, because the cruiser hull is built for slightly different purposes. In that example, training a different race in stead of a higher class is not comparable at all.

This sound slike quoting the ship descriptions. Actually all races can be flown in all alternatives. You cna make ammar brawlers and minmattar bricks no problems... the differences are 5% min max...

Look at the second paragraph you posted. You had no reason to train gallente or minmatar until you saw how amazing the Taranis could be you say. But wait you are falling in line wioth those saying that amazing diversity is "it's own reward"!!!! Wait what? Why did you not train the gallente and minmattar frigs to get "it's own reward" then dude?

It does not matter that now that you "can fly aything under the sun" (a bit loltastic but I won't bite) it makes little difference. It mattered A LOT in the eight or nine years you have spent getting there and the 8 or 9 years someone who is now joining the game is going to spend.

A lot of strong feeling and opposition in this threat but none of it is purely and economically logic. Give me logic or let the thread die away. Any other option and you ll keep hearing it...

What is the current proposal? Are we just looking for extra skills from having different racial skills or are we still looking for extra faction ships?

-Liang

They are different class vessels. Heavy Assault ships and Reckon cruisers. The fact that they are based on the cruiser hulls does not mean anything for balance purposes...

If for some reason that you think is important to look also at classes based on different size hulls for whatever reason (personally I do not find it is helpfull to the discussion) go to the same post you quote and look a wee bit further down there is an example involving HACs and BSs...

I do not see the relevance of the stated objection. EDIT: to clarify the comparison is what skillset you end up with if you take two chars both trained with 3 racial cruiser 5s and heavy assault cruiser 4 say and then the one spends the next 20 days training the fourth race cruiser level 5 ending up with "Set 2" and the other trains reckons 1 to 4 and support skills in the same 20 days and ends up with "Set 1"

In any event all these examples are by necessity technical and stylicized ... do not ge too hang up on technicalities.

Well Liang it's anyone's guess. Personally I do not like the idea of 4 faction ships because I do not like more isk sinks. However it is the one closest to CCP norms.

My proposal remains for a T1 vessel available, (let's start with frig, cruiser and BS) when you have all corresponding skills to 5. Let's say 1 mill isk cost (before market gains) at frig 10 at cruiser 150 at BS. Providing a small efficiency increase over the tech1 counterpart. Details TBD. OP numbers out of the question of course.

Alternative proposal naming a "transfer skill" for each race at each class. Affects correc race vessel at 5% per level, ally race vessel at 1% per level and enemy races levels at 0.5% per level.

As an example, flying an Omen you get 5% per level neut amount from ammar cruiser 5, 1% p/l optimal turret range / missile velocity from caldari cruiser 5 (obviously these skills would have to be of generic application), 0.5% per level web range from minm cruiser 5 and 0.5% per level web factor from gallente cruiser 5. All the above values and skills are simple, placeholders.

Such a widespread change of course should be first implemented for a few months in some more deserving classes only. Frigates-t1-, cruisers-t1-, then later HACs and AFs if all goes well... 6 months down the line it should be clear whether this should be extended to everyhingTM.

Well Liang it's anyone's guess. Personally I do not like the idea of 4 faction ships because I do not like more isk sinks. However it is the one closest to CCP norms.

My proposal remains for a T1 vessel available, (let's start with frig, cruiser and BS) when you have all corresponding skills to 5. Let's say 1 mill isk cost (before market gains) at frig 10 at cruiser 150 at BS. Providing a small efficiency increase over the tech1 counterpart. Details TBD. OP numbers out of the question of course.

Alternative proposal naming a "transfer skill" for each race at each class. Affects correc race vessel at 5% per level, ally race vessel at 1% per level and enemy races levels at 0.5% per level.

As an example, flying an Omen you get 5% per level neut amount from ammar cruiser 5, 1% p/l optimal turret range / missile velocity from caldari cruiser 5 (obviously these skills would have to be of generic application), 0.5% per level web range from minm cruiser 5 and 0.5% per level web factor from gallente cruiser 5. All the above values and skills are simple, placeholders.

Such a widespread change of course should be first implemented for a few months in some more deserving classes only. Frigates-t1-, cruisers-t1-, then later HACs and AFs if all goes well... 6 months down the line it should be clear whether this should be extended to everyhingTM.

The first one basically equates to more/better faction ships. Maybe even some Jove ships. Sure, I'm fine with that - though the price point being suggested is certainly unreasonable.

The second one would be OP as hell in my hands. I already **** up entire gangs at a go... add that into the mx?

-Liang

It addresses the problem that this one guy doesn't feel that having all four races isn't enough of an advantage or worthwhile compared to training just one or two factions. Which, as far as I'm concerned, is the most prudent matter CCP has ever had on it's hands.

Why would I do that? I wholeheartedly support your quest on being a greedy so-and-so who wants to amass power for himself lazily by out of game means. It's the purest expression of the sand-box.

