EVE Search - Lose your modular ship, you lose SP...

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Lose your modular ship, you lose SP...

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Gemmell Spark. Ignition.	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:33:00 - [1] Lame :<
Rawrior Gallente Neo Spartans	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:35:00 - [2] c
Shirley Serious Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:35:00 - [3] wut?
Abrazzar	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:36:00 - [4] You get into a T3 ship and you gain SP. It's like having a ship with hardwiring if I interpreted that correctly.
kublai Endemic Aggression	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:36:00 - [5] Well that just took away all the point in having t3 ships.
Lord Matrix Volition Cult The Volition Cult	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:36:00 - [6] Indeed, losing a T3 ship will cause you to lose skills. Like paying 1B ISK for it won't be enough. Lame functionality tbh.
Bumle Tog	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:36:00 - [7] Sigh, fail... So they expect us to be practically podded without updated clone each time we loose a tech 3 ship.
Jhagiti Tyran Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:41:00 - [8] Please this must be a troll? High sec carebears can use these ships at zero risk and get the benefits yet pvpers face the risk of SP penalisation as well as the cost of the ship loss?
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:44:00 - [9] source?
Tatiana Corbescu	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:45:00 - [10] Im curious as to where the skill points/tech three ships info is coming from?

Eran Laude Gallente The Aduro Protocol	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:45:00 - [11] CCP clarification please? As much as I want to hop in a cloaking, scanning, heavily armed cruiser o' doom I don't want to lose SP when it goes kaboom, short of "them" getting my pod, too.
Missile Barrage	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:45:00 - [12] tomato?
Bumle Tog	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:46:00 - [13] Originally by: Bellum Eternus source? The Dev on EveTV.
Caiman Graystock Caldari	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:46:00 - [14] Do you actually lose SP or just the improved speed of learning them?
Tippia Raddick Explorations BlackWater.	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:47:00 - [15] Originally by: Jhagiti Tyran Please this must be a troll? High sec carebears can use these ships at zero risk and get the benefits yet pvpers face the risk of SP penalisation as well as the cost of the ship loss? …on the other hand, that would mean that you can now hurt those carebears on a whole new level. Nuke their ship, and nuke their SP in a single blow without the need to trick them into not renewing their clones.
Karrade Krise Galatic P0RN Starz	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:48:00 - [16] Edited by: Karrade Krise on 07/02/2009 18:50:38
Bumle Tog	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:49:00 - [17] Just Skills for the specific ship.
Bumle Tog	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:49:00 - [18] Just Skills for the specific ship.
Finnroth Caldari The Guardian Agency Guardian Federation	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:50:00 - [19] This sounds like an epic fail. Can some give a quote from said dev? Somehow i cannot get myself to believe this to be true. Thats for both, potential faster learning (?!) and potential loss of SP just from flying a freaking ship that explodes.
Takeshi Yamato	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:50:00 - [20] Edited by: Takeshi Yamato on 07/02/2009 18:51:02 Quote: Just Skills for the specific ship. It's still skillpoints. and yea this is lame. don't think i'll fly t3 ships in pvp till this changes.

Khanis Zyl	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:52:00 - [21] Originally by: Takeshi Yamato Edited by: Takeshi Yamato on 07/02/2009 18:51:02 Quote: Just Skills for the specific ship. It's still skillpoints. and yea this is lame. don't think i'll fly t3 ships in pvp till this changes. This... or they better be next to Godliness.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:53:00 - [22] Originally by: Takeshi Yamato Edited by: Takeshi Yamato on 07/02/2009 18:51:02 Quote: Just Skills for the specific ship. It's still skillpoints. and yea this is lame. don't think i'll fly t3 ships in pvp till this changes. This is a blessing for people who complained about ship losses not mattering anymore. Weaklings need not apply. On the positive side, this could allow T3 ship skills to be rank 1 and they don't have to pre-nerf them.
Shevar Minmatar Target Practice incorporated	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:53:00 - [23] From the extra explanation you need to train subsystem skills and you loose them if the ship is destroyed. So simply said you will loose training time when getting podded so they are pretty pointless for PvP and they aren't battleships so they aren't useful for a pimp high sec level4 missions since they are cruiser siz
Odyessus	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:54:00 - [24] CCP, can you please confirm or deny this rumour please? if its been said on EVETV, then it deserves to be spoken on these forums. ta, ody
Winters Chill Amarr Ministry of War	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:55:00 - [25] Thats really the lamest thing I have ever heard.
Toramii Gallente Le Moulin Rouge	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:56:00 - [26] Edited by: Toramii on 07/02/2009 18:56:55 Source EVE TV: CCP Chronitis - You will lose one level of the related 'racial' subsystem skill required to fly that T3 ship if its destroyed.
Susan Kennedy Gallente Eddie Murphy Appreciation Society Chubby Chuppers Chubba Chups	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:56:00 - [27] Edited by: Susan Kennedy on 07/02/2009 18:57:25 If you cant afford to lose it.. dont fly it This applies to sp as well as isk I laugh to see all the LEET PVPERS wetting their pants at the thought of losing skill points. Get vack to highsec and start grinding out the LV4s. Proof positive that leet pvpers are nothing more then carebears in disqguise. Bring it on! Real men pvp in T3 KENNEDY
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:57:00 - [28] I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic
Finnroth Caldari The Guardian Agency Guardian Federation	Posted - 2009.02.07 18:59:00 - [29] Edited by: Finnroth on 07/02/2009 18:59:03 Originally by: Susan Kennedy Edited by: Susan Kennedy on 07/02/2009 18:57:25 If you cant afford to lose it.. dont fly it This applies to sp as well as isk I laugh to see all the LEET PVPERS wetting their pants at the thought of losing skill points. Get vack to highsec and start grinding out the LV4s. Proof positive that leet pvpers are nothing more then carebears in disqguise. Bring it on! Real men pvp in T3 KENNEDY Yeah you're soooo l33t training for your destroyed ships a few weeks after each destruction.
Revan Starstrider	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:00:00 - [30] Originally by: Sheriff Jones I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic Considering pvp ships go pop alot more often than ships flown in pve, I'd say we have a good argument.

Yakia TovilToba Halliburton Inc.	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:01:00 - [31] Originally by: Jhagiti Tyran Please this must be a troll? High sec carebears can use these ships at zero risk and get the benefits yet pvpers face the risk of SP penalisation as well as the cost of the ship loss? Why are you taht surprised ? Hisec bears already gain a huge advantage in terms of skillgain by using +5 clones, which can make up a few hours a day compared to no or +2 clones.
Kalith Steiner	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:01:00 - [32] Let us learn those T3 skills parallel or let the ship learn itself after our definition. And if it's gone it's gone. But training one skill over and over again to IV, V or whatever, letting us not learn other skills if we need/want that skill and making us sort of stuck between what we want out of a GAME and what eve advances into just su***.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:02:00 - [33] We need details, so we can see, if the risk is worth the reward. The skill sink better be balanced with some pretty awesome ships.
Jhagiti Tyran Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:02:00 - [34] Originally by: Susan Kennedy Edited by: Susan Kennedy on 07/02/2009 18:57:25 If you cant afford to lose it.. dont fly it This applies to sp as well as isk I laugh to see all the LEET PVPERS wetting their pants at the thought of losing skill points. Get vack to highsec and start grinding out the LV4s. Proof positive that leet pvpers are nothing more then carebears in disqguise. Bring it on! Real men pvp in T3 KENNEDY Your missing the point entirely, by and large people wont use them to pvp in except for extremely low risk situations and yet another content addition is pre nerfed into a limited niche for no good reason.
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:07:00 - [35] Yes, this mechanic is unspeakably lame, and smacks of poorly-concealed contempt for the player base on CCP's part. Zip on over to the Assembly Hall and support my thread if you'd like to show CCP we don't want this.
Pattern Clarc	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:09:00 - [36] Originally by: Kalith Steiner Let us learn those T3 skills parallel or let the ship learn itself after our definition. And if it's gone it's gone. But training one skill over and over again to IV, V or whatever, letting us not learn other skills if we need/want that skill and making us sort of stuck between what we want out of a GAME and what eve advances into just su***. That's a good point you raise there dear sir.
ElCoCo KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:11:00 - [37] Need more details as to how this will work before we start shouting.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:12:00 - [38] Originally by: Revan Starstrider Originally by: Sheriff Jones I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic Considering pvp ships go pop alot more often than ships flown in pve, I'd say we have a good argument. Still, you can't deny the irony
Erica 'cowpig'Lafehr	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:17:00 - [39] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Revan Starstrider Originally by: Sheriff Jones I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic Considering pvp ships go pop alot more often than ships flown in pve, I'd say we have a good argument. Still, you can't deny the irony /This. The irony is so thick it can be cut with a knife. I appreciate that I am not the only one to notice that the biggest whiners in the game are the 'leet' pvp'ers. Like a bunch of old ladies to be exact. STFU and play the game
Shevar Minmatar Target Practice incorporated	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:18:00 - [40] Originally by: ElCoCo Need more details as to how this will work before we start shouting. No we don't. This is the internetz where we can whine about anything and everything without any form of substance.

Revan Starstrider	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:19:00 - [41] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Revan Starstrider Originally by: Sheriff Jones I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic Considering pvp ships go pop alot more often than ships flown in pve, I'd say we have a good argument. Still, you can't deny the irony It isnt ironic; I am all for risk v. reward, but Khanis said in the post above, these ships better be next to Godly for us to take the risk to use them.
KISOGOKU	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:20:00 - [42] Please ,why any acrebear will use crappy cruiser hulls ?I dont see any reason for a carebear to use them ,they will be expensive and im sure CCP will add huge skill req to use one .Only option if they dont need racial cruiser lvl 5 some ppl use them Originally by: Jhagiti Tyran Please this must be a troll? High sec carebears can use these ships at zero risk and get the benefits yet pvpers face the risk of SP penalisation as well as the cost of the ship loss?
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:23:00 - [43] Originally by: Revan Starstrider It isnt ironic; I am all for risk v. reward, but Khanis said in the post above, these ships better be next to Godly for us to take the risk to use them. Actually, the risk vs reward is messed up already. The balance isn't there. So, this is another risk vs reward thing, added to the pile, yet, because it's "shiny" and something people want to use in PVP, the risk suddenly becomes a "problem". I don't mind gripes about stuff, it's the hypocrisy of it all that does my head in.
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:24:00 - [44] Congrats, CCP, you've pre-nerfed more ships into uselessness! (Black ops/marauders, anyone?)
Zey Nadar Gallente Heavily Utilized Mechanic Mayhem Einherjar Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:24:00 - [45] Originally by: Winters Chill Thats really the lamest thing I have ever heard.
Dan Grobag Caldari French Empire Squad	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:26:00 - [46] Maybe they have an exotic type of damage that go through any resistance making T2 weak. But that's totaly random speculation.
Karlemgne Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:26:00 - [47] Originally by: Lord Matrix Indeed, losing a T3 ship will cause you to lose skills. Like paying 1B ISK for it won't be enough. Lame functionality tbh. /signed
Karlemgne Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:29:00 - [48] Originally by: Erica 'cowpig'Lafehr Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Revan Starstrider Originally by: Sheriff Jones I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic Considering pvp ships go pop alot more often than ships flown in pve, I'd say we have a good argument. Still, you can't deny the irony /This. The irony is so thick it can be cut with a knife. I appreciate that I am not the only one to notice that the biggest whiners in the game are the 'leet' pvp'ers. Like a bunch of old ladies to be exact. STFU and play the game Because we are talking about the potential functionality of ship that isn't in game yet, and what have here is complete conjecture, I don't think you can argue that the "biggest whiners" are pvpers. So far the conversation seems calm, and collected. Which is a lot more than I can say for the "pve" types who threaten to rage quit because they got suicide ganked autopiloting through hi-sec. -Karlemgne
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:31:00 - [49] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Revan Starstrider Originally by: Sheriff Jones I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic Considering pvp ships go pop alot more often than ships flown in pve, I'd say we have a good argument. Still, you can't deny the irony You think its ironic that pvp'ers take all the risk and pve players get all the reward?
Honeyz	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:33:00 - [50] Can someone please post a link to EVETV? I can't find the website you guys are referring to. Cheers

Aravel Thon	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:35:00 - [51] I didn't actually watch the dev response but I just want to make sure I'm not confused. I heard earlier that t3 ships would gain in effectiveness the more you use it (akin to skills) but they were not tied into skill books themselves but the ship itself, and that when that ship exploded and you remade a ship just like it, it would start from 0 effectiveness. The actual skill required to fly the t3 ship though would be untouched. Or am i reading this wrong
Sniper Wolf18 Gallente A Pretty Pony Princess	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:38:00 - [52] tbfh there will be no point in even risking W-space if the only rewards are t3 and nothing else if this is true. Face it, would you risk your ship/clone/implants for the items to build a ship that no-one even wants due to it being disgustingly pre-nerfed?
Genya Arikaido	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:38:00 - [53] Link to source or GTFO.
Winters Chill Amarr Ministry of War	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:40:00 - [54] Edited by: Winters Chill on 07/02/2009 19:40:19 can't link it as its a "live" stream. the link is in a General Discussion Thread, thats Im too lazy too link.

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:43:00 - [55] Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocryha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it.

Winters Chill Amarr Ministry of War	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:46:00 - [56] Nice one thank you
Genya Arikaido	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:48:00 - [57] Chronotis: If the use or loss of ANYTHING in EVE causes the loss of SP, you're going to find very VERY little demand and use of said things. I don't care how cool the ships might be, if getting blown up in it loses me SP; I'm not building them, I'm not selling them, and I'll be damned if I fly them.
Lorzion Minmatar IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:48:00 - [58] anyone ever notice how Nozh's dev blogs always contain bad news (speed nerf, this, etc).
Coltach SlingDraw Corp	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:54:00 - [59] Originally by: Genya Arikaido Chronotis: If the use or loss of ANYTHING in EVE causes the loss of SP, you're going to find very VERY little demand and use of said things. I don't care how cool the ships might be, if getting blown up in it loses me SP; I'm not building them, I'm not selling them, and I'll be damned if I fly them. THAT. I can only add that what did you even expect? if its flown in pvp it WILL be killed sooner or later, from ibis to titan. Time spent grinding for new ships, time spent gathering mods, time spent getting back into battle, there are ENOUGH timesinks. Please do not add to them
Ankhesentapemkah	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:55:00 - [60] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocryha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Do I actually need to test that or can I tell you what I think of this kind of game design right now? --- NEW MOVIE!

Gemmell Spark. Ignition.	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:56:00 - [61] I don't how you dress it up Chronotis, you can even cover it in chocolate, it's still lame.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.07 19:58:00 - [62] How to ensure that this skillpoint loss mechanic gets nerfed to hell or removed: gank tons of T3 flying carebears in high sec until they whine to CCP about all their lost skillpoints. I for one will be ready and waiting with suicide gank ships in high sec to pop the first T3 ship I see, if for no other reason than to erase the pilots skillpoints. Even if it takes a few BS to down one in high sec, it'll be worth it just for the nerd rage. I don't see a T3 cruiser sized ship surviving 4-5 T2 fit gank Geddons.
Pattern Clarc	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:00:00 - [63] Edited by: Pattern Clarc on 07/02/2009 20:03:45 Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocryha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. I can pretty much tell you now that baring t3 ships been as powerful as polaris or jove. Actual SP loss, as opposed to something that could be trained/learnt along side normal skills will be extremely unpopular -
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:03:00 - [64] Haha. Whenever somebody sees a t3 ship it will be wtfpwntbubbledfubared!
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:04:00 - [65] If losing sp for the t3 skill on losing the ship is the case then all characters on sisi will need to have the t3 skills spawned at a usable level in the character sheet so we can get a proper test of its effects.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:06:00 - [66] I think what we'll see is something whereby T3 ships have their own skill paths. Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. C.
Disteeler Segunda Fundacion Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:08:00 - [67] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocryha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. "Soon" is a overused word those days. It doesen't generate any hype, in fact the contrary
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:10:00 - [68] Originally by: Cailais I think what we'll see is something whereby T3 ships have their own skill paths. Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. C. I hope they keep it. It'll really separate the best players from everyone else. If you're good you'll fly T3 and only lose SP once in a while. If you suck, you're going to be either flying something other than T3, or you're going to be losing SP all over the place. Either way it's a win for elite PVPers with super high kill/death ratios. Plus the fact that you can kill carebear T3 pilots in high sec. It'll be great. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Grarr Dexx Amarr Divinity's Edge	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:11:00 - [69] CCP's Pre-nerfism (tm)
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:11:00 - [70] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Cailais I think what we'll see is something whereby T3 ships have their own skill paths. Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. C. I hope they keep it. It'll really separate the best players from everyone else. If you're good you'll fly T3 and only lose SP once in a while. If you suck, you're going to be either flying something other than T3, or you're going to be losing SP all over the place. Either way it's a win for elite PVPers with super high kill/death ratios. Plus the fact that you can kill carebear T3 pilots in high sec. It'll be great. Oh look, it's a PvP snob who thinks it's a good idea to make the game easier for people that win. Let's mock him.

Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:13:00 - [71] Originally by: Zurin Arctus Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Cailais I think what we'll see is something whereby T3 ships have their own skill paths. Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. C. I hope they keep it. It'll really separate the best players from everyone else. If you're good you'll fly T3 and only lose SP once in a while. If you suck, you're going to be either flying something other than T3, or you're going to be losing SP all over the place. Either way it's a win for elite PVPers with super high kill/death ratios. Plus the fact that you can kill carebear T3 pilots in high sec. It'll be great. Oh look, it's a PvP snob who thinks it's a good idea to make the game easier for people that win. Let's mock him. Make the game easier for people that win? WTF are you talking about? Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:13:00 - [72] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocryha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Unless Nozh announces that CCP is scraping this bad idea, I hope he is prepared to be known as the dude stupider than Zulupark. Because that is exactly what is going to happen if people have to choose between training for any of the skills currently in game, and training T3 skills that they will lose if their ship gets blown up. T3 is going to be a abysmal failure if flying T3 becomes a choice between character advancement and character stagnation or r.etardation. People play MMOs to make their characters better. Introducing a gameplay mechanic that does the exact opposite of that is not going to be a popular mechanic.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:14:00 - [73] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Cailais I think what we'll see is something whereby T3 ships have their own skill paths. Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. C. I hope they keep it. It'll really separate the best players from everyone else. If you're good you'll fly T3 and only lose SP once in a while. If you suck, you're going to be either flying something other than T3, or you're going to be losing SP all over the place. Either way it's a win for elite PVPers with super high kill/death ratios. Plus the fact that you can kill carebear T3 pilots in high sec. It'll be great. Bang on. Everyone moans about how "carebeary" is has become, now we'll see the true metal of those supposedly 'harden'd pvpers'. Cant wait to see the details behind this and the forum cry babies exposed. I think I'll make a list. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:16:00 - [74] Originally by: Cailais I think what we'll see is something whereby T3 ships have their own skill paths. Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. Well it is a problem, since it seems all the rewards of wormspace is tied to T3 production. With this there will be very little demand, so little production and the reward of wormspace isn't worth it isk wise. Wormspace had so much potential for other than just hardcore PvP crowd, that something like this would pretty much crush those hopes. T3/wormspace would go from the most wanted and exiting addition to the game in a long time to just meh/nothing to do with us. I'll go for the T3 either way, but if it heavily uses up training time, it will see little/no PvP action.
Jhagiti Tyran Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:16:00 - [75] Originally by: Cailais I think what we'll see is something whereby T3 ships have their own skill paths. Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. C. If individual ships generate their own skill path independently of the normal skill training at the risk of losing those bonuses when the ship dies that's pretty cool but it would suck if it interfered with the normal skill training progress.
Pattern Clarc	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:17:00 - [76] Originally by: Dr Ming Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocryha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Unless Nozh announces that CCP is scraping this bad idea, I hope he is prepared to be known as the dude stupider than Zulupark. Because that is exactly what is going to happen if people have to choose between training for any of the skills currently in game, and training T3 skills that they will lose if their ship gets blown up. T3 is going to be a abysmal failure if flying T3 becomes a choice between character advancement and character stagnation or r.etardation. People play MMOs to make their characters better. Introducing a gameplay mechanic that does the exact opposite of that is not going to be a popular mechanic. QFT Hitting the nail on the head with an anvil tbh. ____ My Blog Is Awesome
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:17:00 - [77] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Zurin Arctus Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Cailais I think what we'll see is something whereby T3 ships have their own skill paths. Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. C. I hope they keep it. It'll really separate the best players from everyone else. If you're good you'll fly T3 and only lose SP once in a while. If you suck, you're going to be either flying something other than T3, or you're going to be losing SP all over the place. Either way it's a win for elite PVPers with super high kill/death ratios. Plus the fact that you can kill carebear T3 pilots in high sec. It'll be great. Oh look, it's a PvP snob who thinks it's a good idea to make the game easier for people that win. Let's mock him. Make the game easier for people that win? WTF are you talking about? ...Do you read your own posts?
Ron Bacardi SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:19:00 - [78] Can't wait to fly one. Balls to the ****ing wall imo.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:20:00 - [79] Originally by: Jhagiti Tyran Originally by: Cailais I think what we'll see is something whereby T3 ships have their own skill paths. Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. C. If individual ships generate their own skill path independently of the normal skill training at the risk of losing those bonuses when the ship dies that's pretty cool but it would suck if it interfered with the normal skill training progress. At a guess Id say it probably will be independent, but even if it doesn't it adds new meaning to the term 'don't fly what you cant afford to loose'. Dont forget we havent seen the stats on these ships yet - Im guessing theyre gonna be pretty darn good with this mechanic in place, perhaps with significant bonuses as you skill up that specific skill path. Such an advantage is likely to come at a cost, and that cost is time. C.
Marlenus Caldari Ironfleet Towing And Salvage Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:20:00 - [80] Although my hopes were somewhat dashed when I learned that T3 ships are to be cruiser-only, I'm still hoping I can use the modularity to develop a specialized salvage vessel. I don't lose these very often; and if I sometimes have to train a skill from three back to four (I doubt I'd ever train to five if there's a risk of loss), well, that's the price of specialization. I can live with it.