Now on to more pressing matters; my unprecedented support during your campaign surely cannot go un-noticed, a pittance of 100 million ISK would show good praise and ensure my position as your side-kick for this player movement for as long as it takes to get your voice heard.

Well you can see it like this. Faction ships with 4 factions instead of 2 and with a small mark up in performance and a huge park up in price from current faction ships. (if they edged ahead of faction BSs it would mean 1.5 bill + price Iguess)... and there is nothing wrong with what you are suggesting.

My suggestion however is not for performance above faction but for performance between t1 and t2 and closer to t1 if anything. That's why I want them to be at the suggested prices. I know it is completely alien to EvE paradigm of "always a bit better for a hell of a lot more isk" but hey...

As to the second one being OP: (a) perhaps I havent put it clearly that the 1st 5% p/l the vessel gets from the correct race bonus is what it gets allready so no change there. The additional performance comes from 1% of ally race and 0.5% from two hostile races... so imagine ... Omen as is today with 12km tech II web 2.5% more effective neuts and 2.5% more optimal for it's pulses... That's less than what you can do with 50 mill of hardwirings... how can it be considered OP?

12km T2 webs is not what you can do with 50M worth of hardwirings. And yes, in my hands it would be so OP as to be hilarious.

-Liang

+1, I would never let Liang anywhere near 12km base T2 webs.

I wouldn't let myself anywhere near 12km base T2 webs either. They would be hilariously OP.

Oh come on - you don't want me to get 12km base webs while basically nobody else does?

-Liang

Does balance mean "it would fit my skill layout in a really sweet way"?

+1, I would never let Liang anywhere near 12km base T2 webs.

I wouldn't let myself anywhere near 12km base T2 webs either. They would be hilariously OP.

If you want to reward transracial crosstraining, simply add a damage bonus to each of Eve's ship skills, against the type of vessel the skill allows you to fly. You can RP it away by saying the familiarity with the vessel you gained by training the skill allows you to pick out critical subsystems and familiar weak spots with your weapons fire, which translates to a 2/4/6/8/10% dmg boost per level against that specific ship type.

That way, folks who trained all four races get 10% bonus damage against every kind of ship! While folks who specialized in one race merely get a bonus toward fighting the ships they know how to fly.

Why do I always read this as Transcranial crosstraining?

That's... actually not that bad.

I dunno... I'm finding a 10% damage boost hard to swallow personally. I feel like there's some way to game the system with regards to "weak" ships vs FOTM, but you'd ultimately be making a gamble that nobody knows how to fly what you're flying. It might even be true if you're a BOBS pilot or HIC pilot or something.

At any rate, I believe any scheme like this should work off of an improved certificate system instead of just the ship skills - then we could see people actually being able to fly a Rupture with reasonable skills (T2 guns, T2 drones, T2 tank, etc) before getting a massive damage boost against it.

I'm -1 because I don't need more advantages because of my SP.

-Liang

What's being suggested is similar to set bonus's from WoW and Star Trek online. The problem with that is again, it's an unfair advantage for no real purpose. People should get into new ships because it's what they want to enjoy and they have a different varied play style. Not because its bonus is amazing, we have enough that already.

Yes. Yes it does.

-Liang

There are set bonuses all over Eve. Matching guns with the ships they belong to, implants, etc. This isn't a set bonus. This is an additional reward for having a ship skill trained, nothing more. The OP is about finding a way to reward pilots who have more than one race trained, I merely suggested one.

In fact if this came through all the people gaily posting in this thread how happy they are that they fly all races would have an instant (small) advantage over me in every ship I can fly "at 5" as things stand now.

I guess the best way to express what I meant is it's a set bonus that you don't risk anything for. Not the modules that get destroyed, not the implants when you're podded.

Haven't read the whole topic, so mainly going to answer the original post here.



Giving players a ship that is better, even remotely marginally better, than tech 1 hulls for the same price tag is defeating the very purpose of tech and power level systems we have in-game: you are allowing pilots to gain access to more efficient vessels without paying the price tag for it.

It doesn't really matter how high you set the skill training requirements, we (as the game balancing team) already have serious issues balancing tech 1 hulls to be all viable between each other and to their tech 2 / faction / tech 3 counterpart. Not only would this cause a serious reverse shift of what we are trying to achieve with the ship lines and tech revamp (please refer to the Fanfest presentation), but it would also widen and magnify the hull inconsistency gap as more and more players meet the training requirements for the ships you are suggesting in time.

Besides, this would create inconsistencies in the skill requirements. Training a skill to 5 is something required for tech 2 ships, 4 is something we envision for faction ships, while 1-3 is for tech 1 tiered hulls. As you can see requiring a skill to 5 for a tech 1 hull makes little sense and remains quite confusing.