Kesper North Caldari Epiphyte Mining and Exploration Majesta Empire	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:23:00 - [81] Well, here's my feedback: No. no, no, no and hell no. No one will fly these ships if we lose skillpoints every time we lose one. This kills T3.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:24:00 - [82] Originally by: Pattern Clarc Originally by: Dr Ming Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocryha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Unless Nozh announces that CCP is scraping this bad idea, I hope he is prepared to be known as the dude stupider than Zulupark. Because that is exactly what is going to happen if people have to choose between training for any of the skills currently in game, and training T3 skills that they will lose if their ship gets blown up. T3 is going to be a abysmal failure if flying T3 becomes a choice between character advancement and character stagnation or r.etardation. People play MMOs to make their characters better. Introducing a gameplay mechanic that does the exact opposite of that is not going to be a popular mechanic. QFT Hitting the nail on the head with an anvil tbh. Its obvious isnt it? Its 'high end content'. Trained everything? Got your ships of choice skills maxed? Ok, new T3 ships - wont take me a moment to skill those up aswell...oh..wait.. These arent ships for newbs guys. C.
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:24:00 - [83] Edited by: Grath Telkin on 07/02/2009 20:25:56 I like it, makes losing the ship mean something. Right now, you can lose a dozen BS a week and not care at all. Caps are replaced instantly. T2 is so common that NOT looting because it would short your supply of cap 800's actually happens. I hope dearly that they ignore the whines and keep it. Edit: also, look at all of you crying about loosing skill points in a skill that you A) don't have yet, B) don't know the rank of, and C) don't know how many skill points you lose when the ship goes down.
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:25:00 - [84] Edited by: Zurin Arctus on 07/02/2009 20:27:04 Quote: Its obvious isnt it? Its 'high end content'. Trained everything? Got your ships of choice skills maxed? Ok, new T3 ships - wont take me a moment to skill those up aswell...oh..wait.. These arent ships for newbs guys. C. ITT: Old players and snobs ask what's wrong with a horrible mechanic because they have 80,000,000 SP's and expect everyone else to. I like how the station-huggers are all for this idea, though.
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:27:00 - [85] Originally by: Zurin Arctus ITT: Old players and snobs ask what's wrong with a horrible mechanic because they have 80,000,000 SP's and expect everyone else to. Or not so old players thinking you look ****ed for ***ing about something you haven't seen yet
Dr Fighter	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:27:00 - [86] just because you can, does not make it a good idea. CCP do not bone the vets AGAIN with a beyond-pre-nerfed ship class. you bunch of clucking morehens.
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:27:00 - [87] Originally by: Bellum Eternus I hope they keep it. It'll really separate the best players from everyone else. If you're good you'll fly T3 and only lose SP once in a while. If you suck, you're going to be either flying something other than T3, or you're going to be losing SP all over the place. Either way it's a win for elite PVPers with super high kill/death ratios. Plus the fact that you can kill carebear T3 pilots in high sec. It'll be great. And then you have some lag, get blown up, lose SP, and go back to training T2 skills because you finally realize this isn't a game of D&D where the DM is making you into a special little snowflake who gets to be the star of the show and nothing unfair or random happens to you.
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:28:00 - [88] Edited by: Zurin Arctus on 07/02/2009 20:29:27 Originally by: Grath Telkin Originally by: Zurin Arctus ITT: Old players and snobs ask what's wrong with a horrible mechanic because they have 80,000,000 SP's and expect everyone else to. Or not so old players thinking you look ****ed for *ing about something you haven't seen yet I haven't seen a man ride a bicycle off a skysc**r yet, either. Does that mean it's not a bad idea? EDIT: lol at CCP's horrible filtering. BEWARE THE SKYSCRAPIST!
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:30:00 - [89] Originally by: Zurin Arctus Or not so old players thinking you look ****ed for *ing about something you haven't seen yet I haven't seen a man ride a bicycle off a skyscr yet, either. Does that mean it's not a bad idea? Thats a horrible analogy, but i'll take the bait. Is he a base jumper? Is this his first time? What kind of bike? What size sky sc**r? See what I'm doing? Its called holding my opinion till I have more facts.
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:31:00 - [90] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Apocryha arrives on sisi next week can i haz you forum drones the hit me for CCP love + 5

Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:32:00 - [91] Originally by: Zurin Arctus Quote: Its obvious isnt it? Its 'high end content'. Trained everything? Got your ships of choice skills maxed? Ok, new T3 ships - wont take me a moment to skill those up aswell...oh..wait.. These arent ships for newbs guys. C. ITT: Old players and snobs ask what's wrong with a horrible mechanic because they have 80,000,000 SP's and expect everyone else to. Well I dont have anywhere close to 80000000 SPs. If you're going to be a T3 pilot you're clearly going to have to invest time in staying in one - rather than just ISK as you do currently and which of course some players are frankly rolling in. What's the risk in loosing a T2 cruiser if you've got 50bil in the bank?? Nothing. This mechanic means loosing your ship has ramifications beyond your wallet. Remember there are thousands of versions of these ships. Now, trying to train up to fly all those varieties would take an eternity (with me so far?) - so, why not have the skill up speed pretty quick (so folks get a chance to fly a whole different batch of ships), ah - a problem to little skill training time for that class of ship. Answer - make the skills vulnerable. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
keepiru Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:32:00 - [92] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocryha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Do I actually need to test that or can I tell you what I think of this kind of game design right now? ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:32:00 - [93] Edited by: Zurin Arctus on 07/02/2009 20:36:40 Edited by: Zurin Arctus on 07/02/2009 20:32:55 See what I'm doing? Its called holding my opinion till I have more facts. No, what you're doing is called ignoring the facts because you don't care how very wrong you are. You're welcome to be wrong, just don't be so pushy about it. Quote: Do I actually need to test that or can I tell you what I think of this kind of game design right now? ugh /agree Quote: Well I dont have anywhere close to 80000000 SPs. If you're going to be a T3 pilot you're clearly going to have to invest time in staying in one - rather than (Blah, blah, blah...) This issue really is very simple. People want to be free to train the skills they want. People don't want to have to revisit skills at the cost of valuable training time just because they lost a ship.
Shirley Serious Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:36:00 - [94] hmm, increased risk when flying these things. People like to reduce risk. If it's implemented badly, then they become blob weapons, only ever used when its overwhelming odds. doesn't immediately seem a good thing for small scale conflicts. Need more details. Yes. Yes, I am.
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:38:00 - [95] I think it's a great idea too. As already said, T3 is for high end characters. It doesn't look like they are intending for their abilities to be farmed by rich pvp organisations who turn them into a new flavour of the month by only building and handing out t3 ships too all their players. More something special that you only see now and then, like Titans were originally supposed to be. It would be a nice thing to see problems in the game you can't just solve by throwing isk at them. And if you're one of the high end characters that stubbornly decided to keep taking them out and keep losing your skillpoints from them... oh look, the playing field for the 1 million skillpoint noobs who are still training tech 1 just looked a little more even. My only concern is that due to the nature of the average eve player, the few fair fights that still exist will go out the window as everyone ganks everyone 15v1 etc..., not wanting to lose their skillpoints, and that would be horrible, highsec and lowsec would be like nullsec.
Xavier Zedicus Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:38:00 - [96] OR does the ship learn and when it is destroyed so is the ships experience????
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:39:00 - [97] Originally by: Zurin Arctus Edited by: Zurin Arctus on 07/02/2009 20:32:55 See what I'm doing? Its called holding my opinion till I have more facts. No, what you're doing is called ignoring the facts because you don't care how very wrong you are. You're welcome to be wrong, just don't be so pushy about it. Quote: Do I actually need to test that or can I tell you what I think of this kind of game design right now? ugh /agree Whats wrong about it? You gave me a very limited amount of information and asked if what you told me was a good idea. Frankly, you didn't give me enough info to tell if it was a bad idea or not. MUCH LIKE WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT T3 SHIPS. If you had been more specific, I could give you a better answer, MUCH LIKE T3 SHIPS, but to tell you "yes, thats a dumb idea" would be a potential failure on my part, as the man could ride the bike off the building and pop a shute, he could ditch the bike and be wearing a glide suit. Any of those things could make me wrong. Those are just a few variables stoping me from forming an opinion on your question, whereas, with t3 ships the variables are CONSIDERABLY higher. How long do the skills take to train? How hard are they to get? How much are the ships? Are they even viable for PVP for me to even care? How many skill points do i actually lose upon the ships destruction (arguably, if your done training for other things, how much would this really hurt you if you only lost a few thousand sp) How easy are the ships to build and procure (if its a pain, why deviate from my amarr specialty that I've been flying for 2 years now). YOU can be as wrong as you want, its your right, but don't be blindly ignorant about it.
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:41:00 - [98] Originally by: 5pinDizzy I think it's a great idea too. As already said, T3 is for high end characters. It doesn't look like they are intending for their abilities to be farmed by rich pvp organisations who turn them into a new flavour of the month by only building and handing out t3 ships too all their players. More something special that you only see now and then, like Titans were originally supposed to be. It would be a nice thing to see problems in the game you can't just solve by throwing isk at them. And if you're one of the high end characters that stubbornly decided to keep taking them out and keep losing your skillpoints from them... oh look, the playing field for the 1 million skillpoint noobs who are still training tech 1 just looked a little more even. My only concern is that due to the nature of the average eve player, the few fair fights that still exist will go out the window as everyone ganks everyone 15v1 etc..., not wanting to lose their skillpoints, and that would be horrible, highsec and lowsec would be like nullsec. 1. Consider posting on your main so you don't look like a sockpuppet ;) 2. Notice that section I set in bold there? Yes? That's where you defeated your own argument. But just to add a few nails to the coffin, the kind of extreme risk-aversive behavior this mechanic would add to eve is something I don't think we want.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:44:00 - [99] Originally by: Zurin Arctus This issue really is very simple. People want to be free to train the skills they want. People don't want to have to revisit skills at the cost of valuable training time just because they lost a ship. Nobodies forcing you to fly T3. Think about this for a second: You want to implement T3, you want the ships to be good - possibly better than T2. How do you stop T3 making T2 redundant, T1 total trash whilst not making T3 so prohibitively expensive that only the mega billionaires can afford to fly them? At some stage you've got to neuter the demand - otherwise either prices will skyrocket or, if theyre as cheap and as available as T2 then T2 will just be worthless (or close to it). C.
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:45:00 - [100] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocrypha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Do I actually need to test that or can I tell you what I think of this kind of game design right now? How the hell were you planning on testing this? Were you planning to not get blown up on the test server?

Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:48:00 - [101] Quote: If you had been more specific, I could give you a better answer, MUCH LIKE T3 SHIPS, but to tell you "yes, thats a dumb idea" would be a potential failure on my part, as the man could ride the bike off the building and pop a shute, he could ditch the bike and be wearing a glide suit. Any of those things could make me wrong. I'm sorry Grath. I missed most of what you said there. I'm still laughing too hard from when you implied the kind of bike/skyscr@per would make it less of a bad idea. As for the base jumping thing you added when you realized you weren't making sense, let's stop playing word games, shall we? It's a bad idea in principle, and I don't need to know anything more about TK3 to say so.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:48:00 - [102] Anything that goes against the ship -> pod -> medical clone and SP gain only depending on attributes -> BAD. Being in a ship for a long time should NOT give you an edge over other people who just bought the ship that have the same total SP distributed in a similar way, and limiting some skill (or skill-equivalent) learning to being "physically" somewhere is silly. You can scrap the whole thing already, you don't even need to get our feedback "after we tested it".
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:49:00 - [103] Originally by: Dr Ming Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocrypha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Do I actually need to test that or can I tell you what I think of this kind of game design right now? How the hell were you planning on testing this? Were you planning to not get blown up on the test server? You're assuming the skill training time equates to T2 and T1 skill training times. My guess is it wont -they'll be much much shorter. C.
Balsak Minmatar Es and Whizz	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:50:00 - [104] Ok maybe i'm the one misinterpreting things here. The way I am understanding this so far is that the skill you lose when you lose a tech 3 ship is a skill that's tied directly yo the ship and not your character like other skills. Also the longer you have the ship the more that skill goes up but once the ship goes boom then that particular skill is gone and its replaced when you get into a new tech 3 ship. I don't get how people are making it out to be like you just got pod killed without an up to date clone and you lose a level on every skill. CCP aren't complete and total ****s like some of you people make them out to be. Seems to me like a lot of little whiny cry baby *es that just love to have a temper tantrum on the forums and rage at CCP. Please just go rage on your parents and let them beat you a little while, might do you some good. Seriously people, wait and see how this comes out when the expansion is released. Until then STFU and quit ***ing about something you don't even know how is gonna work yet. Now just in case these ships do come in with the OMGSKYISFALLING skill loss you DON'T have to fly them at all. They will not be overpowered pwnmobiles and they will go pop just like any other ship in the game with some thought. I may be reading this all wrong but then again I have only been around since beta and I kind of have an idea of what CCPs thinking is behind everything they do.
Nyphur Pillowsoft	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:52:00 - [105] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocrypha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Losing SP when you lose the ship is the stupidest thing I've ever heard, ahhahahaha.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:52:00 - [106] Originally by: Cailais You're assuming the skill training time equates to T2 and T1 skill training times. My guess is it wont -they'll be much much shorter. So what would be the point ? Sit in a ship for a couple of hours, be maxed-out ? Or would you actually have to "do something" to gain "subsystem SP" ? Didn't CCP devs already get the idea about why linking activity with skill gains is bad ? Thumbs down, no matter how they try to implement it. It just can't work in a "proper" EVE way.
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:52:00 - [107] Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Dr Ming Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocrypha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Do I actually need to test that or can I tell you what I think of this kind of game design right now? How the hell were you planning on testing this? Were you planning to not get blown up on the test server? You're assuming the skill training time equates to T2 and T1 skill training times. My guess is it wont -they'll be much much shorter. C. I'm assuming that the training times will be long enough to matter, because having training times that don't matter would be better implemented by just not having the training times at all.
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:53:00 - [108] Originally by: Zurin Arctus Quote: If you had been more specific, I could give you a better answer, MUCH LIKE T3 SHIPS, but to tell you "yes, thats a dumb idea" would be a potential failure on my part, as the man could ride the bike off the building and pop a shute, he could ditch the bike and be wearing a glide suit. Any of those things could make me wrong. I'm sorry Grath. I missed most of what you said there. I'm still laughing too hard from when you implied the kind of bike/skyscr@per would make it less of a bad idea. As for the base jumping thing you added when you realized you weren't making sense, let's stop playing word games, shall we? It's a bad idea in principle, and I don't need to know anything more about TK3 to say so. so basically you can sit and call me wrong, and tell me not to be pushy, while at the same time being a close minded redneck yourself. interesting. you also missed the point i was making, which you are obviously avoiding: Your spouting off like you know everything, when in fact you have very little knowledge about the ships. its like saying you don't like oysters even though you've never tried them simply because they look nasty in all the pictures you've seen.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:53:00 - [109] Originally by: Akita T Anything that goes against the ship -> pod -> medical clone and SP gain only depending on attributes -> BAD. Being in a ship for a long time should NOT give you an edge over other people who just bought the ship that have the same total SP distributed in a similar way, and limiting some skill (or skill-equivalent) learning to being "physically" somewhere is silly. You can scrap the whole thing already, you don't even need to get our feedback "after we tested it". Why shouldnt it give you an edge? Having more ISK gives you an edge (implants, ability to replace ships quickly, better fittings), having more time in game overall gives you an edge (possibly higher skills, greater breadth of ship and modular options). What specifically is wrong with this mechanic over say an IS advantage? C.
Karl Luckner	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:55:00 - [110] Well, I like the idea. Keeps those things rare. If the ship itself "learns" and get's better by using it, loosing said "SP" only makes sense.

Juwi Kotch Gallente VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:55:00 - [111] As long as those T3 ships are not something close to undestroyable (meaning at least like a Titan), no one will fly them, and those ships will end up as a weird curiosity in the history of EVE. Just like the Dev who was responsible for this idea. Or are those ships not meant to be flown at all, but to add to the collections of ship collectors? Juwi Kotch
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:58:00 - [112] Quote: so basically you can sit and call me wrong, and tell me not to be pushy, while at the same time being a close minded redneck yourself. interesting. you also missed the point i was making, which you are obviously avoiding: Your spouting off like you know everything, when in fact you have very little knowledge about the ships. its like saying you don't like oysters even though you've never tried them simply because they look nasty in all the pictures you've seen. You know, I'm not going to dignify you with another reply. You can come up with vacuous replies to my posts all day long, and I only have so much time to waste. So instead, I'll leave you with a good quote from another poster: Quote: Do I actually need to test that or can I tell you what I think of this kind of game design right now?
Atlas Oracle Minmatar Colossus Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:58:00 - [113] this is pretty hilarious i can't figure out which is more hilarious: 1) the stupidity of sp loss 2) the "adapt or die" hardcore "we just want a fair fight (not really)" pvp'ers crying about it lawl
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:58:00 - [114] Originally by: Juwi Kotch As long as those T3 ships are not something close to undestroyable (meaning at least like a Titan), no one will fly them, and those ships will end up as a weird curiosity in the history of EVE. Juwi Kotch Thats actually wrong, I'm betting theres more than a few of us waiting to get into them, to see how they handle in a fight.
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:59:00 - [115] Originally by: Zurin Arctus Yes Im a close minded redneck Thought so
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 20:59:00 - [116] Originally by: Cailais Why shouldnt it give you an edge? Because it's not "EVE style". It totally clashes with the way EVE's skill system was set up until now. And no, change just for the sake of change is not a good idea. _ Create a character \|\| Fit a ship \|\| Get some ISK
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:00:00 - [117] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Cailais You're assuming the skill training time equates to T2 and T1 skill training times. My guess is it wont -they'll be much much shorter. So what would be the point ? Sit in a ship for a couple of hours, be maxed-out ? Or would you actually have to "do something" to gain "subsystem SP" ? Didn't CCP devs already get the idea about why linking activity with skill gains is bad ? Thumbs down, no matter how they try to implement it. It just can't work in a "proper" EVE way. Depends on if it scales. For example you'll have rank 1 skills that effect attribute A, and rank 2 skills that effect attribute A, rank 3 skills - and so on and so forth. At some stage you have to decide if you're going to use that T3 ship. You surprise me, I didnt realise you were quite so risk averse. One of the reasons I believe some folks are whining so hard is that theyre now gripped by a real fear that their previous ISK advantage (a risk buffer) could be wiped out. Sure its harsh, cruel and unforgiving - but that's "proper eve". C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Caiman Graystock Caldari	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:00:00 - [118] If these skills that the ship learns run ALONG SIDE normal skills, then I don't care about losing the points associated with the ship and I think it is a genius mechanic and something we've missed for a while, to make people take more care of their ships when they use them. But if we have to train these skills at the cost of other skills and then risk losing SP... no thanks, no one will fly T3.
Ordais	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:02:00 - [119] Edited by: Ordais on 07/02/2009 21:06:05 man, CCP has a talent to find ways that ppl DONT USE the new things they implement. Well, i suppose T2 will remain standard. EDIT: its not that i have a problem losing skills, i lived with it when i played M59 (you lost all your stuff + skills when dieng in PvP). But i could grind it back. Here, i cannot.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:02:00 - [120] Originally by: Cailais At some stage you have to decide if you're going to use that T3 ship. You surprise me, I didnt realise you were quite so risk averse. Actually, quite the opposite. The "bears" will make the most of, if not ALL of the advantages of T3 ships (since they'll seldom lose them), while PVPers will have next to none of the advantages, because they'll probably lose them as soon as they get them (or shortly after). Don't get me wrong, I'm a "bear" myself and I love it, but I still don't think it's fair for the PVPers out there. _ Create a character \|\| Fit a ship \|\| Get some ISK

Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:04:00 - [121] Quote: One of the reasons I believe some folks are whining so hard is that theyre now gripped by a real fear that their previous ISK advantage (a risk buffer) could be wiped out. Sure its harsh, cruel and unforgiving - but that's "proper eve". C. Ha. Because being ridiculously expensive doesn't wipe out/reduce an isk advantage. No sir.
Oasio	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:05:00 - [122] Edited by: Oasio on 07/02/2009 21:07:09 We need more details, but i think it can be a good thing. If we have many subsystems skills, of semi-low ranks, and the easy to made ships require skill level 1, and the uberest lvl 4 or 5 and you loose a level when the ship die... It make the t3 ships easy to get in, yet worth of decent stats, and quite possibly cheaper too. And harsh death penalties are part of a succesfull game, imho. Not too harsh, but a little suffering is good for the fun... And it will made a nice alternative, if t3 component are plentifull. You need a little edge? farm 8 hours a day for a week and climb in a officer/faction fitted t2 ship. or train for few days and climb in a t3 ship, knowing that loosing it will imply training again ... For the casual player who don't have huge vault of isk, but who do not care if his char is 2 million xp less than it could have been theorically, it could well be a very worthy choice. oasio
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:06:00 - [123] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Cailais Why shouldnt it give you an edge? Because it's not "EVE style". It totally clashes with the way EVE's skill system was set up until now. And no, change just for the sake of change is not a good idea. Looks like EVE is evolving then, you'll just have to adapt to that. But arguing against a mechanics because its not 'EVE's style' just doesn't cut it imho. Either give some proper reasoned argument against why someone shouldnt get a sliver of an advantage because they've specced in a ship and who could loose that advantage if they loose it or just get back in your CNR and carry on missioning in Motsu. C.
Takeshi Yamato	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:06:00 - [124] Quote: I like it, makes losing the ship mean something. Right now, you can lose a dozen BS a week and not care at all. Caps are replaced instantly. T2 is so common that NOT looting because it would short your supply of cap 800's actually happens. I hope dearly that they ignore the whines and keep it. T3 will not change anything about BS/Caps being (relatively) cheap.
Amerilia	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:07:00 - [125] It was in EON, I think, that they stated that the T3 ships advance on their own. So the SP we lose there, wont be ours, its the SP of the ship I think. If the Ship explodes, its just logical that it loses its advancement, since it does NOT exist at all.
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:07:00 - [126] Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Cailais Why shouldnt it give you an edge? Because it's not "EVE style". It totally clashes with the way EVE's skill system was set up until now. And no, change just for the sake of change is not a good idea. Looks like EVE is evolving then, you'll just have to adapt to that. But arguing against a mechanics because its not 'EVE's style' just doesn't cut it imho. Either give some proper reasoned argument against why someone shouldnt get a sliver of an advantage because they've specced in a ship and who could loose that advantage if they loose it or just get back in your CNR and carry on missioning in Motsu. C. lol, there it is. "Well you'll just have to adapt!"
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:07:00 - [127] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Cailais At some stage you have to decide if you're going to use that T3 ship. You surprise me, I didnt realise you were quite so risk averse. Actually, quite the opposite. The "bears" will make the most of, if not ALL of the advantages of T3 ships (since they'll seldom lose them), while PVPers will have next to none of the advantages, because they'll probably lose them as soon as they get them (or shortly after). Don't get me wrong, I'm a "bear" myself and I love it, but I still don't think it's fair for the PVPers out there. I think you'll find that MOST of the PVP guys will hold out until the ships are actually in use to form an opinion. We just don't have enough info about how it will work to ***** about it right now. They could train over time, or with use, the sp loss could be small, like not an entire level, or marginal loss of points in a level. The ships could be insanely expensive and largely unseen in combat for the longest time. Use of these ships in combat will come on as all things expensive do, slowly, to see where and what they can stand up to. Black Ops suck, but more often now your seeing them used as people are finding their niche in EVE, t3 will be the same, AND due to the penalties of flying the ships will not become ridiculously overpopulated because of the penalties. I can actually say that this is the first thing ship wise thats excited me in EVE since the Khanid changes to amarr, and I hope to have one and be losing sp as soon as they are released, as I put the ships through their paces.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:08:00 - [128] Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 07/02/2009 21:09:17 If the reasoning for such a mechanic is as mentioned on EveTV, to make losing a ship hurt more, I assume we can expect the ships to be dirt cheap or the parts easily obtained? How or by what scale do you apply an ISK value to the passage of time, which is what skill training is? Sincerely hope it is temporary skill loss that regrows on its own over time, barring you from that particular hull for a specific period otherwise the cost/benefit plummets (unless T3 ships are so uber that they unbalance everything by merely existing).
Abrazzar	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:10:00 - [129] And this is why the Devs don't like to talk to the player base: A single sentence gets bloated up into a ****storm without any information on details, actual functionality or definite implementation.
Amerilia	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:10:00 - [130] Originally by: Amerilia It was in EON, I think, that they stated that the T3 ships advance on their own. So the SP we lose there, wont be ours, its the SP of the ship I think. If the Ship explodes, its just logical that it loses its advancement, since it does NOT exist at all. And if I am right, PVPers can just buy "leveled" T3 Ships from Carebears.

Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:11:00 - [131] Originally by: Takeshi Yamato Quote: I like it, makes losing the ship mean something. Right now, you can lose a dozen BS a week and not care at all. Caps are replaced instantly. T2 is so common that NOT looting because it would short your supply of cap 800's actually happens. I hope dearly that they ignore the whines and keep it. T3 will not change anything about BS/Caps being (relatively) cheap. I know, but thats not what i meant. BS and caps USED to be used with care, the loss USED to mean something, but over time, that has faded in EVE, as the wealth accumulated. With these ships, the loss will ALWAYS mean something, no matter how many sp you get, or how much wealth you accumulate, the loss will sting. That is something thats needed to return to EVE for a very long time.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:11:00 - [132] Originally by: Cailais Looks like EVE is evolving then DE-volving, you mean. Quote: you'll just have to adapt to that I'm not saying I won't. Quote: But arguing against a mechanics because its not 'EVE's style' just doesn't cut it imho. Ok, let's only have fully consensual PVP in highsec, let's have CONCORD in lowsec, let's ONLY have no-standings-loss PVP when wars are declared. Oh, wait, what do you mean, "that's not EVE" ? I thought that's not a good argument, it just doesn't cut it ! Quote: Either give some proper reasoned argument against why someone shouldnt get a sliver of an advantage because they've specced in a ship That's the job of skills to be trained normally, NOT of skills to be trained either when in the ship alongside normal skills nor instead of regular skills, if they can be lost. Also, see previous post. Quote: and who could loose that advantage if they loose it or Lose. Single L. Not two. Quote: just get back in your CNR and carry on missioning in Motsu. I think you must be confusing me with somebody stupid and/or lame. You mean, "go back to manipulating the markets" ?
Pattern Clarc	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:11:00 - [133] Edited by: Pattern Clarc on 07/02/2009 21:17:16 Open questions that need to be explained in the dev blog. 1) What happens if I eject? If you lose sp when your not piloting the ship, does that mean that the person who assembled the ship loses SP, say, if you dismantle a POS, and a number of t3 ships appear and there destroyed, can you remotely remove someone's SP? Even though they might be offline? And if you can't, isn't this subject to abuse like aforementioned. 2) Is this really endgame content? IE, no noobs aloud? 3) By adding a new risk metric, which cannot easily be compared with traditional (isk) for a hull size that generally explodes on contact with asteroids, along with components which have unmanageable, and unpredictable risk attached to there acquisition, the reward for flying them would have to be unbelievably high - 4) If this is end game content, considering your MO of spending more time on things a greater chunk of the community would be prepared to use, won't t3 in that format this be a total departure from that direction and how could you justify denying further player requested end game content any further?
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:11:00 - [134] Originally by: Zurin Arctus Quote: One of the reasons I believe some folks are whining so hard is that theyre now gripped by a real fear that their previous ISK advantage (a risk buffer) could be wiped out. Sure its harsh, cruel and unforgiving - but that's "proper eve". C. Ha. Because being ridiculously expensive doesn't wipe out/reduce an isk advantage. No sir. That's true - but being ridiculously expensive does put such ships out of the reach of the poorer pilot. Think of the options CCP face here to stop T2 becoming a redundant novelty. T3 - Great ships. Stupidly Expensive. T3 - Rubbish ships. Cheap as chips. T3 - Great Ships. Pretty cheap. Loose one and you suffer more than a blinky wallet. Choose. C.
MOOstradamus	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:13:00 - [135] /me supports the T3 / skill loss idea & applauds CCP for taking this risk (particularly in light of the instant panic over reaction by so many already) Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Natasha Zenith Caldari Crushed Ambitions	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:14:00 - [136] I really hope they change this otherwise T3 is total fail and no thanks CCP try again.
Sunny Babezor	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:14:00 - [137] You guys might Call me a idiot but Sp Loss should only be lost if you die to a Rat or POS for that sakes.... Not a other Person that randomly shows up to Blow up you Shiney new T3 ship, Becasue you gotta be pretty Dumd to loose to a Rat if you have the right skillz and such. And i though T3 would be Crusier Sized, Battleship sized and even a Dreadnaught sized one (hehe that would be awsome with a t3 Dread ) But my point is that Noone will acually but so the t3 Ships if you loose SP everytime you loose it, So limeted it to Rats and Poses would be the Best choice of Both Carebears and PVP side. -Sunny
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:15:00 - [138] Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Zurin Arctus Quote: One of the reasons I believe some folks are whining so hard is that theyre now gripped by a real fear that their previous ISK advantage (a risk buffer) could be wiped out. Sure its harsh, cruel and unforgiving - but that's "proper eve". C. Ha. Because being ridiculously expensive doesn't wipe out/reduce an isk advantage. No sir. That's true - but being ridiculously expensive does put such ships out of the reach of the poorer pilot. Think of the options CCP face here to stop T2 becoming a redundant novelty. T3 - Great ships. Stupidly Expensive. T3 - Rubbish ships. Cheap as chips. T3 - Great Ships. Pretty cheap. Loose one and you suffer more than a blinky wallet. Choose. C. What past experience indicates we'll get: TK3- Mediocre to openly horrible ships that cost near a bil to assemble and cost you SP's when you lose them.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:15:00 - [139] Originally by: Akita T Lose. Single L. Not two. Quote: You mean 'o' not 'L' - if you're gonna troll me over a typo at least get it right yourself. C.
MOOstradamus	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:16:00 - [140] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Cailais Quote: and who could loose that advantage if they loose it or Lose. Single L. Not two. FAIL.

Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:16:00 - [141] Originally by: Cailais T3 - Great ships. Stupidly Expensive. T3 - Rubbish ships. Cheap as chips. T3 - Great Ships. Pretty cheap. Loose one and you suffer more than a blinky wallet. Knowing CCP and their pre-nerf tendency, it will be: T3 - Rubbish ships. Stupidly expensive. Lose one and you suffer more than a blinky wallet.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:17:00 - [142] Originally by: Amerilia Originally by: Amerilia It was in EON, I think, that they stated that the T3 ships advance on their own. So the SP we lose there, wont be ours, its the SP of the ship I think. If the Ship explodes, its just logical that it loses its advancement, since it does NOT exist at all. And if I am right, PVPers can just buy "leveled" T3 Ships from Carebears. This would be interesting if true - rather like PE'd BPCs. C.
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:17:00 - [143] Quote: What past experience indicates we'll get: TK3- Mediocre to openly horrible ships that cost near a bil to assemble and cost you SP's when you lose them. Quote: Knowing CCP and their pre-nerf tendency, it will be: T3 - Rubbish ships. Stupidly expensive. Lose one and you suffer more than a blinky wallet. Hivemind!
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:17:00 - [144] Originally by: Cailais You mean 'o' not 'L' - if you're gonna troll me over a typo at least get it right yourself. Wanted to check if you actually read my posts or just replied in a generic contrary manner
Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:19:00 - [145] Edited by: Blazde on 07/02/2009 21:22:16 Originally by: Cailais Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. Totally. And it's exactly what's needed to balance them and ensure they can be decent without completely resorting to the old boring doctrine of just making awesome stuff expensive. If I'm a pvper and not insanely rich why shouldn't I be able to risk skillpoints instead of just carebear points (ISK). Noone is forcing everyone to fly t3 ships and if it puts people off then great, more t3 ships for me to fly. I'm pretty surprised at this getting such a negative reaction, has EVE really attracted too many soft players I just hope the devs have some balls on this one too and don't bow to popular pressure. And what are +2 attribute pirate implants doing if not affecting your skillpoints? [Edit: Negatively I mean, by comparison with +3/+4/+5 implants that you can't use if you opt for pirate ones]
Nyphur Pillowsoft	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:19:00 - [146] My initial reaction was that this is plainly stupid but thinking about it, it all depends on the training time it takes to properly max out a ship. If it's only a day or two and brought the T3 ship up from T1 equivalent to T2, I wouldn't mind at all.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:19:00 - [147] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 07/02/2009 21:19:17 You know why you don't like us old folk talking about this? Because we're right. We've been here, through thick and thin, through snow and sleet, and we're still here. Take it, own it love it, hat's how this goes
Tippia Raddick Explorations BlackWater.	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:19:00 - [148] …so that's what they meant by "some of the winsauce may leak out when you reassemble/rearrange the ships".
Elisa VanHelsing	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:20:00 - [149] I must have it wrong then... I thought that it would be like the ships themselves would gain like EXP, or skill points, so the more you survive in the ship and the more you kill, the better the ship would get, and this would be the skill you loose.. I would prefer the above to losing actual character SP though... If it is character SP, I have to say ccp you fail at this one, I mean how can you work the story for it?? how would losing said ship mean lose of SP when other ships don't?
Disteeler Segunda Fundacion Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:20:00 - [150] Maybe you loose skillpoints but not from regular skills, but from new "skill" system tied to T3...

Mioelnir Minmatar Meltd0wn Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:20:00 - [151] -- it may or may not be a bad thing, largely depending on the ranks of the 'skills' you can lose. Beyond Rank 2 it gets really really ugly really really fast. -- suicide SP-ganking in highsec out of pure spite will become a problem. Too many Eve players tick that way for this not to escalate.
Raddick Tseng	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:22:00 - [152] If done right this could be a great idea. With the right formula to determine SP lost not just an abatraly 1 level lost. Something like Base SP Loss x modifier for number and quality of bouses x number of T3 ships lost in a given time frame. So a ship with say a min bounus and no other T3 ships lost in the set time frame might set you back an hour or 2 or as little has 20-30 min. If you are going through T3s with max bonuses like candy you could lose days of training per ship. I think the Set Time Frame should be 15-30 DT cycles. Or the time it takes to train from 0SP to level skill 5 for average character.
Juwi Kotch Gallente VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:23:00 - [153] Edited by: Juwi Kotch on 07/02/2009 21:23:32 Originally by: Akita T Knowing CCP and their pre-nerf tendency, it will be: T3 - Rubbish ships. Stupidly expensive. Lose one and you suffer more than a blinky wallet. You now them well, Akita, and I would not be surprised at all if this will actually be the case. Let's wait and see. CCP is generally not stupid. They always said that T3 neither will make T2 redundant, nor will it give out ownage tickets to the pilots. Maybe they end up as special purpose ships, very hard to kill, but not doing lots of damage. They would not provide a complete new technology tree for just a few very ambitious and adventurous pilots, and simply not acceptable to the majority because of unacceptable risks and costs. So right now we are only speculating, and we need to wait just another week until we can see on Sisi what it is all about. Greetings Juwi Kotch
Ris Dnalor Minmatar Ex Cruoris Libertas	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:23:00 - [154] Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 07/02/2009 21:24:19 What if it's the ship that learns, not you. So that the longer you fly the same ship, the better that ships bonuses get... a sort of symbiosis forming between you and your ship... and when you start with a new ship, that starts over. no training time taken away from your other skills. Nothing added or subtracted to your skillpoints. Rather an attribute of the ship that increases the more it's flown. I'm willing to bet this is what CCP is after. And if it is, it will rule.
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:24:00 - [155] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 07/02/2009 21:19:17 You know why you don't like us old folk talking about this? Because we're right. We've been here, through thick and thin, through snow and sleet, and we're still here. Take it, own it love it, hat's how this goes Your sentimental tripe is making me sick to my stomach. Look, maybe you're passive enough to 'adapt' to any lame, idiotic changes CCP makes with your money. I'm not.
Kiotsu Adler	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:25:00 - [156] If this is not tied to main SP system, excellent idea; otherwise, terrible idea.
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:25:00 - [157] Originally by: Zurin Arctus Your sentimental tripe is making me sick to my stomach. Look, maybe you're passive enough to 'adapt' to any lame, idiotic changes CCP makes with your money. I'm not. Good, quit, were all waiting for the contracts from your stuff
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:26:00 - [158] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Cailais You mean 'o' not 'L' - if you're gonna troll me over a typo at least get it right yourself. Wanted to check if you actually read my posts or just replied in a generic contrary manner Touche. And yes I did read your post, dont get me wrong the devil here will be in the details - what SPs? how long do they take to train? Is it a dual training process? How good are the ship parts? How available (and therefore costly) will they be? Those details aren't known yet - but I still believe that in principal a 'SP loss' mechanic isn't totally anti EVE. It exists in a diluted form with the clone process (although you're only going to drop SPs from that if you're forgetful and dont upgrade your clone). Its still there though. (Apols for the CNR comment btw, cheap low blow). C. C.
Mashie Saldana Minmatar Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:26:00 - [159] I like this idea with loss of SP.
Doctor Penguin Amarr Shadow Command Tenth Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:27:00 - [160] TBH, the important thing is that SiSi is getting the update next week, so we can all go on there, test out wormholes and buy lots of T3 ships to have ze funs with. Until then, who cares. >.>

Balsak Minmatar Es and Whizz	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:27:00 - [161] So far there is only one fact in this whole thread and that is people are *****ing and crying over something they know nothing about. Everything else is pure speculation based off nothing but fear. I guess if CCP prenerfs then people can prewhine too.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:27:00 - [162] Originally by: Juwi Kotch Originally by: Akita T Knowing CCP and their pre-nerf tendency, it will be: T3 - Rubbish ships. Stupidly expensive. Lose one and you suffer more than a blinky wallet. You now them well, Akita, and I would not be surprised at all if this will actually be the case. Let's wait and see. CCP is generally not stupid. Generally, no. But they have "dunce-cap moments" every now and then. And when a dev tells you "if it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it"... you can expect a lot of "fail" in that particular field. Hell, when they come and say "we have this GREAT idea, you will LOVE it", even then I'm a bit skeptical (like, for instance, the Marauders and Black Ops)... but when they're not so convinced themselves, expect a flamefest once exact details are made public.
Clair Bear Perkone	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:27:00 - [163] This could be pure win if not pre-nerfed too much. Nobody said the new skills will take freaking years to build up and have tons of 'Pointless Timesink (8)' at V prerequisites. Think about this for a moment. What if you can be competent in a T3 ship in a day or two, very good in a week and godlike after a month? Then the skill loss will not be as devastation as say losing carrier V, yet still hurt enough to make it worthwhile to avoid dying. Could be a stealth buff to station tanking and gank warfare, but we'll see.
Disteeler Segunda Fundacion Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:27:00 - [164] Originally by: Ris Dnalor Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 07/02/2009 21:24:19 What if it's the ship that learns, not you. So that the longer you fly the same ship, the better that ships bonuses get... a sort of symbiosis forming between you and your ship... and when you start with a new ship, that starts over. no training time taken away from your other skills. Nothing added or subtracted to your skillpoints. Rather an attribute of the ship that increases the more it's flown. I'm willing to bet this is what CCP is after. And if it is, it will rule. Yes, it's what I think. Some sort of skill system just for T3. Like your tripulation gets better with time or something like that.
Natasha Zenith Caldari Crushed Ambitions	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:28:00 - [165] Originally by: Kiotsu Adler If this is not tied to main SP system, excellent idea; otherwise, terrible idea. This, I am not willing to lose my own SP but if its the ships skill that is loss well that is a whole other story.
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:29:00 - [166] Originally by: Balsak So far there is only one fact in this whole thread and that is people are *****ing and crying over something they know nothing about. Everything else is pure speculation based off nothing but fear. I guess if CCP prenerfs then people can prewhine too. Actually, the biggest ninny is Zurin, everybody else seems fairly calm
Balsak Minmatar Es and Whizz	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:29:00 - [167] Originally by: Ris Dnalor Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 07/02/2009 21:24:19 What if it's the ship that learns, not you. So that the longer you fly the same ship, the better that ships bonuses get... a sort of symbiosis forming between you and your ship... and when you start with a new ship, that starts over. no training time taken away from your other skills. Nothing added or subtracted to your skillpoints. Rather an attribute of the ship that increases the more it's flown. I'm willing to bet this is what CCP is after. And if it is, it will rule. QFT
Nyphur Pillowsoft	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:29:00 - [168] Originally by: Ris Dnalor Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 07/02/2009 21:24:19 What if it's the ship that learns, not you. So that the longer you fly the same ship, the better that ships bonuses get... a sort of symbiosis forming between you and your ship... and when you start with a new ship, that starts over. no training time taken away from your other skills. Nothing added or subtracted to your skillpoints. Rather an attribute of the ship that increases the more it's flown. I'm willing to bet this is what CCP is after. And if it is, it will rule. That's what I assumed it would be too.
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:30:00 - [169] Edited by: Zeba on 07/02/2009 21:31:01 nvm didnt see that other post.
Abrazzar	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:30:00 - [170] This system is only the first step of a necessary mechanic. Next step would be to remove clone grades and have you lose SPs whenever you get podded, depending on the total amount of SPs you have. This will allow new players to catch up with old players as low SP players lose fewer SPs on death. Skills can be prioritized for loss, so you don't lose skills you consider vital and instead lose those pesky Mining I and other carebear skills you barely need. Skills can be completely forgotten and you will need to buy a new skillbook should that happen. Just to add to the general nonsense in this thread.