As for creating new ships, what would be their purpose? Again, ship balance is currently a horrible mess, there is little need to add a new, specific meta-level between tech 1 and 2 when we already have faction in the middle, that can be split in two, with navy ships (slightly better than tech 1, as you suggested) and pirate ships (slightly better/specialized than tech 2).

However, there would be two ways to satisfy you by tampering with your idea a little

• Introduce more pirate ships: as they are a cross-bred of two factions altogether, they could fill some of your high-end goals: for instance Blood Raiders require both Amarr and Minmatar trained. But that is two cross-racial skill requirements, not four and we don't see any faction requiring all of these for now, except maybe Concord. However, allowing players to fly Concord vessels wouldn't end well, to put it mildly. In all cases, pirate ships have a significantly higher price tag for tech 1 ships for a reason, and that would stay that way.


• Have bonuses not tied with spaceship command, but that benefits existing ships somehow: here we would reward players for training something on top of spaceship command skills. Basically hulls could be sorted by role, and you could then add new generic and specialization skills that give small bonuses to strengthen such roles no matter to which race it applies. Example: you could have a generic "combat ship" skill that give you X% more HP to all EVE ships sorted in this category. We are thinking on introducing that for the ship lines, but that's a very tricky move, as having new skills on such a fashion would still widen the gap between new and veteran players, while possibly unbalancing hulls further or killing fitting creativity if we done incorrectly.

Hope that helps a bit.

More skills => more points => more expensive medi-clone.

Skills aren't risk free.

A very good point. I love frig pvp but its it somehow defeats the purpose if you are sporting a 20 mill clone. Older players are (in terms of isk effectiveness) deprived of riftermania.

As for creating new ships, what would be their purpose? Again, ship balance is currently a horrible mess, there is little need to add a new, specific meta-level between tech 1 and 2 when we already have faction in the middle, that can be split in two, with navy ships (slightly better than tech 1, as you suggested) and pirate ships (slightly better/specialized than tech 2).

Eve got T3 ships not too long ago. These have a very low barrier for entry. I want ships with a high skill barrier. Subcap ships meant for people like me, ships that can't be boarded unless you have over 100 million SP and all four races' ship/weapon skills maxed. Cost isn't really a balancing factor, but I wouldn't mind dropping a billion or two on something like that.

Introduce more pirate ships: as they are a cross-bred of two factions altogether, they could fill some of your high-end goals: for instance Blood Raiders require both Amarr and Minmatar trained. But that is two cross-racial skill requirements, not four and we don't see any faction requiring all of these for now, except maybe Concord. However, allowing players to fly Concord vessels wouldn't end well, to put it mildly. In all cases, pirate ships have a significantly higher price tag for tech 1 ships for a reason, and that would stay that way.

Have bonuses not tied with spaceship command, but that benefits existing ships somehow: here we would reward players for training something on top of spaceship command skills. Basically hulls could be sorted by role, and you could then add new generic and specialization skills that give small bonuses to strengthen such roles no matter to which race it applies. Example: you could have a generic "combat ship" skill that give you X% more HP to all EVE ships sorted in this category. We are thinking on introducing that for the ship lines, but that's a very tricky move, as having new skills on such a fashion would still widen the gap between new and veteran players, while possibly unbalancing hulls further or killing fitting creativity if we done incorrectly.

I'm not a fan of this, despite it having been pitched in the Tiericide dev blog. My core objection is that I can immediately start training these skills while a new player is still trying to get cruiser 5 or HAC 5 or BC 5 or CS 5. This temporarily increases my SP advantage.... but at least it has the benefit of being only temporary. Still, its confusion I'd rather avoid - the current system works fine without these special skills. I just don't think that older players need bigger advantages because of higher SP. :(

Also, I don't think this would give any particular reason for the OP to cross train. I guess we're stuck with awesome new ships!

-Liang

Ytterbium: Their purpose would be to reward players who have spent years with Eve Online, and have the skillpoints to show it.

I have close to 130 million SP. In my corp, that isn't much - we have guys with 150, even a guy close to 170. We haven't felt that there were ships specifically for us FOR AGES. Titans and supercarriers do NOT interest us (except for stealing them). They aren't for us. They're awkward sluggish bricks meant to serve in alliance warfare.

The last ships I felt good about flying were the Crusader (when it came out) and the Zealot (when it came out) - why? Because when they were released, they were cutting edge. People didn't know how to counter them, they were a new power. They required lots of training to get into. These are the kind of ships I would like to see added to Eve, for us veteran badasses that ran out of skills to train ages ago.

Eve got T3 ships not too long ago. These have a very low barrier for entry. I want ships with a high skill barrier. Subcap ships meant for people like me, ships that can't be boarded unless you have over 100 million SP and all four races' ship/weapon skills maxed. Cost isn't really a balancing factor, but I wouldn't mind dropping a billion or two on something like that.