Dictum Factum Dark-Rising	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:36:00 - [171] No more risk-free PvP? What ever shall we do?
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:37:00 - [172] Originally by: Nyphur Originally by: Ris Dnalor Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 07/02/2009 21:24:19 What if it's the ship that learns, not you. So that the longer you fly the same ship, the better that ships bonuses get... a sort of symbiosis forming between you and your ship... and when you start with a new ship, that starts over. no training time taken away from your other skills. Nothing added or subtracted to your skillpoints. Rather an attribute of the ship that increases the more it's flown. I'm willing to bet this is what CCP is after. And if it is, it will rule. That's what I assumed it would be too. I think this is exactly what we'll be getting. In EON CCP talked about T3 ships 'winsauce' leaking out if you disassembled them. This would relate nicely to a symbiotic relationship between pilot and his ship. The ship AND the pilot combined 'grow'. I doubt the system will mean once youre T3 ship is destroyed you have to wait to fly one again, but that you're simply not as proficient in that ship as you had been. Increasing your competency in that one specific ship comes at a price of course and possibly to the detriment of say training more generically. T3 pilots will be quite an unusual breed - eskewing the traditional path of frig>cruiser>BS>dread>titan. C.
Garr Anders Minmatar Thukk U	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:39:00 - [173] I remember that somewhere someone from CCP said that your ship learns stuff, so when you disasemble it or loose it the stuff that was learned gets lost. Yeah, I know thats very vague, but it could make sense, as in that when you fly your T3 assemebled, it gains SP to reduce drawbacks from whatever increasing its abilities/boost/boni, so being a different pool of SP. If you dont fly it, it doesnt learn anything but well if you loose it, SP of that particular ship are gone. IMHO, I really think that the SP are tied to the ship, so you maybe can "sell trained ships", so if you eject, the SPs will belong more the to ship than to you. Together with the fact that sleepers might be a new kind of drones with a different AI and that the new T3 is dependent on the sleeper technology it "would make sense" that once assembeld ships could "learn" and thus train certain stuff. Whatever they might learn, getting more powergrind, cpu, sensorstrenght, could resemeble the ship bonus you get when you increase minmatar cruiser from I to V but now these are tied to the hull as long as it stays intact. But again, this is all just rabble rabble rabble rabble and all just put together from hearsay.... ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Irida Mershkov Gallente Noir.	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:42:00 - [174] Originally by: Dr Ming People play MMOs to make their characters better. Introducing a gameplay mechanic that does the exact opposite of that is not going to be a popular mechanic. Orly? 'Cause losing your skill points when getting podded without an active clone isn't that popular? That's never been seen as a problem. T3 just applies a bigger label to, "Don't fly what you can't afford to lose."
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:43:00 - [175] Originally by: Zurin Arctus ...Do you read your own posts? Bellum, please. You only like this mechanic because it would mean a free ride for station-hugging garbage like you that rarely lose ships because you run and hide whenever a fair fight comes your way. LOL. Post with your main btw. Frankly, I think that the SP loss idea is total crap, but if it does end up on TQ, which it probably will, I'll be at the top of the list of those using T3. Fair fight? If a fight is fair you didn't prepare well enough. And don't talk to me about fair. I get 15-20 man gangs coming by to try and kill our 3-4 man gangs all the time. Nobody fights fair, ever, if they can help it. And for the record, I rarely fight on a station, mostly due to the fact that nobody ever engages me there. They'd rather engage on a high sec gate where they have all the advantage. But I can understand how anyone fighting me would need every advantage they could possibly get. Why don't you post with your main so I know what kind of garbage I'm replying to? Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:44:00 - [176] Assuming the ship 'learns' in its own right (we'll have to see if this is the case') the role of Piracy - and by that I mean the traditional role of capturing a ship intact will get a massive boost. Perhaps the 'skill points' are distributed in some fashion between pilot and ship? Forced to eject and you keep your SPs. Go down with your ship and you lose them? C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Tippia Raddick Explorations BlackWater.	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:45:00 - [177] Originally by: Irida Mershkov Orly? 'Cause losing your skill points when getting podded without an active clone isn't that popular? That's never been seen as a problem. That's because you can cough up some cash to be completely safe from that kind of loss, and you're never put in a position where this protection can't be bought (well, short of having no cash left). ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:47:00 - [178] Originally by: Cailais dont get me wrong the devil here will be in the details - what SPs? how long do they take to train? Is it a dual training process? How good are the ship parts? How available (and therefore costly) will they be? Well, let's see... we have the following possibilities: 1. Subsystem-skill training time : a) very short (below rank 1 equivalent) -> b) average (rank 1 equivalent) -> c) high (anything above that) Also, you can expect at least 3, maybe 5 subsystem types. 2. Subsystem skill training type : a) all the time while T3 ship is assembled and in any hangar of yours ALONGSIDE normal skills -> b) only when in T3 ship (or only in space doing something with it) ALONGSIDE normal skills -> c) INSTEAD of normal skills 3. Subsystem-skill loss : a) very low on disassembly / medium for ship loss -> b) average -> c) medium for disassembly / severe for ship loss 4. Subsystem-skills : a) linked to ship alone -> b) linked to pilot alone -> c) linked to ship+pilot combo 5. T3 component costs : a) average (if they drop like flies from everything in "W-Space" and are very small) -> b) high (if they drop slightly often and are small enough to make a trip worth the risks) -> c) stupidly high (expected if current exploration rewards are to be any indication) 6. T3 ship performance (assumed L4 "subsystem skills") : a) overall between T1 and T2 but with high customisability -> b) slightly below T2 overall but with very strong "niche" points not covered by T2 yet -> c) slightly above T2 with certain strong points ____ Now, 1a makes pretty much everything pointless, since there's no big deal between a L4 and a L5 subsystem skill, and just waiting a day or so might get you there. 1c is way too harsh to be even considered unless you also do a lot more concessions in the points below (unlikely), so we are left with something similar to 1b as the only remotely feasable alternative. 2a would be too lenient and therefore unlikely, 2c is downright idiotic (and I hope I don't have to explain why), so we have 2b as the only reasonable alternative too. At point 3, I really don't know - that's the only place where everything COULD work, as it has the least overall influence. 4a would mean carebears could "level up" the ship by simply staying in it, so it's out of the question. 4b would make little sense, I just included it for completness' sake. So, we have option 4c as the only reasonable alternative. 5a is so unlikely it's not even worth considering. 5b would be remotely feasable, but I strongly doubt CCP would do that (for many different reasons). So, we have 5c as the most likely alternative. 6a is sadly the most likely scenario. 6b would be nice, but unlikely... what niches AREN'T already filled by T2 anyway ? And would we really need something with a stronger niche role as T2 ? 6c is almost completely out of the question. So, yeah, the devil IS in the details. T3 will be so heavily pre-nerfed it's not even worth talking about, and now they ALSO want to add some OTHER drawback on top of it ? Or, do they want THIS particular drawback to be the main "pre-nerf", and not actually pre-nerf them much or at all ? Either way, not a good outlook. Take it as you will _ Create a character \|\| Fit a ship \|\| Get some ISK
Dau Imperius Amarr	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:50:00 - [179] Whoo hoo. If thiis true then I say, adapt or die you PvPers. Myself, I'll be happily usiig mine in high sec space. Especially since I can't get a dread or carrier there. Seems fair to me; Lose your SP's for being cannon fodder. :) Might make you all actually think for once...Nah, that will never happen.
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:50:00 - [180] Originally by: Irida Mershkov Originally by: Dr Ming People play MMOs to make their characters better. Introducing a gameplay mechanic that does the exact opposite of that is not going to be a popular mechanic. Orly? 'Cause losing your skill points when getting podded without an active clone isn't that popular? That's never been seen as a problem. T3 just applies a bigger label to, "Don't fly what you can't afford to lose." If you tell someone that you fly without updated clones, they will tell you that your stupid.

Shadowsword Epsilon Lyr Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:53:00 - [181] Originally by: Cailais Nobodies forcing you to fly T3. Think about this for a second: You want to implement T3, you want the ships to be good - possibly better than T2. How do you stop T3 making T2 redundant, T1 total trash whilst not making T3 so prohibitively expensive that only the mega billionaires can afford to fly them? At some stage you've got to neuter the demand - otherwise either prices will skyrocket or, if theyre as cheap and as available as T2 then T2 will just be worthless (or close to it). C. Sure, nobody is forced into T3 ships. But then, they are the central point of this extension. Worm-hole exploration is going to be about the T3 industry. There's been a considerable amount of efforts made by CCP about those. Now, let's suppose it end up like that, that you lose a signifiant amont of SP each time you go poof. Congratualtion, you are now THE primary, before even Marauder Pilots, because you can be hurt. Do you really think you're going to enjoy yourself much? From the industrial side, that means T3 manufacturers and explorers won't have much to do on the long term. They'll supply the demand from high-sec carebears, but once that demand is satisfied, then what? The high-sec dwellers won't lose their ships often, and the pvpers will hardly use them. And without that demand, worm-hole exploration might not be profitable anymore, and become another low-sec. It's works like that: If you want the key features of Apocrypha to become a signifiant part of Eve, T3 ships MUST have a worthwhile benefit/cost ratio, and with a signifiant SP component on the cost, the benefit is either not enough, or completely overpowered... ------------------------------------------
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles Zzz	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:54:00 - [182] Witholding all comment until we find out exactly how this works. I'd only look silly if I got worked up over speculation based on incomplete information. --- Can't afford that BPO? Look here. 20:1 mineral compression The EVE f@h team
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:54:00 - [183] Originally by: Dau Imperius Whoo hoo. If thiis true then I say, adapt or die you PvPers. Myself, I'll be happily usiig mine in high sec space. Especially since I can't get a dread or carrier there. Seems fair to me; Lose your SP's for being cannon fodder. :) Might make you all actually think for once...Nah, that will never happen. You do realize that Jihadswarm version 2.0 would suicide gank you in high sec for the lulz if you lost SP out of it.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:56:00 - [184] Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro Witholding all comment until we find out exactly how this works. I'd only look silly if I got worked up over speculation based on incomplete information. I thought that's 90% of the fun of it ? _ Create a character \|\| Fit a ship \|\| Get some ISK
Caiman Graystock Caldari	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:56:00 - [185] IF the skillpoints lost belong to the ship and not to your character, I don't think there's anything worth whinging about. IF though we are losing SP we gained for the ship in place of for our characters then this is BS. But let's not let something like waiting for the devblog stop us.
Etchyboy Minmatar Firman AB 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:58:00 - [186] I think I would be ok witht he SP loss as long as the T3 skills could be learned in parralel with other skills.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 21:59:00 - [187] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Cailais dont get me wrong the devil here will be in the details - what SPs? how long do they take to train? Is it a dual training process? How good are the ship parts? How available (and therefore costly) will they be? Well, let's see... we have the following possibilities: etc So, yeah, the devil IS in the details. T3 will be so heavily pre-nerfed it's not even worth talking about, and now they ALSO want to add some OTHER drawback on top of it ? Or, do they want THIS particular drawback to be the main "pre-nerf", and not actually pre-nerf them much or at all ? Either way, not a good outlook. Take it as you will Well I appreciate Im in the minority in liking this mechanic - for me the biggest rush / crushing blow I have in EVE is when I've actually got something 'on the line'. If there isn't a impact in losing something then you can't really experience either. I guess that's just me, although I am surprised at how these normally pro-risk forums have swung to abject terror at the thought of 'not winning'. I've noticed there are also some images of 'arenas' posted recently - again the emotional drama of two T3 pilots dualing it out makes so much more sense to me in that environment than say a couple of vets in expendable T1 frigates. Equally the idea of carebears 'leveling up' a T3 ship doesn't repulse me. Its simply another element of the production chain. You could buy a 'newborn' T3 ship, or one matured over time (like a fine wine?). Not only do you have a plethora of ship types in this example, but also another scale of capability. Added to that implants, modules and combat boosters and there's a heady mix of both ability, and potential loss. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
chatgris	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:05:00 - [188] Originally by: Erica 'cowpig'Lafehr Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Revan Starstrider Originally by: Sheriff Jones I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic Considering pvp ships go pop alot more often than ships flown in pve, I'd say we have a good argument. Still, you can't deny the irony /This. The irony is so thick it can be cut with a knife. I appreciate that I am not the only one to notice that the biggest whiners in the game are the 'leet' pvp'ers. Like a bunch of old ladies to be exact. STFU and play the game The irony gets thicker if these are the same people that say that skill points really don't matter, all noobs should head out day one and fight like real men!
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:07:00 - [189] Edited by: Cailais on 07/02/2009 22:07:41 Originally by: Shadowsword Now, let's suppose it end up like that, that you lose a signifiant amont of SP each time you go poof. Congratualtion, you are now THE primary, before even Marauder Pilots, because you can be hurt. Do you really think you're going to enjoy yourself much? Good news for the Marauder pilots I guess. as for enjoyment - well that depends on what you regard as fun? If you dont like losing anything of worth then by all means jump in a T1 frigate and fly into FW. Personally I love high risks from time to time. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
NightmareX Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:13:00 - [190] Originally by: Dau Imperius Whoo hoo. If thiis true then I say, adapt or die you PvPers. Myself, I'll be happily usiig mine in high sec space. Until you get suicided in empire.

Sophia Truthspeaker THE INTERNET.	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:14:00 - [191] The way I am thinking of them now is, that you got a skill in your normal skills that allows you to use the module. If you loose a t3 ships you loose sp from a skill in those module skills. If that holds true I'd like to see some pretty high ranks in those skills. To compensate let the skills start with 10 sp for lvl 1. Anyone got a calculation how long a Rank 10 skill would take if you start with 10 and want to go to three, four and five? That would put a bit of risk into pvp, make it not impossible to catch up again after loosing a ship and lets you specialze more than now to keep in the smallish ships of a single race. Pretty sweet idea, I'd say.
Akor Flandres	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:19:00 - [192] ARE ALL THE PEOPLE WHINGING THE SAME PEOPLE WHO SHOUT DOWN CAREBEARS BECAUSE EVE IS A GAME WHERE YOU REALLY CAN LOSE SOMETHING SO GET BACK TO WOW? ITS FUNNY SEEING YOU ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE FOR A CHANGE. CAP ATTACK!
Gunnanmon Gallente UNITED STAR SYNDICATE	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:19:00 - [193] Originally by: Gemmell If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. o.m.g. How many people will give positive feedback about this "feature". What a bunch of imbeciles.
Akor Flandres	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:23:00 - [194] Originally by: Gunnanmon Originally by: Gemmell If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. o.m.g. How many people will give positive feedback about this "feature". What a bunch of imbeciles. You dont even KNOW how it works yet, so stfu.
Gunnanmon Gallente UNITED STAR SYNDICATE	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:24:00 - [195] Originally by: Akor Flandres Originally by: Gunnanmon Originally by: Gemmell If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. o.m.g. How many people will give positive feedback about this "feature". What a bunch of imbeciles. You dont even KNOW how it works yet, so stfu. All we have is what was said on the broadcast. stfu
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:25:00 - [196] This whole 'ship skill point gain' thing will probably end up being horribly broken for one reason or another. If ships gain SP individually once they're assembled over time, then people are going to be assembling them and just letting them 'cook' in their hangar until they're good. If they need to kill other ships in order to improve, people are going to farm alts in cruisers or whatever in order to 'level up' their ships. Insurance will make this almost painless. If ships need to be occupied by a pod in order to gain SP over time then I see everyone making T3 SP farming alts so that they can again 'cook' their ships for a while on alts in order to get them ready for use, or to sell them as 'improved' ships on contract for ridiculous sums of ISK. Any way you slice it, the system can be gamed and exploited. I doubt we'll see an exploit proof system that is worthwhile. If something is worth doing, it's worth exploiting. And Pattern brings up some very good points: what happens when the ship dies at a POS, or you disassemble it? How are we even going to test this stuff fully on SISI? If T3 has so many risks, just how good are these ships going to be in order to offset the added risk? They'd have to practically be able to take on a fleet of fifty for as much risk as they pose to pilots. Maybe they have some crazy special ability like they're unjammable and they're immune to cap warfare... (one could only wish).
Leaving Eve	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:25:00 - [197] Edited by: Leaving Eve on 07/02/2009 22:25:50 If you lose skill points when you lose a ship, then I'm leaving eve.
ebonyivory	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:26:00 - [198] Originally by: Akor Flandres ARE ALL THE PEOPLE WHINGING THE SAME PEOPLE WHO SHOUT DOWN CAREBEARS BECAUSE EVE IS A GAME WHERE YOU REALLY CAN LOSE SOMETHING SO GET BACK TO WOW? ITS FUNNY SEEING YOU ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE FOR A CHANGE. CAP ATTACK! idiot >.> carebears have 0% risk all the time pvpers expect to lose ships when they undock...however if they are rich they also expect to be able to buy a ship and be fighting again asap....(one of the benifits of being rich) but instead theyl spend weeks at a time training because they lost a ship do you have any idea how easy it is to get blobbed these days? since 80% of pvp is blob based your pretty much screwed in a fleet fight since you will always be primaried
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:26:00 - [199] Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 07/02/2009 22:21:15 Originally by: Dau Imperius Whoo hoo. If thiis true then I say, adapt or die you PvPers. Myself, I'll be happily usiig mine in high sec space. Until you get suicided in empire. I personally would just do it with like 4-5 BS'es only because the tears and crying from a high sec bear would be so awesome that it will be worth it. Ayup. Look me up btw if and when you want some help with this, LOL.
Gunnanmon Gallente UNITED STAR SYNDICATE	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:28:00 - [200] Originally by: Leaving Eve Edited by: Leaving Eve on 07/02/2009 22:25:50 If you lose skill points when you lose a ship, then I'm leaving eve. Well, since you're leaving eve either way it doesnt really matter either way.

Akor Flandres	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:31:00 - [201] Originally by: ebonyivory Originally by: Akor Flandres ARE ALL THE PEOPLE WHINGING THE SAME PEOPLE WHO SHOUT DOWN CAREBEARS BECAUSE EVE IS A GAME WHERE YOU REALLY CAN LOSE SOMETHING SO GET BACK TO WOW? ITS FUNNY SEEING YOU ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE FOR A CHANGE. CAP ATTACK! idiot >.> carebears have 0% risk all the time pvpers expect to lose ships when they undock...however if they are rich they also expect to be able to buy a ship and be fighting again asap....(one of the benifits of being rich) but instead theyl spend weeks at a time training because they lost a ship do you have any idea how easy it is to get blobbed these days? since 80% of pvp is blob based your pretty much screwed in a fleet fight since you will always be primaried Honestly, you are the idiot. You don't even know how this is going to work, whether these skills will train for your ship alone along side your normal skills or not. As ever, you are all making your own wild assumptions based on a couple of sentences you probably didn't even listen to yourself.
Soporo Caldari The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:33:00 - [202] Gah! All I know is: If there is the potential for me to LOSE SKILLPOINTS if I fly and die in a certain ship (even just screwing around), then screw that. Certainly screw it x10 for pvp. Skilling is the biggest, sickest, most long lasting and unavoidable grind in the game. Why tf would I want to prolong that? Even a little bit?
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:36:00 - [203] Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Amerilia Originally by: Amerilia It was in EON, I think, that they stated that the T3 ships advance on their own. So the SP we lose there, wont be ours, its the SP of the ship I think. If the Ship explodes, its just logical that it loses its advancement, since it does NOT exist at all. And if I am right, PVPers can just buy "leveled" T3 Ships from Carebears. This would be interesting if true - rather like PE'd BPCs. C. "SP lost on repackaging". No market sale. Contact: "T3 ship with 1 million sp" will be the next contract scam?
Kyra Felann Gallente Noctis Fleet Technologies	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:36:00 - [204] Interesting.
ArmyOfMe 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:39:00 - [205] /me sits back and waits for darkfall to come out
Ben Derindar Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:42:00 - [206] If the result of this concept is that T3 ships remain a fairly rare sight, then it's a good thing. What's the point of adding new content if it simply deprecates the old content in every way? /Ben
Benedic The Aftermath	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:44:00 - [207] Prenerfed content? feigns disbelief
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:51:00 - [208] Originally by: Benedic Prenerfed content? feigns disbelief Well, its only nerfed if you die. C.
Tyrrax Thorrk Amarr Guiding Hand Social Club	Posted - 2009.02.07 22:59:00 - [209] hell will freeze over before CCP makes the huge mistake of releasing T3 without removing the loss of skillpoints part frankly whoever came up with that idea should crawl back into his/her cave and stay away from design and balance forever
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:02:00 - [210] The solution is simple: fire whoever thought of this stupid idea, and forget it ever happened. The only content needed in this dev blog is "haha, just kidding". No matter which case it is, the idea is just terrible. If it's SP loss from your character, T3 is dead. Ships die, and usually die fast, especially cruisers. Nobody is going to train level IV in a skill when they're going to lose that SP faster than they can train it. Not only that, but it breaks a basic rule of EVE: assets can be lost, SP can not (who ever fails to update a clone?). If it's special SP trained by the ship in addition to your normal SP, it will be massively exploited and broken. If it's by time, people will park a dozen T3 ships in their hangar for a month. If it's combat experience, they'll farm cheap kills with an alt. Instead of a cool concept of "if you're good enough to keep a ship intact through lots of battles, you get better with it", it will just be a competition to see who can exploit the loopholes most efficiently. Either way, just kill the idea now, while most people haven't heard of it.

Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:02:00 - [211] Originally by: Tyrrax Thorrk hell will freeze over before CCP makes the huge mistake of releasing T3 without removing the loss of skillpoints part frankly whoever came up with that idea should crawl back into his/her cave and stay away from design and balance forever On that basis I think we can assume its a dead cert then . C.
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:03:00 - [212] Edited by: Nova Fox on 07/02/2009 23:04:37 I hope its just the ship can gain experince and gets stronger over time. And if you lose the ship the related gained 'experince' gets lost. If its acutal player skills, then bohoo Im boycotting T3 as well.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:12:00 - [213] Im stunned so many can't handle the thought of losing SPs. What happened to the fans of EVE - a dark and gritty universe? All those 'gb2wow' posts seem so uselessly pathetic in the face of these comments. Clearly ISK has become so readily available over the past few years that losing that is no biggy - but a few skill points and the end is nigh! Maybe we should adopt the WOW model and ships just respawn in your hangar when you get blown up? C.
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:13:00 - [214] Originally by: Merin Ryskin The solution is simple: fire whoever thought of this stupid idea, and forget it ever happened. The only content needed in this dev blog is "haha, just kidding". No matter which case it is, the idea is just terrible. If it's SP loss from your character, T3 is dead. Ships die, and usually die fast, especially cruisers. Nobody is going to train level IV in a skill when they're going to lose that SP faster than they can train it. Not only that, but it breaks a basic rule of EVE: assets can be lost, SP can not (who ever fails to update a clone?). If it's special SP trained by the ship in addition to your normal SP, it will be massively exploited and broken. If it's by time, people will park a dozen T3 ships in their hangar for a month. If it's combat experience, they'll farm cheap kills with an alt. Instead of a cool concept of "if you're good enough to keep a ship intact through lots of battles, you get better with it", it will just be a competition to see who can exploit the loopholes most efficiently. Either way, just kill the idea now, while most people haven't heard of it. QFT System is either stupid and nobody will use it, or will be so easily exploitable that they might as well just do away with the system and just hand out the end result as the baseline. Nozh has their work cut out from them with this blog. Personally, I'm expecting Nozh to get Zuluparked.
Pottsey Enheduanni Foundation	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:14:00 - [215] What would the role-play/story reason be for losing skillpoints for losing a ship. There better be a very good reason in why all of a sudden you lose skillpoints when the ships blows up. If that is what happens.
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:16:00 - [216] Originally by: Nova Fox Edited by: Nova Fox on 07/02/2009 23:04:37 I hope its just the ship can gain experince and gets stronger over time. And if you lose the ship the related gained 'experince' gets lost. This is what it sounded like from when they talked about "learning ships." So I think this is just some dumb pubbie overreaction.
Dreamwalker	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:17:00 - [217] I like this idea of losing SP with the new T3. Not me but there are pilots that have their skills trained up and are looking for something, now they will always be looking for something as the younger chars start to catch up to them. Now if you are a younger pilot and don't have your skills in order and want to fly it so be it but I think it would be like those BS pilots that can't fit T2 guns or those cap pilots that can't fit capital armor. If you are crying over this then its not your ship type. And I still like the Black Ops.
Kiotsu Adler	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:21:00 - [218] Originally by: Cailais What happened to the fans of EVE - a dark and gritty universe? All those 'gb2wow' posts seem so uselessly pathetic in the face of these comments. Clearly ISK has become so readily available over the past few years that losing that is no biggy - but a few skill points and the end is nigh! Total different league. Think about this: what you get with your subscription is the ability to advance your char (and play, off course), so you're trading real money for losing ships. How far could we take this idea... permadeath maybe? All has to have a limit and everyone has one, even hardcore players. I'm not strictlly against the idea, just want to see how is gonna be implemented, but if it's tied to main SP system seems pretty much broken. And otherwise seems to hard to not be exploitable in someway. Well just let's wait until blog (if it ever comes).
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:23:00 - [219] Originally by: Dreamwalker I like this idea of losing SP with the new T3. Not me but there are pilots that have their skills trained up and are looking for something, now they will always be looking for something as the younger chars start to catch up to them. Now if you are a younger pilot and don't have your skills in order and want to fly it so be it but I think it would be like those BS pilots that can't fit T2 guns or those cap pilots that can't fit capital armor. If you are crying over this then its not your ship type. And I still like the Black Ops. That's just stupid. Even assuming you have absolute max skills for an entire race, which is the better use of your time: Training T3 skills that you are going to lose faster than you can train them past III. OR Training another race. The number of players who already have absolute maximum skills in everything they want to train is so absurdly tiny that words do not exist to describe how absolutely ****ing stupid it would be to limit T3 to those players. If CCP is going to make T3 just a toy for .000000001% of the players, then they need to just scrap the entire concept now. I'd rather have no expansion at all than something so poorly designed. -----------
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:23:00 - [220] Originally by: Pottsey What would the role-play/story reason be for losing skillpoints for losing a ship. There better be a very good reason in why all of a sudden you lose skillpoints when the ships blows up. If that is what happens. Im thinking it could be something along the lines of Hamilton's 'The Reality Disfucntion' where pilot and Voidhawk shared a symbiotic link. Clearly once that link is broken that shared knowledge is lost. I imagine the depth to which a player chooses to link with his ship will be very optional - i.e that T3 ships will be fully pilotable without re affirming this link but, should you wish to do so, you can invest SPs into the ship itself. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.

Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:29:00 - [221] Originally by: Kiotsu Adler Originally by: Cailais What happened to the fans of EVE - a dark and gritty universe? All those 'gb2wow' posts seem so uselessly pathetic in the face of these comments. Clearly ISK has become so readily available over the past few years that losing that is no biggy - but a few skill points and the end is nigh! Total different league. Think about this: what you get with your subscription is the ability to advance your char (and play, off course), so you're trading real money for losing ships. How far could we take this idea... permadeath maybe? All has to have a limit and everyone has one, even hardcore players. I'm not strictlly against the idea, just want to see how is gonna be implemented, but if it's tied to main SP system seems pretty much broken. And otherwise seems to hard to not be exploitable in someway. Well just let's wait until blog (if it ever comes). You're always trading RL money when you lose a ship. If you subscribe and say spend 1 month ratting to buy a ship, and then lose that ship you've lost that investment in time. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Novacanne Caldari The Uniting of Eve Initiative	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:31:00 - [222] We are the pvpers and every new content placed in EVE must stand up to our specifications and standards, LOL CCP losing skill points thats for Carebears.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:33:00 - [223] Long story short, we have two posible extremes in which all of this hub-bub is sadly going to fall into. One is the "unexploitable but next to useless" extreme, where the drawbacks will far, FAR outweigh the benefits of flying T3, maybe with a few exceptions that will be so imbalanced they're very likely to get the nerfbat sooner rather than later. The other is the "so exploitable it becomes meaningless" extreme, where, well, the quote said it all. _ Create a character \|\| Fit a ship \|\| Get some ISK
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:33:00 - [224] Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 07/02/2009 23:35:17 Ok. Everyone, Just listen to me real quick. I seriusly doubt CCP will make it any kind of Real SP loss. It will be like gaining experience for your ship. Picture the ship as an alternate account you made. It can train skills independent of your char, And when it dies. All It's SP is lost. While this makes it progressively risker to lose the ship in battle. It has 1 advantage over all other ships. It can actually learn and "skill up". While it may be tedious to do the same thing with t3 ship after t3 ship this encourages protecting the ship from harm. However if all you do is "cook" the ship to gain skill points. It's being no use to you, And odd's are you will still lose it eventually. The best thing you can do is ride the wave. If you lose it early on no biggy, If you lose an old ship you will feel it. This will give people an emotion attachment to Their ship. Not just a class of ship but one specific vessel. That is one of the things eve really needs. It's a new feature. And if you complain about just consider this It gives nothing but advantages, No other ship grows more powerful over time. Not one. There is no negatives to this change. Would you prefer the ship to be static with it's base stat's? or grow and evolve into your special baby? You use it, You fight with it, You bleed for it and die with it. It's what this game needs. the "lucky" ones will keep their ship for quite awhile, And gain very high sp vessels. These vessels will become known throughout eve for their power, It's kind of like having a special ship for the corp. It's like a mascot. If i lose a tech 3 ship. I will be sad and maby a lil ****ed. But it's a game. I will get over it, Get a new one. And the (Insert ship name here) Mark 2 will fly out in the stars to seek revenge for the death of it's brother. Mrr?
Bidermaier Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:36:00 - [225] Its a really interesting idea. 1.It punish people that rely on farming game skills rather than getting better in the battlefield. 2. It makes the new ships a big deal in the battle. People use to say "only fly what you can afford to lose" when the real fun kicks off when you fly ships that you really can't afford to lose. This new mechanic pushes that idea. After 9 months I am trying to learn PVP and I cant afford to lose T2 ships. The same way there will be T2 ship pilots that aren't simply ready to pilot T3 ships.
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:39:00 - [226] Bugs and glitches can now cost you skill points awesome
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:41:00 - [227] Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 07/02/2009 23:42:06 You may afford to lose tech 3 ships isk wise. But the ship experience loss is inevitable, This is a very good thing imho. As in said in my last post. This gives player attachment to their ships. Something I think eve needs, I am seeing far to many ships named (Random name X's raven). You have to fly it into battle. Otherwise it's not doing you any good. Might as well fly it. Whats the point of having a superior ship if you never use it, If you have a advantage. It is better to use it frequently and to it's full advantage before you lose it than to use it sparingly and eventually end up with merely 4-5 real battles under the ships belt. It has not been much help to you. Why even bother going to tech 3 unless your going to commit to flying in it. I am alarming at all the people against this. It's nothing if not a positive change once you think about it. Why rally against an entirely new feature that gives no negative drawbacks. I can understand complaining about a nerf, But complaining because of something that increases the power or value of a ship you own is ridiculous.
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:41:00 - [228] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 07/02/2009 23:42:14 Originally by: Kytanos Termek However if all you do is "cook" the ship to gain skill points. It's being no use to you, And odd's are you will still lose it eventually. Why settle for just one? Buy 50x copies of your favorite T3 ship, and "cook" 49 of them while you fly the 50th. You clearly don't understand the level of metagaming and loophole exploitation that most good PvPers will use to get every possible advantage. Quote: Would you prefer the ship to be static with it's base stat's? or grow and evolve into your special baby? You use it, You fight with it, You bleed for it and die with it. It's what this game needs. the "lucky" ones will keep their ship for quite awhile, And gain very high sp vessels. These vessels will become known throughout eve for their power, It's kind of like having a special ship for the corp. It's like a mascot. Which might be nice if ships didn't die so often. That might be cool with a capital, but on a cruiser hull that is likely to always be primaried because of its high cost and SP loss? Good luck keeping one alive long enough to care about it... Not that it will matter, since all that experience will be in the form of farming unfitted Bantams with my alt for 16 hours.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:43:00 - [229] Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 07/02/2009 23:44:52 Hmm they should implement something like that for capitals. That will give alliances real "flag ships" to rally behind. CCP i think we have a winner. As for the "Cooking" excuse. Your probably going to have to be actively in the ship for it to gain xp. Otherwise it's just too broken. I would say have it gain xp while your out in space, Online. You may decide to cook the ship in a t3 alt. But your paying 15 a month for that. So go right ahead. If you want to waste money cooking a t3 ship. If you are that dedicated, Go right ahead.
Coros Galactic Research Corp	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:44:00 - [230] Originally by: Tyrrax Thorrk hell will freeze over before CCP makes the huge mistake of releasing T3 without removing the loss of skillpoints part frankly whoever came up with that idea should crawl back into his/her cave and stay away from design and balance forever agreed

Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:46:00 - [231] Originally by: Merin Ryskin That's just stupid. Even assuming you have absolute max skills for an entire race, which is the better use of your time: Training T3 skills that you are going to lose faster than you can train them past III. OR Training another race. Stoping you right there, I would rather train T3, simply because I fly amarr, i've always flown them, and its all I want to fly. I own another account, pure galente. I've not, nor do i plan, to cross train either of them, even as one approaches 50 million sp. IF i had something else to train either amarr or galente respectively, those alts will train that, otherwise, when i feel they are maxed enough I will consolidate the accounts into one, for lack of caring about Minnie and Caldari ships. Originally by: Merin Ryskin The number of players who already have absolute maximum skills in everything they want to train is so absurdly tiny that words do not exist to describe how absolutely **ing stupid it would be to limit T3 to those players. Says you, can i see some statistical information supporting this argument? If your race specific in what you fly, capping out skills you "want to train" can be done fairly easy. Originally by:** Merin Ryskin If CCP is going to make T3 just a toy for .000000001% of the players, then they need to just scrap the entire concept now. I'd rather have no expansion at all than something so poorly designed. Well then, I for one, am glad you have jack **** to do with the expansions release. Also, in reference to the underlined bit, can you please show me your dev notes, or pms, detailing the exact design of the way things will be implemented so I too can be privy to the "poor design"? What? Speak up, I can't hear you. You say you don't know the exact design? Well damn, from your rant there at the end I had assumed you knew all about it and its "poor design". The fact is, you know the same as every one else, and for some reason, you, and people like you, grab it by the nose and run screaming about the falling sky even though your facts are so limited in scope that no sane person would ever follow your conclusions to the same end.
thelung187 Guiding Hand Social Club	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:47:00 - [232] Not going to read through 8 pages to see if this has already been proposed, but if so, my apologies. The only way that SP loss due to ship loss can be balanced is to allow for SP bonus for ship kills. Example: if I kill your t3 ship, you lose some t3 sp, while I (or spread amongst myself and whoever else is on the killmail) get appropriate SP bonuses. So if you lose 800 sp for losing your ship, my buddy and I each get 400sp tacked onto ours (in addition to regular SP accumulation over time). Otherwise, really, what can we do with t3 that we can't with existing ships? Or put more simply... why bother? Without the aforementioned balancing mechanic (or some type of incentive beyond "oooh shiny new things"), this is potentially on the same level of sheer epic failure as the introduction of POS or existing sovereignty mechanics.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:47:00 - [233] Alot of people dont seem to understand yet that you DO NOT LOSE SKILL POINTS. to make it absolutely clear YOU DO NOT LOSE REAL SKILLPOINTS. You lose Ship experience! Which is effectively the ship training itself AT THE EXACT SAME TIME YOUR POD PILOT IS TRAINING HIS OWN SKILLS. Aka the ship has it's own skillpoints. Yours are completely and totally unaffected. sorry for the caps and rudeness. But i am trying to get the message out so the uninformed don't give CCP the wrong impression because of lack of knowledge.
Eliza Farcaster	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:48:00 - [234] Edited by: Eliza Farcaster on 07/02/2009 23:49:25 Actually I quite like this idea. Not many people will be brave enough to fly them, making them rare status symbol ships. I hope they are made virtually useless for missions and only viable for PVP, these T3 ships shouldnt be flying around highsec. These should be ships for the real hardcore PVPers. Keep them rare. You DONT HAVE to fly them! The only negative to this is that people who aren't man enough don't get any new ships! Oh, and I'm not going to fly them, but still like the idea. EDIT - They would be a joke for high-sec mission runnuners unless the missions are made unpredictable and have more webbers, scrammers etc. Being in high sec with +5 implants would be too much of an advantage.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:48:00 - [235] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Originally by: Kytanos Termek However if all you do is "cook" the ship to gain skill points. It's being no use to you, And odd's are you will still lose it eventually. Why settle for just one? Buy 50x copies of your favorite T3 ship, and "cook" 49 of them while you fly the 50th. You clearly don't understand the level of metagaming and loophole exploitation that most good PvPers will use to get every possible advantage. [ Thats assuming you can cook them - which isnt confirmed. It's frankly more likely you can only skill up one specific ship and its linked to one specific pilot. Drop that 'link' and the SP's invested die off (perhaps over time?). C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:51:00 - [236] And one last time to make it clear. to those who read every 3rd post. You do not ever, ever lose personal skill points. The ship has it's own skill points, That it loses if it's blown up. Think of it like having an alt that trains skills while you are also training skills at the exact same time. Mrr?
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:51:00 - [237] Originally by: Cailais Im stunned so many can't handle the thought of losing SPs. What happened to the fans of EVE - a dark and gritty universe? All those 'gb2wow' posts seem so uselessly pathetic in the face of these comments. Clearly ISK has become so readily available over the past few years that losing that is no biggy - but a few skill points and the end is nigh! Maybe we should adopt the WOW model and ships just respawn in your hangar when you get blown up? That often refers more to the moral ambiguity of EVE. The loss of ships and modules also serves a purpose in the game, other than HC e-peen waving. Without it there would be no industry/economy. It is what makes the world go round. If you remove it this whole thing will fall apart. Skill training on the other hand is nothing but a time sink and a measure of progress in the game. We have more than enough skills to train already and there will be even more added as time goes on, so there is no lack of timesinks. The point is anyway, that it kills many other features in the expansion, IF it is implemented in the way people fear. These ships need to be used and lost for all the planned features to work in the long run. Otherwise all that work poured into these features will mostly go to waste. It doesn't make any sense either and I'm not sure what value it adds to the game, if implemented this way. If CCP wants to add a HC SP loss feature, they could implement some experimental super(T3 ) implants, that give huge boosts to the pilots that dare to use them, but as a result some permanent memory loss will happen when podded. This or something similar would propably be acceptable by all involved and would not ruin any other features.
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:51:00 - [238] Whaddya know, people are freaking out and whining about mechanics that haven't been released yet. Gee whiz, this hasn't happened in say every content patch that has ever been released Every post in this thread is useless and moronic, even mine. Wait until the ships hit Sisi or a dev blog is released and then do the threadnaught whinefest thing. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
shone Guiding Hand Social Club	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:54:00 - [239] Originally by: thelung187 Not going to read through 8 pages to see if this has already been proposed, but if so, my apologies. The only way that SP loss due to ship loss can be balanced is to allow for SP bonus for ship kills. Example: if I kill your t3 ship, you lose some t3 sp, while I (or spread amongst myself and whoever else is on the killmail) get appropriate SP bonuses. So if you lose 800 sp for losing your ship, my buddy and I each get 400sp tacked onto ours (in addition to regular SP accumulation over time). Otherwise, really, what can we do with t3 that we can't with existing ships? Or put more simply... why bother? Without the aforementioned balancing mechanic (or some type of incentive beyond "oooh shiny new things"), this is potentially on the same level of sheer epic failure as the introduction of POS or existing sovereignty mechanics. QFT
DeadDuck Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:55:00 - [240] So you gain experience points when flying these ships ?... So instead of being docked you better be afk cloaked on a tec3 ship in order to gain experience points ?? ________________ God is my Wingman

Irida Mershkov Gallente Noir.	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:56:00 - [241] Originally by: Kytanos Termek And one last time to make it clear. to those who read every 3rd post. You do not ever, ever lose personal skill points. The ship has it's own skill points, That it loses if it's blown up. Think of it like having an alt that trains skills while you are also training skills at the exact same time.
thelung187 Guiding Hand Social Club	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:57:00 - [242] Originally by: shone Originally by: thelung187 Not going to read through 8 pages to see if this has already been proposed, but if so, my apologies. The only way that SP loss due to ship loss can be balanced is to allow for SP bonus for ship kills. Example: if I kill your t3 ship, you lose some t3 sp, while I (or spread amongst myself and whoever else is on the killmail) get appropriate SP bonuses. So if you lose 800 sp for losing your ship, my buddy and I each get 400sp tacked onto ours (in addition to regular SP accumulation over time). Otherwise, really, what can we do with t3 that we can't with existing ships? Or put more simply... why bother? Without the aforementioned balancing mechanic (or some type of incentive beyond "oooh shiny new things"), this is potentially on the same level of sheer epic failure as the introduction of POS or existing sovereignty mechanics. QFT OK, so instead of being char-point-based, it's ship-point-based. I believe the logic is still applicable.
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.07 23:59:00 - [243] BRB 40 BS to Suicide T3 Ship
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:02:00 - [244] Originally by: Kytanos Termek And one last time to make it clear. to those who read every 3rd post. You do not ever, ever lose personal skill points. The ship has it's own skill points, That it loses if it's blown up. Think of it like having an alt that trains skills while you are also training skills at the exact same time. Actually I dont think we know that's the case (unless there's something Ive missed - in which case a linky to the Dev comment would be great). Personal skill point loss would be the harsher end of the scale for such a mechanic. Losing SP's is a real kicker for some players, and the reason for this is quite straight forward. If you're wealthy (probably through having lots of online playing time), or RL wealthy (through GTCs) you can mitigate or even nullify the loss of any ship. In essence you cant be 'hurt' by another player - at least not in any significant fashion. SP loss is a totally different story however. You can't just jump into your CNR Alt pilot and run missions, or hide deep in your Alliance space and shoot NPCs to make up the difference. That time is lost, and can never be recovered. Admittedly its not 'character death' in the true sense of the term - but losing a T3 ship and those SPs is going to really smart. Its very harsh, totally unforgiving and completely avoids the risk buffer that ISK provides. For that reason, players who I notice have previously been very vocal about EVE's harsh environment are now anxiously hoping this wont come to pass. funny how once risk has real meaning, people arent quite so fond of it after all... C.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:02:00 - [245] Keep in mind I have no source for this information other than simple logic. CCP are good game developers, And would not do something so monumentally stupid. From everything I have read about tech 3 and peiced together. This seems the likeliest conclusion. It uses a pre-existing system (The skill point mechanic) Therefor reducing development time and effort. People already understand how skill points work. This is why there was so much confusion. When People talk about skill points. They immediately assume and relate it to the ones we train now. However it is certainly not. Actually having a ship train skills is a relatively abstract idea, And thus the confusion. TLDR version: CCP is re adapting a previously existing game mechanic to give ships "experience". It has already been proven to work, And will greatly reduce development time and effort vs brain storming, programming, and testing an entirely new mechanic and code.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:05:00 - [246] Originally by: Kytanos Termek And one last time to make it clear. to those who read every 3rd post. You do not ever, ever lose personal skill points. The ship has it's own skill points, That it loses if it's blown up. Think of it like having an alt that trains skills while you are also training skills at the exact same time. That would work, but the dev said something like you will lose a skill level when you lose your ship. Maybe I heard wrong or he said it badly, but that implies that the skill loss is yours not the ships. Why would you lose just one level anyway, if it was the ship that is gaining experience. It's dead when destroyed, so shouldn't you lose all gained experience? This whole thing is pretty much pointless anyway until we get more details. We are just discussing worst case scenarios at this point. Hope we get a devblog about it soonÖ.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:06:00 - [247] Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Kytanos Termek And one last time to make it clear. to those who read every 3rd post. You do not ever, ever lose personal skill points. The ship has it's own skill points, That it loses if it's blown up. Think of it like having an alt that trains skills while you are also training skills at the exact same time. Actually I dont think we know that's the case (unless there's something Ive missed - in which case a linky to the Dev comment would be great). Personal skill point loss would be the harsher end of the scale for such a mechanic. Losing SP's is a real kicker for some players, and the reason for this is quite straight forward. If you're wealthy (probably through having lots of online playing time), or RL wealthy (through GTCs) you can mitigate or even nullify the loss of any ship. In essence you cant be 'hurt' by another player - at least not in any significant fashion. SP loss is a totally different story however. You can't just jump into your CNR Alt pilot and run missions, or hide deep in your Alliance space and shoot NPCs to make up the difference. That time is lost, and can never be recovered. Admittedly its not 'character death' in the true sense of the term - but losing a T3 ship and those SPs is going to really smart. Its very harsh, totally unforgiving and completely avoids the risk buffer that ISK provides. For that reason, players who I notice have previously been very vocal about EVE's harsh environment are now anxiously hoping this wont come to pass. funny how once risk has real meaning, people arent quite so fond of it after all... C. You do lose skill points. They are just associated with the ship. If it's an entirely new ship you dont feel the bite as much. But if it's an old ship you will be reeling. It is in a way "personal" skill points. It's your ship. You've had it for a month now and it just finished training blow noobs up level 4. You don't want it to be reset back to it's base stat's. It's so nice now. So even the wealthiest player cannot make this up. It is indeed as you said. Time based. They can purchase all the tech 3 ships they want and lose them. But they will not have the same quality ship as the guy who has had his for 3 months and have Kill Mah enemies lvl 5. :-)
Gunnanmon Gallente UNITED STAR SYNDICATE	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:08:00 - [248] Originally by: Destination SkillQueue Originally by: Kytanos Termek And one last time to make it clear. to those who read every 3rd post. You do not ever, ever lose personal skill points. The ship has it's own skill points, That it loses if it's blown up. Think of it like having an alt that trains skills while you are also training skills at the exact same time. That would work, but the dev said something like you will lose a skill level when you lose your ship. He said "you will need to train new skills to fly the T3 ships, and when it pops you lose a level in those new skill(s)".
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:10:00 - [249] Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 08/02/2009 00:10:30 They also said their were changing it based on player feedback. I think these people are right. We need to wait for more information. THEN UNLEASH THE THREADNAUGHTS! Mrr?
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:12:00 - [250] I love how people assume that it'll all be ok if it's ship SP gained in addition to your normal SP. It won't be, it'll just be broken, terrible game design in a different way. If ship SP is gained by time alone, everyone will "cook" piles of T3 ships before using them. Say hi to my 50x T3 ships in my hangar waiting to be used. If it's gained through time spent actively flying, say hi to 23/7 AFK cloaking to "cook" one ship at a time (or flying in highsec, etc). If it's gained through combat, say hi to endless hours spent farming easy kills with an alt. I'm sure I'll have great fun shooting my alt's Bantam for the 16th straight hour... No matter how ship SP is gained, it will be exploited, and those exploits will almost definitely be boring as hell. Everyone who wants to win in PvP will have their T3 ships at max level, making that ship SP irrelevant. End result: another time sink/grind mechanic added to this game, but no real benefit. I see no reason why this is even remotely a good idea. -----------

Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:13:00 - [251] Originally by: Kytanos Termek Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 08/02/2009 00:10:30 They also said their were changing it based on player feedback. I think these people are right. We need to wait for more information. THEN UNLEASH THE THREADNAUGHTS! we should start now so we need no real threadnaught ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:14:00 - [252] Originally by: Merin Ryskin I love how people assume that it'll all be ok if it's ship SP gained in addition to your normal SP. It won't be, it'll just be broken, terrible game design in a different way. If ship SP is gained by time alone, everyone will "cook" piles of T3 ships before using them. Say hi to my 50x T3 ships in my hangar waiting to be used. If it's gained through time spent actively flying, say hi to 23/7 AFK cloaking to "cook" one ship at a time (or flying in highsec, etc). If it's gained through combat, say hi to endless hours spent farming easy kills with an alt. I'm sure I'll have great fun shooting my alt's Bantam for the 16th straight hour... No matter how ship SP is gained, it will be exploited, and those exploits will almost definitely be boring as hell. Everyone who wants to win in PvP will have their T3 ships at max level, making that ship SP irrelevant. End result: another time sink/grind mechanic added to this game, but no real benefit. I see no reason why this is even remotely a good idea. because no matter how long you train your ship, it will always be a cruiser? ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:14:00 - [253] Perhaps there will be a mechanic were you can only train 1 ship at a time if they are going with the time alone method. Makes sense to me. that way it's about a exploitable as character skill training is. Mrr?
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:15:00 - [254] Originally by: Kytanos Termek Perhaps there will be a mechanic were you can only train 1 ship at a time if they are going with the time alone method. Makes sense to me. that way it's about a exploitable as character skill training is. Again: bad game design. Why the hell would you want to encourage keeping a ship in your hangar for long periods of time instead of actively flying it? -----------
Caelum Mortuos Gallente Zero G Research and Development	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:16:00 - [255] In during ****storm Let's wait and see what the devblog says rather than jumping to conclusions shall we?
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:19:00 - [256] Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 08/02/2009 00:21:27 Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 08/02/2009 00:19:44 Originally by: Merin Ryskin Originally by: Kytanos Termek Perhaps there will be a mechanic were you can only train 1 ship at a time if they are going with the time alone method. Makes sense to me. that way it's about a exploitable as character skill training is. Again: bad game design. Why the hell would you want to encourage keeping a ship in your hangar for long periods of time instead of actively flying it? Well do that if you want. For every moments it's in your hanger it inst being useful to you. If players want to hoard their ships and barely use them. Fine. they get a ****load of XP. And they will lose it eventually. And for all that, It sit's collecting dust. I can tell you I would actively use my ship. Have fun with your shiny barely used toy. I will burn fast and die hard. and make as much use out of it as i can. If it survivles for awhile, Awesome. If not. oh well. I can buy another and train it. Mrr?
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:20:00 - [257] Originally by: thelung187 Not going to read through 8 pages to see if this has already been proposed, but if so, my apologies. The only way that SP loss due to ship loss can be balanced is to allow for SP bonus for ship kills. Example: if I kill your t3 ship, you lose some t3 sp, while I (or spread amongst myself and whoever else is on the killmail) get appropriate SP bonuses. So if you lose 800 sp for losing your ship, my buddy and I each get 400sp tacked onto ours (in addition to regular SP accumulation over time). Otherwise, really, what can we do with t3 that we can't with existing ships? Or put more simply... why bother? Without the aforementioned balancing mechanic (or some type of incentive beyond "oooh shiny new things"), this is potentially on the same level of sheer epic failure as the introduction of POS or existing sovereignty mechanics. That system falls flat on its face when you consider that you can farm your alts for SP. Which is exactly what people will do. Also, if you gain SP from non-T3 ships, you don't even need alts to farm. Just buy a stack of 100 T1 cruisers and have your friend fly them while you blow them up.
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp KenZoku	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:20:00 - [258] Lets wait and see what Sisi has to show about it. If its a seperate type of ship baised SP, one that does not effect a character's SP, then its ok. Well, to be honest, I am not impressed with any form of "use a alt to level up a ship afk". And thats it really. How do you prevent t3 ships becoming something a alt levels up for you? I guess we will find out once its on Sisi. I just hope CCP do not make a horrible mistake like they did when they tied Soverignity to mining POS's -- Billion Isk Mission
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:21:00 - [259] Originally by: Merin Ryskin I love how people assume that it'll all be ok if it's ship SP gained in addition to your normal SP. It won't be, it'll just be broken, terrible game design in a different way. If ship SP is gained by time alone, everyone will "cook" piles of T3 ships before using them. Say hi to my 50x T3 ships in my hangar waiting to be used. If it's gained through time spent actively flying, say hi to 23/7 AFK cloaking to "cook" one ship at a time (or flying in highsec, etc). If it's gained through combat, say hi to endless hours spent farming easy kills with an alt. I'm sure I'll have great fun shooting my alt's Bantam for the 16th straight hour... No matter how ship SP is gained, it will be exploited, and those exploits will almost definitely be boring as hell. Everyone who wants to win in PvP will have their T3 ships at max level, making that ship SP irrelevant. End result: another time sink/grind mechanic added to this game, but no real benefit. I see no reason why this is even remotely a good idea. On that logic nobody would undock until they'd skilled up to fly a Titan, but that doesnt happen now does it? Even assuming you can cook up ships to max skill level before using them, thats still time lost, SPs lost once that ship goes pop - that's still an irreplaceable loss. So what if you've got 50 T3 ships in your hangar? You've still had to take the time to get them to the right level, just as you've had to spend time shooting rats, running missions or whatever to get the 50 x T2 ships sat right next to them. If you can think of something in game that doesnt require the expenditure of time to complete then by all means let us know. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:21:00 - [260] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Originally by: Kytanos Termek Perhaps there will be a mechanic were you can only train 1 ship at a time if they are going with the time alone method. Makes sense to me. that way it's about a exploitable as character skill training is. Again: bad game design. Why the hell would you want to encourage keeping a ship in your hangar for long periods of time instead of actively flying it? because it's a cruiser. ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.

Caiman Graystock Caldari	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:22:00 - [261] CCP wouldn't get this close to rolling the T3 ships out without considering the obvious exploits alluded to in farming ship specific SP, right? Right?
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:25:00 - [262] Originally by: Caiman Graystock CCP wouldn't get this close to rolling the T3 ships out without considering the obvious exploits alluded to in farming ship specific SP, right? Right? coming on sisi in a week solve the puzzle ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:27:00 - [263] Originally by: Lord WarATron And thats it really. How do you prevent t3 ships becoming something a alt levels up for you? Make that skill progression specific to one character that applies only to one ship. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:33:00 - [264] Originally by: Caelum Mortuos In during ****storm Let's wait and see what the devblog says rather than jumping to conclusions shall we? Hi. You must be new here.
Lethos Aranis THE BLACK RAGE FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:36:00 - [265] I cbf reading through all this in detail right now and formulating another reply, but here's what I wrote on SHC that applies to this thread: Originally by: "Garr Anders" I remember that somewhere someone from CCP said that your ship learns stuff, so when you disasemble it or loose it the stuff that was learned gets lost. Yeah, I know thats very vague, but it could make sense, as in that when you fly your T3 assemebled, it gains SP to reduce drawbacks from whatever increasing its abilities/boost/boni, so being a different pool of SP. If you dont fly it, it doesnt learn anything but well if you loose it, SP of that particular ship are gone. But that just put together from hearsay.... Best post so far. I think you're the closest to the truth out of anyone. To expand on your thoughts, it seems that the Sleepers are some sort of sentient drones or maybe even infected Jove. Therefore the ships have a mind of their own and it also ties into the new AI and the fact they are meant to be tough. Obviously if you take parts from these ships to assemble your own, you're taking characteristics of each part. In other words, you are no longer just a pilot in a hunk of metal, but a pilot in a ship that is "alive" and works together with you, not for you. As you fly it the ship learns. Not only from it's own experience fighting but from you as well. You develop a sort of bond. It's stats increase and a parallel sort of SP increases. It might even reach into your own SP to boost it's attributes. Therefore when it dies, you don't lose a hunk of metal but a sentient ship. You are still there but the ships experience and everything it has learned dies with it. The trauma of the loss can also affect your own SP, hence the loss of it. We really do need details on whether it's a parallel SP, same SP or a combination of both. I'm not going to panic like almost everyone else about it but I can certainly see why people are complaining already and why it's such a ****storm. That's completely understandable. We just need more (much more) details before we can make a proper judgment and test it out on SiSi. Now this also brings up an interesting thing about salvaging. If you salvage a T3 ship, is it possible to bring over some experience to the next ship that uses that T3 component? How do you determine the value of the T3 component? Do you see what attributes and bonuses it will have before you use it or do you only know that there is a bonus but have no idea what it is before it's used to make the next ship? Are the bonuses standard amongst the same components or are even the components sentient and carry their own individuality? The possibilities with T3 in this way are endless and it's actually mind boggling how much potential this has if executed correctly. I'm more excited than ever about this.
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:37:00 - [266] I think CCP should listen to all the whinging and ***ing in this thread and shut down the server, as obviously, all there game designs are flawed and their game balance totally unfair and crap. After all, thats why all these people *ing still play, because the game is unbearably **ty.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:39:00 - [267] Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 08/02/2009 00:39:23 Congratulations Lethos. you earn an award for most optimistic person on the forums! now backoff the happy pills :-p tips his hat :-D I wish more people thought of it that way.
Soporo Caldari The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:57:00 - [268] Edited by: Soporo on 08/02/2009 00:59:30 Next years Alliance Tourneys will certainly be interesting if this turns out like it sounds ... The alts will fall like rain.
Lethos Aranis THE BLACK RAGE FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:02:00 - [269] Originally by: Kytanos Termek Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 08/02/2009 00:39:23 Congratulations Lethos. you earn an award for most optimistic person on the forums! now backoff the happy pills :-p tips his hat :-D I wish more people thought of it that way. It's because I've managed to put on 7 tin foil hats simultaneously But seriously, it's a game. No point *****ing until we have solid data which at this point in time we don't.
Polinus Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:03:00 - [270] I dare to day.. the last time CCP introduced something that WORKED and was not a TOTAL FAILURE of conception.. was when TUX was a game designer. Think on that...

Hatsumi Kobayashi SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:08:00 - [271] I'm putting my money on this being an elaborate CCP troll.
Doctor Mabuse	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:11:00 - [272] Unbelievable, absolutely unbelievable. 10 pages and no ones noticed? 'Trolls Sah! Fahsands of 'em' In fact this tread has herds of trolls in it, laughing, at you all, running around like Chicken Little...
MMXMMX Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:15:00 - [273] LOL First the take your isk when you die and now olso your skilpoints So everything you earn and learn wil be gone when you die so in the end you gain 0 by playing eve :) No isk + No skils = NO FUN
Undeniable Existence Questionable Practices	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:16:00 - [274] Can i have all your stuff??
MMXMMX Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:21:00 - [275] Edited by: MMXMMX on 08/02/2009 01:25:27 Originally by: Undeniable Existence Edited by: Undeniable Existence on 08/02/2009 01:19:41 Can i have all your stuff?? Trolling about something you aren't even sure of yet and taking it as a bad thing is pretty lame TBH!! Yes send me 10 mil ingame today and you can have all my stuff?? Oh wait you ar on a NOOB account you can not do that lol
LegendaryFrog Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:30:00 - [276] Calling it now, all tech 3 related skills will have Charisma as its primary attribute.
Pipboy2K Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:43:00 - [277] Originally by: LegendaryFrog Calling it now, all tech 3 related skills will have Charisma as its primary attribute. THIS! and they wont tell us until all people changed as many as possible of their attribute-points from charisma --> perception/intelligence if you spin this a bit further... as people already had this idea of "ship is alive/trains with you/uses your attributes", the ship learns faster as your charisma is higher (it just likes you more, as noone wants to have un-charismatic people around them, even a living ship doesnt and is unhappy having to fly around with you ugly bastard) and i tell you, nothing of what has been thought about for now will be used by ccp, they will just throw the idea of losing sp away :D sure, the idea would be nice to have a ship learn with you, but as it has already been said, people would just exploit it..... War, war never changes
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:43:00 - [278] Originally by: Kytanos Termek Well do that if you want. For every moments it's in your hanger it inst being useful to you. If players want to hoard their ships and barely use them. Fine. they get a **load of XP. And they will lose it eventually. And for all that, It sit's collecting dust. I can tell you I would actively use my ship. Have fun with your shiny barely used toy. I will burn fast and die hard. and make as much use out of it as i can. If it survivles for awhile, Awesome. If not. oh well. I can buy another and train it. And this is exactly why it is such terrible game design. You should not be forced to choose between: 1) Put up with anti-fun mechanics to maximize your stats. OR 2) Have fun, but die to everyone who is willing to accept the anti-fun loophole. In good game design, fun and performance go together, they aren't competing goals. Originally by:** Cailais On that logic nobody would undock until they'd skilled up to fly a Titan, but that doesnt happen now does it? No, that's not even close. You don't lose training time by undocking normal ships, you DO lose something if you undock a T3 ship too early. Quote: Even assuming you can cook up ships to max skill level before using them, thats still time lost, SPs lost once that ship goes pop - that's still an irreplaceable loss. So what if you've got 50 T3 ships in your hangar? You've still had to take the time to get them to the right level, just as you've had to spend time shooting rats, running missions or whatever to get the 50 x T2 ships sat right next to them. And this is a good idea how? See above about fun vs. stats. You should not be rewarded for avoiding playing the game, but that's what everyone is going to do, "cook" their T3 ships while flying a different T3 ship or just the standard T2/T1 ships. -----------
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.02.08 01:45:00 - [279] Originally by: Zurin Arctus Originally by: 5pinDizzy blah 1. Consider posting on your main so you don't look like a sockpuppet ;) 2. Notice that section I set in bold there? Yes? That's where you defeated your own argument. But just to add a few nails to the coffin, the kind of extreme risk-aversive behavior this mechanic would add to eve is something I don't think we want. You're an idiot. Sorry I normally try to post construtively, but he wasn't worth the effort.
achoura	Posted - 2009.02.08 02:06:00 - [280] Edited by: achoura on 08/02/2009 02:07:36 Sp = time, a finite resource because our lifespan is limited and whether we actively think of it or not it's always in the subconscious when we say something is a waste of time. Now if ccp have balance effectively t3 ships are roughly as powerful as t2, eventually cost more but (hopefully) be similar in cost eventually. Now, if you had the choice between flying two equally powerful, ships with equal cost, loosing one of which would cost you isk, the other isk & sp i.e. your time, which would you fly? black ops are better than this The first gatecamp, bubble, dd, roaming gang, suicide gank, not checking the ap, pressing jump instead of warp etc etc and you loose time that wont come back. True, we can loose it with pod but tbfh the whole dam point of clone is that you didn't. Thank you for completely removing the point of buying a t3 ship before they even reached sisi. If this does go through in the end then demand won't be that high, at least after the initial rush. Then after things calm down that couple thousand extra systems you crafted suddenly arnt worth exploring, the money's not worth it and people who originally bought the ships have either lost them and gone back to t2 to protect their sp and put them in a hander and gone back to t2 to save sp. Spend all that time expanding, building the biggest expansion to date to give people more toys to pew pew then *s on it before it's even finished. Thanks for totaly removing any incentive to fly them before they're even out. P.S. If your a mac user awaiting the premium update, don't bother buying the retail disk, you get it home it'll initiate a 1.5 gig dl because that disk you just bought didnt actually have the client on it you just paied for (gm post, gd forum). The EVE servers and their patches**

Tiirae The New Era HUZZAH FEDERATION	Posted - 2009.02.08 02:11:00 - [281] Originally by: Cailais Im stunned so many can't handle the thought of losing SPs. What happened to the fans of EVE - a dark and gritty universe? All those 'gb2wow' posts seem so uselessly pathetic in the face of these comments. Clearly ISK has become so readily available over the past few years that losing that is no biggy - but a few skill points and the end is nigh! Maybe we should adopt the WOW model and ships just respawn in your hangar when you get blown up? C. This reply is for everyone in this thread who has made a comment similar to the above: The problem is that there is a culture in Eve that values SP above pretty much everything else. Prior to this, there was only one way to lose SP, and that was by making the incredibly stupid error of not updating your clone before getting podded. So we have 5 years of people drilling 'you can't lose SP unless you're an idiot' into our heads. It's hardly surprising that people's instinctive reaction is one of dismay when they hear they can now lose SP through regular gameplay. Anyone who is active in PvP and plays for fun will lose ships regularly - sometimes you have a bad run and lose 2 or more ships in a day. Those of us who enjoy PvP have long ago been forced to accept the waste of a lot of money often without any chance to defend yourself. To now push SP into that equation as well is frankly beyond the pale. Anyone who doesn't think this is a terrible idea has never done PvP as the only activity for a long period. I'm sure this will be changed before it goes live. What would be acceptable is for your ship to gain SP as you fly it, then when it is destroyed, those SP are lost. That's fine; it would still hurt a lot but at least you're not touching my SP that has taken so long to acquire.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.08 02:16:00 - [282] Originally by: Merin Ryskin And this is a good idea how? See above about fun vs. stats. You should not be rewarded for avoiding playing the game, but that's what everyone is going to do, "cook" their T3 ships while flying a different T3 ship or just the standard T2/T1 ships. I still cant see why you're assuming players will simply store up their T3 ships until theyre cooked? Even if such a process is possible do you not fly a T2 ship until youve maxed out your skills with it??? And if they are flying a t1 or T2 ship (as you suggest) how are they avoiding playing the game?? Im going to assume you mean that players won't use their T3 ships because they'll be scared of losing the SPs invested? Well the longer they delay using the ship the more SPs they can potentially lose. Equally You dont have to maximise your stats in fact Id wager most players are generalists rather than having everything for a racial cruiser at V. Ultimately its a risk issue - some players will happily fit and fly faction ships, with faction fittings and implants into a pvp fight. Others will just spin ships like that in a station. At some stage you're going to lose - either thats in the form of ISK (which is a negligble loss for many players), or T3 SPs (which ISK cant replace). C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Undeniable Existence Questionable Practices	Posted - 2009.02.08 02:18:00 - [283] Originally by: MMXMMX Edited by: MMXMMX on 08/02/2009 01:25:27 Originally by: Undeniable Existence Edited by: Undeniable Existence on 08/02/2009 01:19:41 Can i have all your stuff?? Trolling about something you aren't even sure of yet and taking it as a bad thing is pretty lame TBH!! Yes send me 10 mil ingame today and you can have all my stuff?? Oh wait you ar on a NOOB account you can not do that lol Begging for isk on the forums is not allowed, nub.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.08 02:21:00 - [284] Originally by: Tiirae Originally by: Cailais Im stunned so many can't handle the thought of losing SPs. What happened to the fans of EVE - a dark and gritty universe? All those 'gb2wow' posts seem so uselessly pathetic in the face of these comments. Clearly ISK has become so readily available over the past few years that losing that is no biggy - but a few skill points and the end is nigh! Maybe we should adopt the WOW model and ships just respawn in your hangar when you get blown up? C. This reply is for everyone in this thread who has made a comment similar to the above: The problem is that there is a culture in Eve that values SP above pretty much everything else. Prior to this, there was only one way to lose SP, and that was by making the incredibly stupid error of not updating your clone before getting podded. So we have 5 years of people drilling 'you can't lose SP unless you're an idiot' into our heads. It's hardly surprising that people's instinctive reaction is one of dismay when they hear they can now lose SP through regular gameplay. Anyone who is active in PvP and plays for fun will lose ships regularly - sometimes you have a bad run and lose 2 or more ships in a day. Those of us who enjoy PvP have long ago been forced to accept the waste of a lot of money often without any chance to defend yourself. To now push SP into that equation as well is frankly beyond the pale. Anyone who doesn't think this is a terrible idea has never done PvP as the only activity for a long period. I'm sure this will be changed before it goes live. What would be acceptable is for your ship to gain SP as you fly it, then when it is destroyed, those SP are lost. That's fine; it would still hurt a lot but at least you're not touching my SP that has taken so long to acquire. Bolded - Thats what pretty much everyone is expecting. C.
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2009.02.08 02:29:00 - [285] No use freaking out until we see the devblog.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.08 02:32:00 - [286] Edited by: Cailais on 08/02/2009 02:32:43 Originally by: achoura Edited by: achoura on 08/02/2009 02:07:36 Now, if you had the choice between flying two equally powerful, ships with equal cost, loosing one of which would cost you isk, the other isk & sp i.e. your time, which would you fly? black ops are better than this ISK has a time cost as well. You use up time in order to aquire it - e.g by running missions, selling mined minerals, shooting npcs etc. Everytime you loose a ship you (in theory) need 'X' amount of time to buy it back again. So, when you engage in PVP you're putting that 'time invested' on the line - the costlier the ship, the more time invested, the greater the risk. So, if T3 ships do not come with some form of "disadvantage" they are likely to be better than, more desirable than T2 ships. The demand for them will be high -very high. High demand = high costs. Higher costs means you'll have to grind for ISK longer hence using up your time invested. C.
TSAChaoticGhost Caldari Skill Level Six Dara Cothrom	Posted - 2009.02.08 02:42:00 - [287] Next!!! give me updates on T4 please
MMXMMX Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.02.08 02:49:00 - [288] Originally by: Undeniable Existence Originally by: MMXMMX Edited by: MMXMMX on 08/02/2009 01:25:27 Originally by: Undeniable Existence Edited by: Undeniable Existence on 08/02/2009 01:19:41 Can i have all your stuff?? Trolling about something you aren't even sure of yet and taking it as a bad thing is pretty lame TBH!! Yes send me 10 mil ingame today and you can have all my stuff?? Oh wait you ar on a NOOB account you can not do that lol Begging for isk on the forums is not allowed, nub. I was not begging For isk you NUB 1: You where begging for all my stuff 2: I was trying to sel all my stuff to you for 10 mil 3: You ar on the NUB account
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.02.08 03:01:00 - [289] Originally by: Cailais Even if such a process is possible do you not fly a T2 ship until youve maxed out your skills with it??? And if they are flying a t1 or T2 ship (as you suggest) how are they avoiding playing the game?? Like I said, the analogy does not work at all. If I fly a Zealot before I finish getting all skills trained to fly it perfectly, I lose nothing but that Zealot when it dies. If I fly the T3 ship before I finish getting all skills trained to fly it perfectly, not only do I lose the ship itself, but I lose *all progress towards flying it perfectly*. This is the problem: If I buy an Omen, the low cost encourages me to fly it whenever I want. If I buy a Zealot, the higher cost means I'm less willing to take risks, but I'm still flying the ship. If I buy a T3 ship, the correct action is to "cook" it to maximum level instead of flying it. One of these things is not like the others.
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2009.02.08 03:09:00 - [290] if IF this is true, it is only one more example of how astray the developers for this game have gone. incredibly incredibly weak and ******ed. what, you couldn't think up anything better than "hey, we have isk sinks, lets have SP sinks too" ? if it's done soley to make it a unique and niche field, it really shows a lack of imagination. you want these things to fail as bad as black ops? it appears ccp doesn't have the ability to bring anything new to the table anymore without making it totally useless.

Undeniable Existence Questionable Practices	Posted - 2009.02.08 03:23:00 - [291] Originally by: MMXMMX Originally by: Undeniable Existence Originally by: MMXMMX Edited by: MMXMMX on 08/02/2009 01:25:27 Originally by: Undeniable Existence Edited by: Undeniable Existence on 08/02/2009 01:19:41 Can i have all your stuff?? Trolling about something you aren't even sure of yet and taking it as a bad thing is pretty lame TBH!! Yes send me 10 mil ingame today and you can have all my stuff?? Oh wait you ar on a NOOB account you can not do that lol Begging for isk on the forums is not allowed, nub. I was not begging For isk you NUB 1: You where begging for all my stuff 2: I was trying to sel all my stuff to you for 10 mil 3: You ar on the NUB account Noob char does not equal noob account so **** off
rValdez5987 Amarr 32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.	Posted - 2009.02.08 03:29:00 - [292] Originally by: Kesper North Well, here's my feedback: No. no, no, no and hell no. No one will fly these ships if we lose skillpoints every time we lose one. This kills T3. Ill still fly them, sp and isk dont matter that much to me as long as i bring down as many of you as i can before i die. Thats all that matters in the end to me anyways, playing even solo, and making fleets cry.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.08 03:30:00 - [293] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Originally by: Cailais Even if such a process is possible do you not fly a T2 ship until youve maxed out your skills with it??? And if they are flying a t1 or T2 ship (as you suggest) how are they avoiding playing the game?? Like I said, the analogy does not work at all. If I fly a Zealot before I finish getting all skills trained to fly it perfectly, I lose nothing but that Zealot when it dies. If I fly the T3 ship before I finish getting all skills trained to fly it perfectly, not only do I lose the ship itself, but I lose *all progress towards flying it perfectly. This is the problem: If I buy an Omen, the low cost encourages me to fly it whenever I want. If I buy a Zealot, the higher cost means I'm less willing to take risks, but I'm still flying the ship. If I buy a T3 ship, the correct action is to "cook" it to maximum level instead of flying it. One of these things is not like the others. Ah I see where you're coming from now. From my perspective its the very fact that you don't* loose anything when your example zealot blows up that makes any sense of loss meaningless. Depending on your wealth (ISK) the Zealot might be a 'high risk' ship to fly - or just yet another ship in your hangar. SP loss, specific to a ship, is however very different. It hurts; loss has meaning. Now drawing your analogy futher - T1 ship - low cost, fly whenever (essentially expendable) T2 ship - high cost, fly with caution T3 ship - high cost (ISK + SP), fly with extreme caution? Now, remove the SP loss and what is the difference between the T2 ship, and the T3 ship? Quite possibly nothing at all - at which point you have to ask the question, why would anyone want to fly a T2 ship ever again? Now Id go as far as agreeing with you that optimising a T3 ship makes sense - depending upon how long it takes to reach that optimized level. My guess is CCP are attempting to make T3 optimisation only a fleeting goal, and one which requires skill, considerable luck and caution to maintain for any period of time. T4 would never be required under such a system as very very few (if any) would reach the 'end game' state of having a fully optimized T3 ship for a long period. Whats equally interesting to me is the massive contrast in players approach to risk. Elsewhere there is much nashing of teeth demanding that w-space has no local channel, that local makes a star system 'too safe', removes risk etc etc. In months gone by other threads have demanded that Empire space is nerfed as being 'risk free', war decs enhanced to prevent corp hopping, gates reduced in size because too many pilots escape - and so forth. And yet, when CCP add risk apparently this is a 'bad idea'? I was originally of the opinion that many EVE players embraced risk, and really enjoyed the fact that EVE was one game where 'loss' really meant something. Sadly from the comments I've read so far I cant hold to that view any longer. I think its safe to say that those players who deride the risk averse "carebears" only do so provided its on their terms, and its not actually them risking anything at all really. C.
Crimsonshot Brooti Minmatar Tactical Assault and Recon Unit	Posted - 2009.02.08 03:39:00 - [294] Originally by: Lethos Aranis I cbf reading through all this in detail right now and formulating another reply, but here's what I wrote on SHC that applies to this thread: Originally by: "Garr Anders" I remember that somewhere someone from CCP said that your ship learns stuff, so when you disasemble it or loose it the stuff that was learned gets lost. Yeah, I know thats very vague, but it could make sense, as in that when you fly your T3 assemebled, it gains SP to reduce drawbacks from whatever increasing its abilities/boost/boni, so being a different pool of SP. If you dont fly it, it doesnt learn anything but well if you loose it, SP of that particular ship are gone. But that just put together from hearsay.... Best post so far. I think you're the closest to the truth out of anyone. To expand on your thoughts, it seems that the Sleepers are some sort of sentient drones or maybe even infected Jove. Therefore the ships have a mind of their own and it also ties into the new AI and the fact they are meant to be tough. Obviously if you take parts from these ships to assemble your own, you're taking characteristics of each part. In other words, you are no longer just a pilot in a hunk of metal, but a pilot in a ship that is "alive" and works together with you, not for you. As you fly it the ship learns. Not only from it's own experience fighting but from you as well. You develop a sort of bond. It's stats increase and a parallel sort of SP increases. It might even reach into your own SP to boost it's attributes. Therefore when it dies, you don't lose a hunk of metal but a sentient ship. You are still there but the ships experience and everything it has learned dies with it. The trauma of the loss can also affect your own SP, hence the loss of it. We really do need details on whether it's a parallel SP, same SP or a combination of both. I'm not going to panic like almost everyone else about it but I can certainly see why people are complaining already and why it's such a ***storm. That's completely understandable. We just need more (much more) details before we can make a proper judgment and test it out on SiSi. Now this also brings up an interesting thing about salvaging. If you salvage a T3 ship, is it possible to bring over some experience to the next ship that uses that T3 component? How do you determine the value of the T3 component? Do you see what attributes and bonuses it will have before you use it or do you only know that there is a bonus but have no idea what it is before it's used to make the next ship? Are the bonuses standard amongst the same components or are even the components sentient and carry their own individuality? The possibilities with T3 in this way are endless and it's actually mind boggling how much potential this has if executed correctly. I'm more excited than ever about this. Best optimistic post yet... The ship should grow with charisma as secondary ....pets the ships, makes cooing noises Also when you kill ships, it should be like cap limits of certain points attributed to the ship ie say 10 points for a frigate or 20 for a cruiser and so on. Or when ever you kill something for so long it learns/grows as you kill this type(bit like the tyranids) of ship and goes anti-(ie frigate,in the form of either defences/guns)of whatever you shot at ,the compromise would be any other ship you face would eventually weaken as to simulate the specialization, that would be worth using the ship for. I definately use one when it comes out.. need to spice up the life of almost-no-risk a bit.
Asuri Kinnes Caldari Adhocracy Incorporated	Posted - 2009.02.08 03:51:00 - [295] Originally by: Gemmell Edited by: Gemmell on 07/02/2009 19:57:12 Edited by: Gemmell on 07/02/2009 19:57:02 Edited by: Gemmell on 07/02/2009 18:49:19 Lame :< Source: CCP Chronitis(sp?) on EVETV Clarification: Only skills relating to the modular ship you're flying. CCP Forum Reply; Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocrypha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Oh wait, you mean like the feedback on the speed/missile nerf? Oh yeah, THAT makes me feel LOTS better... -N-O-T- Bad idea AK Honor is that which you do when no one else is looking. Ethics, Honor and Respect. Without the first two, you can't buy the last one...
Matrix Skye Caldari	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:06:00 - [296] Originally by: Bellum Eternus How to ensure that this skillpoint loss mechanic gets nerfed to hell or removed: gank tons of T3 flying carebears in high sec until they whine to CCP about all their lost skillpoints. I for one will be ready and waiting with suicide gank ships in high sec to pop the first T3 ship I see, if for no other reason than to erase the pilots skillpoints. Even if it takes a few BS to down one in high sec, it'll be worth it just for the nerd rage. I don't see a T3 cruiser sized ship surviving 4-5 T2 fit gank Geddons. But you're already doing so well whining on this very thread. But as always you don't see the sty in your own eye, just on those you hate so much... teh bearz!
Kusum Fawn	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:10:00 - [297] this is great, I love all of it and wish there was more, Please, The new expansion will be run on the tears of Pvpers I cant wait for the first T3 to get concorded (whats this about cooking ships? are you all half baked? or do they get sp by not using them, I sort of figured that ships would learn and die like a wingman, If your all mavericks then the ship is Goose, you mess up and your goose is served ( I couldnt use the word cooked again) why would having a t3 hanger queen give it any experience?) Im the best pilot that you ever saw, as long as i dont leave the station.
Kyusoath Orillian Broski Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:12:00 - [298] this is a fine idea. i love the rage its generating. i think maybe its like the CREW getting SP rather than you ? crews are something thats been thrown around on the forums for ages. PS, our ships have crews read the chronicles that state this clearly. pod piloting reduces the crew needed massively but does not eliminate it TRU BRO. Unofficial .BRO. raep team captain.
Ta'ku Minmatar	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:12:00 - [299] Edited by: Ta''ku on 08/02/2009 04:16:20 Originally by: Tiirae What would be acceptable is for your ship to gain SP as you fly it, then when it is destroyed, those SP are lost. That's fine; it would still hurt a lot but at least you're not touching my SP that has taken so long to acquire. That's what I'm gonna bet on. But either way is good with me. Ships SP or your own personal SP. I'm good with both, tbh. Though admittedly, I'd rather it be "ship sp." For obvious reason. I'll be a bit sad if I can't get a dedicated T3 Exploration ship. *Edited because I'm high and my thoughts got confubard.
shuckstar Gallente Hauling hogs	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:17:00 - [300] Originally by: kublai Well that just took away all the point in having t3 ships. Yep agreed, sounds **** tbh.

Matrix Skye Caldari	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:20:00 - [301] So much for puking the almighty companion line of the L337 PVPer: "Eve is a cold harsh place" Oh the hypocrisy
Joss Sparq Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:23:00 - [302] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocrypha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. 11 pages now of fear & loathing, confirm/deny?
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:27:00 - [303] Find your fangs you !@@#$ing cry babys God forbid there be risk in PVP Dozens of other MMO's have XP penaltys for death, any death. In that respect EVE is relativity soft on player death, no damage to your character it's self if you are cloned, and NPC's never pod. Sad day when the "Hard core l33t PVPers and "pirates" in EVE have less balls then EQ2 players... And grats to everyone who had an epic level emo hissy fit over something that isn't finalized and they havent even seen yet, even CSMs... Originally by: StevieSG Verone looks like data from star trek. that is all.
Isil Rahsen IsilZheHa Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:32:00 - [304] I approve of this development.I find I can't F5 fast enough for all the tears.
chatgris	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:38:00 - [305] Originally by: Isil Rahsen I approve of this development.I find I can't F5 fast enough for all the tears. I've seen this F5 reference elsewhere, and in the context of a screenshot. But F5 activates a high slot..? Could you explain why you want to hit F5 specifically?
Isil Rahsen IsilZheHa Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:40:00 - [306] If you press F5 it will refresh whatever webpage you are currently looking at in your browser.
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2009.02.08 04:48:00 - [307] F5 key activates 'refresh' in most internet browsers As for the skill loss of the character on tech 3, I think its a bad idea unless insrance can cover/protect it.
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2009.02.08 05:00:00 - [308] Dumb idea, if folks lose skill points when their t3 ships are lost then you'll not see folks using them. If they are so powerful that they aren't balanced without skill loss then they need to be toned down.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.08 05:05:00 - [309] I can't help but think that my idea about unique ships with a record of their kill history and such has been bastardized into this T3 'ship SP' nonsense.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 05:08:00 - [310] it's like 34 hours to testing :P and we won't even have a write up on were testing :P

Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.08 05:12:00 - [311] Originally by: MotherMoon it's like 34 hours to testing :P and we won't even have a write up on were testing :P This tbh. If you assume that they'll even have it installed and running on test on Monday, which probably won't happen. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Threv Echandari Caldari K Directorate	Posted - 2009.02.08 05:18:00 - [312] Edited by: Threv Echandari on 08/02/2009 05:22:42 Throwing my ill informed 2 isk in; I'm going to have to agree with the "Ship has SP" and its tied to your Pilot somehow in terms the T3 skills used to pilot it.Thats going from what I read in EON, the Fanfest Video and the other carp floating on the forums. So yeah if you lose it, its going to hurt, like you lost a freind. Yeah Bellum, you may have been on track with that but its also the similar to "Crew Ideas" that have been floating around too. As for Meryn's comments about "Cooking" ships with alts; if the ship is tied to YOU then you will only be able to "Cook" one ship at a time no "alt cooking". Regardless of whether the ships gains SP by mere time spent flying, or by actually killing stuff (hi-sec rat farming),like Neocron where you got better in a particular skill by using it, your Char will not be doing anything else and you will get bored sooner than later and want to take it out (or you know go out in one of your old T2 ships and have fun like you used to). So you tell me Meryn, given the circumstnaces above would YOU tie up your combat main flying afk for days on end in a cloaker, or blasting an alt in bantam knowing that all that (non-fun)cooking time will go straight down the toilet when your ship gets popped? Meh.. It doesn't matter really, we are going to find out soon enough. The fact that T3 is going to be on SISI next week is the really big news . Speculate, cry, whine all you want (a general you not a specific "you"), we will have the answers to all these questions soon enough.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.08 05:21:00 - [313] Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 08/02/2009 05:23:02 Ok, for those who are entirely against ship SP and losing it. (Lets face it some of you will fight against this till the day eve ends, It is the nature of an mmo to not please everyone. It is impossible to do so.) Lets do something constructive. What else? What other way is there for the ship to advance, Do you propose you only lose a fixed portion of Ship SP and can transfer it to your new ship? How about say a % based loss? Maby you don't loss anything, And your ship just gets more powerful? Wouldn't that be a little broken too? Please, by all means suggest alternatives, Instead of dismantling this idea and stopping on the burning wreckage. Take those shattered shards of creativity and build something out of them. Does anyone have any alternate methods of giving ships "experiance"? Or should we just can the entire idea and lose any benefit it would have given us. And just go with tech 3 ships as Lego building ships with nothing else going for them besides the modular nature? I am interested to see the suggestions.
Isil Rahsen IsilZheHa Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.08 05:24:00 - [314] Originally by: Threv Echandari Edited by: Threv Echandari on 08/02/2009 05:22:42 Throwing my ill informed 2 isk in; I'm going to have to agree with the "Ship has SP" and its tied to your Pilot somehow in terms the T3 skills used to pilot it.Thats going from what I read in EON, the Fanfest Video and the other carp floating on the forums. So yeah if you lose it, its going to hurt, like you lost a freind. Yeah Bellum, you may have been on track with that but its also the similar to "Crew Ideas" that have been floating around too. As for Meryn's comments about "Cooking" ships with alts; if the ship is tied to YOU then you will only be able to "Cook" one ship at a time no "alt cooking". Regardless of whether the ships gains SP by mere time spent flying, or by actually killing stuff (hi-sec rat farming),like Neocron where you got better in a particular skill by using it, your Char will not be doing anything else and you will get bored sooner than later and want to take it out (or you know go out in one of your old T2 ships and have fun like you used to). So you tell me Meryn, given the circumstnaces above would YOU tie up your combat main flying afk for days on end in a cloaker, or blasting an alt in bantam knowing that all that (non-fun)cooking time will go straight down the toilet when your ship gets popped? Meh.. It doesn't matter really, we are going to find out soon enough. The fact that T3 is going to be on SISI next week is the really big news . Speculate, cry, whine all you want (a general you not a specific "you"), we will have the answers to all these questions soon enough. This ^ tbqfh. Anyone else going to come and cry about mechanics you know very little (aka next to nothing) about?
Sidrat Flush Caldari Life is Experience Rally Against Evil	Posted - 2009.02.08 05:29:00 - [315] No of course I haven't read all eleven pages, that would be silly. I'll read the blog instead. However from reading the first and last page (mainly the last page, page 11 on my screen) - it sounds like the idea is to have some sort of MMO game of conkers in space. WOOT!! Now was it clear glue and keeping them in the freezer that made them harder, or did you just have to put them in the freezer? I can't remember. For those that don't know what it is, here's a link There's also a free web game around as well, but I'm not linking that.
Trind2222 Amarr Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2009.02.08 05:45:00 - [316] Edited by: Trind2222 on 08/02/2009 05:45:13 Hope the T3 ahips will be like illegal goods it is risk to take it to empire You will not lose any thing else sp then t3 ships skill tree as I understand?
John'eh Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:14:00 - [317] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocrypha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Do I actually need to test that or can I tell you what I think of this kind of game design right now? I will tell you; This is the most epic fail I have seen from CCP in terms of game design yet. I'm not a PVP'er either; I just think that this is a waste. Why would you do something as stupid as make SP the basis for something that can be lost to easy? You know that any t3 ship will be called primary, so it will be lost the second it un-docks. The risk for this is too great because no matter how good the ship is, its going down asap. CCP has once again proven that they dont know squat in terms of game design; nobody will use Tech3 except people in NPC corps who sit in empire all day. And even then, no doubt they will not be usable for missions so they will be worthless.
Fire Ants The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:16:00 - [318] Honestly, the SP loss itself wouldn't bother me too much. The problem for me is that losing a T3 ship could potentially screw me out of the next few weeks of training time, since I'd have to train the ship skills back up. On the other hand, if it's just that the ship gains experience that will be lost when it pops, that's totally fine and actually pretty awesome. Whatever it is that I'm losing when my ship blows up - ship experience, SP, "sentience," whatever - I just hope that it doesn't interrupt my actual skilltree. Otherwise, between this and the need for a skill queue (although I love the queue itself), I wonder if EVE won't continue drifting further away from pew-pew and more toward the tiresome logistical treadmill of other MMOs. Sometimes it looks like the thrill of combat and the fun of just screwing around in New Eden has taken a backseat to the numbers game, which is a bit saddening. Someday, we'll all be playing EFT on the forums instead of actually logging into EVE. That said, I'll withhold my final judgment until I can get on SiSi. But I'll be watching this very closely.
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:17:00 - [319] Originally by: Trind2222 Edited by: Trind2222 on 08/02/2009 05:45:13 Hope the T3 ahips will be like illegal goods it is risk to take it to empire You will not lose any thing else sp then t3 ships skill tree as I understand? I see that as the problem really. It means your essentially trapped in that ship. Much like a Mothership or Titan pilot, but your only in a cruiser. I don't see many folks going to want to lose skills just to switch ships, and heaven help you if you have to leave the ship to change out the configuration. In essence seems like a hair brained idea. Sadly though CCP has not really impressed much in the last few expansions.
Sidrat Flush Caldari Life is Experience Rally Against Evil	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:22:00 - [320] Originally by: John'eh I will tell you; This is the most epic fail I have seen from CCP in terms of game design yet. I'm not a PVP'er either; I just think that this is a waste. Why would you do something as stupid as make SP the basis for something that can be lost to easy? You know that any t3 ship will be called primary, so it will be lost the second it un-docks. The risk for this is too great because no matter how good the ship is, its going down asap. CCP has once again proven that they dont know squat in terms of game design; nobody will use Tech3 except people in NPC corps who sit in empire all day. And even then, no doubt they will not be usable for missions so they will be worthless. Why wouldn't they be useable in missions? And do you know EXACTLY how skill points will be used when it comes to t3 ships? You don't. Heck not even CCP does they've got a design of course, and I for one would like to see it. As long as it doesn't do too much damage and certainly doesn't tie in to existing Tech1 skill books as well, then it's all good. These ships are going to be so damn expensive anyway that if you can afford to fly one, you can afford to re-learn a few skills. Personally I'd rather have it based on the following WARNING GOOD IDEA IMMINENT i) CCP releases the schematics for implants in empire stations, maybe LP stores. ii) These implants (maybe new ones, maybe existing ones) - are then able to be plugged in to a slot on a T3 hull iii) Those implant devices and salvage rigs (hmmm, doesn't really fit does it.).. okay scratch this one. So buildable implants, which will bring the prices down further, plugging them in to a ship hull for extra bonus's to that hull's characteristics and...well it's not exactly the game of conkers it sounded like is it. See wait for the dev blog okay.

OffBeaT Caldari LEGI0N	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:24:00 - [321] you should not be able to use your jump clone in a t3 ship. not lose skill points for it.
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:27:00 - [322] Originally by: OffBeaT you should not be able to use your jump clone in a t3 ship. not lose skill points for it. That's another problem which will hamper their use. Many folks in 0.0 use JC especially to go to empire to get skillbooks and such. If the ship impairs that it'll be just like a prison that impedes growth. Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts. Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Zel Nughat Amarr Nughat Corp	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:31:00 - [323] ppl just talks about the ships, i dont care about them, i just want to explore to bodly go where no toon has gone before...oh wait, its not that game, whatever, sure some will get the point or...maybe not ------------------------------------------- The moon is a terrible mistress... ...who walks the night with demons of dread.
Tiirae The New Era HUZZAH FEDERATION	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:33:00 - [324] Originally by: Cailais And yet, when CCP add risk apparently this is a 'bad idea'? I was originally of the opinion that many EVE players embraced risk, and really enjoyed the fact that EVE was one game where 'loss' really meant something. Sadly from the comments I've read so far I cant hold to that view any longer. I think its safe to say that those players who deride the risk averse "carebears" only do so provided its on their terms, and its not actually them risking anything at all really. You are kidding, right? Most people in this game are extremely risk averse, for example those kiddies who call themselves 'pirates' and just blob low-sec gates all day. it's the most carebearing profession there is. Believe me, the risk of losing an expensive ship is extremely scary for a lot of people. it's why solo pvp is so hard to find in many places. it's why people blob. 90% of the people who used to fly nano ships weren't doing it for the tactical challenge, they were doing it so you had a95% chance of being able to run away. I have _no idea_ where you would get the impression that eve players enjoy risky activities. The only risk that people learn to live with is (riskofdeath=(1/fleetsize)) Look, for a lot of people, losing 100m in t2 HACs every week is a royal pain in the butt, because almost all activities to earn isk are just not fun. Adding the likelihood that you will also lose a week's worth of training makes it unpalatable. Before, at least while you were grinding to get back to previous level of ISK, you could be training new skills. Now, you'll only just get back to the prvious level of skill as well. Sure, it would be better if people were prepared to face bigger risks and put it all on the line. but they won't. So the upshot is just that people won't fly the ships. You can't change people.
Gamer4liff Caldari Metalworks THE INTERSTELLAR FOUNDRY	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:54:00 - [325] Edited by: Gamer4liff on 08/02/2009 06:54:42 Yeah sorry not a fan of this idea, and not just because I'm sitting on nearly 81m sp either. Skillpoints should be absolute, or rather, unable to be lost by anything less than a podkill without a clone, and you should not be penalized for doing the thing that keeps the eve economy going, flying combat ships and dying heroically.
Trind2222 Amarr Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:56:00 - [326] Edited by: Trind2222 on 08/02/2009 06:58:25 Originally by: Mecinia Lua Originally by: Trind2222 Edited by: Trind2222 on 08/02/2009 05:45:13 Hope the T3 ahips will be like illegal goods it is risk to take it to empire You will not lose any thing else sp then t3 ships skill tree as I understand? I see that as the problem really. It means your essentially trapped in that ship. Much like a Mothership or Titan pilot, but your only in a cruiser. I don't see many folks going to want to lose skills just to switch ships, and heaven help you if you have to leave the ship to change out the configuration. In essence seems like a hair brained idea. Sadly though CCP has not really impressed much in the last few expansions. I see you are new to game find some npc drug and take it around empire use a shutle find out what im am taking about. Auto pilot ofc. ____________ Wrangler comes back out wearing his wizard hat and robe Wrangler: Hail and well met from Blizzard, how might I assist you?
Isil Rahsen IsilZheHa Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:56:00 - [327] Edited by: Isil Rahsen on 08/02/2009 06:58:37 Originally by: Mecinia Lua Originally by: Mecinia Lua I see that as the problem really. It means your essentially trapped in that ship. Much like a Mothership or Titan pilot, but your only in a cruiser. I don't see many folks going to want to lose skills just to switch ships, and heaven help you if you have to leave the ship to change out the configuration. In essence seems like a hair brained idea. Sadly though CCP has not really impressed much in the last few expansions. That's another problem which will hamper their use. Many folks in 0.0 use JC especially to go to empire to get skillbooks and such. If the ship impairs that it'll be just like a prison that impedes growth. Did you bother to engage your brain when you typed this? Where does it say you lose skillpoints for leaving the ship. All i've seen indicates SP loss upon destruction of ship via explosion or repackaging.
OffBeaT Caldari LEGI0N	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:58:00 - [328] Originally by: Tiirae Originally by: Cailais And yet, when CCP add risk apparently this is a 'bad idea'? I was originally of the opinion that many EVE players embraced risk, and really enjoyed the fact that EVE was one game where 'loss' really meant something. Sadly from the comments I've read so far I cant hold to that view any longer. I think its safe to say that those players who deride the risk averse "carebears" only do so provided its on their terms, and its not actually them risking anything at all really. You are kidding, right? Most people in this game are extremely risk averse, for example those kiddies who call themselves 'pirates' and just blob low-sec gates all day. it's the most carebearing profession there is. Believe me, the risk of losing an expensive ship is extremely scary for a lot of people. it's why solo pvp is so hard to find in many places. it's why people blob. 90% of the people who used to fly nano ships weren't doing it for the tactical challenge, they were doing it so you had a95% chance of being able to run away. I have _no idea_ where you would get the impression that eve players enjoy risky activities. The only risk that people learn to live with is (riskofdeath=(1/fleetsize)) Look, for a lot of people, losing 100m in t2 HACs every week is a royal pain in the butt, because almost all activities to earn isk are just not fun. Adding the likelihood that you will also lose a week's worth of training makes it unpalatable. Before, at least while you were grinding to get back to previous level of ISK, you could be training new skills. Now, you'll only just get back to the prvious level of skill as well. Sure, it would be better if people were prepared to face bigger risks and put it all on the line. but they won't. So the upshot is just that people won't fly the ships. You can't change people. yea, you are right they don't like risk in a real way and act like they do, a lot of eve gamers get away with it. its the solo players that take it on the chin or the small alliances/corps out there. small corps/alliances cant effort to war against alliances who have a free ride against anyone in 00 then because you cant afford to war on them they get a free ride in empire without being hunted.. t3 ships should be for the players who got the balls to take the most risk..
Joss Sparq Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:15:00 - [329] Originally by: MotherMoon it's like 34 hours to testing :P and we won't even have a write up on were testing :P We're testing the element of surprise.
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:17:00 - [330] Originally by: Isil Rahsen Edited by: Isil Rahsen on 08/02/2009 06:58:37 Originally by: Mecinia Lua Originally by: Mecinia Lua I see that as the problem really. It means your essentially trapped in that ship. Much like a Mothership or Titan pilot, but your only in a cruiser. I don't see many folks going to want to lose skills just to switch ships, and heaven help you if you have to leave the ship to change out the configuration. In essence seems like a hair brained idea. Sadly though CCP has not really impressed much in the last few expansions. That's another problem which will hamper their use. Many folks in 0.0 use JC especially to go to empire to get skillbooks and such. If the ship impairs that it'll be just like a prison that impedes growth. Did you bother to engage your brain when you typed this? Where does it say you lose skillpoints for leaving the ship. All i've seen indicates SP loss upon destruction of ship via explosion or repackaging. Of course I did. It makes no sense you would lose skills on the destruction of the ship and then not lose skills when you weren't in the ship. The whole idea is a bad one. Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts. Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal

Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:18:00 - [331] Originally by: Trind2222 Edited by: Trind2222 on 08/02/2009 06:58:25 Originally by: Mecinia Lua Originally by: Trind2222 Edited by: Trind2222 on 08/02/2009 05:45:13 Hope the T3 ahips will be like illegal goods it is risk to take it to empire You will not lose any thing else sp then t3 ships skill tree as I understand? I see that as the problem really. It means your essentially trapped in that ship. Much like a Mothership or Titan pilot, but your only in a cruiser. I don't see many folks going to want to lose skills just to switch ships, and heaven help you if you have to leave the ship to change out the configuration. In essence seems like a hair brained idea. Sadly though CCP has not really impressed much in the last few expansions. I see you are new to game find some npc drug and take it around empire use a shutle find out what im am taking about. Auto pilot ofc. I didn't fall for that 4 years ago when I started playing.
Isil Rahsen IsilZheHa Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:23:00 - [332] Originally by: Mecinia Lua Originally by: Isil Rahsen Edited by: Isil Rahsen on 08/02/2009 06:58:37 Originally by: Mecinia Lua Originally by: Mecinia Lua I see that as the problem really. It means your essentially trapped in that ship. Much like a Mothership or Titan pilot, but your only in a cruiser. I don't see many folks going to want to lose skills just to switch ships, and heaven help you if you have to leave the ship to change out the configuration. In essence seems like a hair brained idea. Sadly though CCP has not really impressed much in the last few expansions. That's another problem which will hamper their use. Many folks in 0.0 use JC especially to go to empire to get skillbooks and such. If the ship impairs that it'll be just like a prison that impedes growth. Did you bother to engage your brain when you typed this? Where does it say you lose skillpoints for leaving the ship. All i've seen indicates SP loss upon destruction of ship via explosion or repackaging. Of course I did. It makes no sense you would lose skills on the destruction of the ship and then not lose skills when you weren't in the ship. The whole idea is a bad one. So your another person who just jumps on the lets guess at this stuff with no knowledge of what you speak like the rest of the whines in this thread. Why don't you wait until it hits the test server and get your sh*t straight before spouting off about things you have no information on?
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:26:00 - [333] Originally by: Isil Rahsen Originally by: Mecinia Lua Of course I did. It makes no sense you would lose skills on the destruction of the ship and then not lose skills when you weren't in the ship. The whole idea is a bad one. So your another person who just jumps on the lets guess at this stuff with no knowledge of what you speak like the rest of the whines in this thread. Why don't you wait until it hits the test server and get your sh*t straight before spouting off about things you have no information on? Yep just like you, since you have no knowledge of what your talking about.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:27:00 - [334] I bet that dev is kicking himself in the ass right now :P
Isil Rahsen IsilZheHa Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:29:00 - [335] Edited by: Isil Rahsen on 08/02/2009 07:32:11 Originally by: Mecinia Lua Originally by: Isil Rahsen Originally by: Mecinia Lua Of course I did. It makes no sense you would lose skills on the destruction of the ship and then not lose skills when you weren't in the ship. The whole idea is a bad one. So your another person who just jumps on the lets guess at this stuff with no knowledge of what you speak like the rest of the whines in this thread. Why don't you wait until it hits the test server and get your sht straight before spouting off about things you have no information on? Yep just like you, since you have no knowledge of what your talking about. But unlike you I'm not filling the thread with negative conjecture based around some comments made on the Alliance Tourny guest panel. I've opted for a wait and see approach without the whines about T3 sucking or being useless. Originally by:* Mothermoon I bet that dev is kicking himself in the ass right now :P You know it he is, lol. He gave birth to a baby threadnaught.
ghost st	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:35:00 - [336] Ill be waiting to hear about this from the blog. I kinda like the idea of losing skills for losing ships, its an incentive to be better. So you wouldnt be seeing these in blobs, and they would have a more tactical or specialized use. At least thats what im hoping for, and what i think ccp is going for aswell.
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:37:00 - [337] I'm open to the idea of losing t3 ship skills with ship destruction. It puts fear into people. Fear forces accountability. The smart will adapt and prosper, the weak shall perish. After all, t3 stuff is an addition to the game - an optional alternative. Nobody is forced to use it. Unlike t2, it should not become mandatory. Tho I don't have much faith in the current CCP design team people to make good decisions, there's not enough info to criticize anything. Frankly, I'd feel a lot better if current game designers were rotated or moved to some other tasks. They ****ed up enough already
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:43:00 - [338] Originally by: Ephemeron I'm open to the idea of losing t3 ship skills with ship destruction. It puts fear into people. Fear forces accountability. The smart will adapt and prosper, the weak shall perish. After all, t3 stuff is an addition to the game - an optional alternative. Nobody is forced to use it. Unlike t2, it should not become mandatory. Tho I don't have much faith in the current CCP design team people to make good decisions, there's not enough info to criticize anything. Frankly, I'd feel a lot better if current game designers were rotated or moved to some other tasks. They **ed up enough already here is the issue I see though. he then said something about them being in the alliance tourny. He said "they will have the capabilities of a cruiser saized vessal so I think we might see them" wtf? they better be ing PIMP if you lose skill points apoon death on top of price and how hard it will be to find parts. I'm expecting one with a smart pilot (not in web range and such) to solo 2 tech 1 battleships. If not then ** it, I'll fly a stabber into wormhole space. HOwever if one is AS powerful to go toe to toe with a T2 battleship, then I will fly one, as they will be able to enter wormhole space without taking up as much mass as a battleship. thus you get more through.
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.08 07:57:00 - [339] Quote: I'm expecting one with a smart pilot (not in web range and such) to solo 2 tech 1 battleships. If not then **** it, I'll fly a stabber into wormhole space. That might have been possible if CCP didn't take speed out of equation. It's hard to believe that so many people in positions of power fail to realize that speed is one of fundamental parts of combat. Trying to pretend that speed should not matter is setting yourself up for failure. They dragged us all down with them. When will we get game designer with common sense? sorry for ranting, it just makes me angry to see such blatant incompetence.
Lady Ione	Posted - 2009.02.08 08:08:00 - [340] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon(TM). As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocrypha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. Fixed it for you Chronotis

MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 08:23:00 - [341] Originally by: Ephemeron Quote: I'm expecting one with a smart pilot (not in web range and such) to solo 2 tech 1 battleships. If not then **** it, I'll fly a stabber into wormhole space. That might have been possible if CCP didn't take speed out of equation. It's hard to believe that so many people in positions of power fail to realize that speed is one of fundamental parts of combat. Trying to pretend that speed should not matter is setting yourself up for failure. They dragged us all down with them. When will we get game designer with common sense? sorry for ranting, it just makes me angry to see such blatant incompetence. when did that take speed out? have you been watching the allaince tourny? Have you actually tried PvPing in TQ?
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.08 08:44:00 - [342] Originally by: Ephemeron Quote: I'm expecting one with a smart pilot (not in web range and such) to solo 2 tech 1 battleships. If not then ** it, I'll fly a stabber into wormhole space. That might have been possible if CCP didn't take speed out of equation. It's hard to believe that so many people in positions of power fail to realize that speed is one of fundamental parts of combat. Trying to pretend that speed should not matter is setting yourself up for failure. They dragged us all down with them. When will we get game designer with common sense? sorry for ranting, it just makes me angry to see such blatant incompetence. Nerfing speed wasn't a mistake. The only real problem has been the fallout inflicted on ships that never took advantage of the broken gameplay and in doing so broke all sorts of other balance. ...........anyway** (where is that dead horse gif?) T3 probably won't be worth the time and effort in the long run. We won't see something that can significantly out perform existing ships, particularly not current battleships. I guess I'm jaded, but so far CCP has a pretty consistent track record for delivering disappointing mediocre ships.
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.08 09:06:00 - [343] Edited by: Ephemeron on 08/02/2009 09:09:29 Originally by: MotherMoon when did that take speed out? have you been watching the allaince tourny? Have you actually tried PvPing in TQ? I pvp enough on TQ to notice that nanohacs and speed fits have been nearly wiped out. You'd have to be blind not to notice ships going twice as slow. There are no more setups that increase speed effectively. Speed is no longer a thing for consideration. There's your standard MWD or AB, maybe a couple nanofibers - but there's no variety in setups, it's pointless to try boost speed more at expensive of tank, gank, tackle, EW. Amount of possible ship tactics and ship setups have been reduced. The fun factor in PvP reduced. The edge blunted Quote: I guess I'm jaded, but so far CCP has a pretty consistent track record for delivering disappointing mediocre ships. If CCP didn't have a track record of taking existing cool ships and turning them into disapponting mediocre ships, I wouldn't be as jaded.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 09:13:00 - [344] Originally by: Ephemeron Edited by: Ephemeron on 08/02/2009 09:09:29 Originally by: MotherMoon when did that take speed out? have you been watching the allaince tourny? Have you actually tried PvPing in TQ? I pvp enough on TQ to notice that nanohacs and speed fits have been nearly wiped out. You'd have to be blind not to notice ships going twice as slow. There are no more setups that increase speed effectively. Speed is no longer a thing for consideration. There's your standard MWD or AB, maybe a couple nanofibers - but there's no variety in setups, it's pointless to try boost speed more at expensive of tank, gank, tackle, EW. Amount of possible ship tactics and ship setups have been reduced. The fun factor in PvP reduced. The edge blunted Quote: I guess I'm jaded, but so far CCP has a pretty consistent track record for delivering disappointing mediocre ships. If CCP didn't have a track record of taking existing cool ships and turning them into disapponting mediocre ships, I wouldn't be as jaded. if all ships go half as slow then there is no different in PvP now then there was before. think before you post.
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2009.02.08 09:19:00 - [345] so if this will be that ship have its own sp. character can train only 1 at time And skills to train will be cruiser 5 enginering 5 mechanic 5 weapon upgrades 5 leadership 5 and ship will use charisma primery + memory secondery. Well it will cut much farmers ;]
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2009.02.08 09:29:00 - [346] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Ephemeron Quote: I'm expecting one with a smart pilot (not in web range and such) to solo 2 tech 1 battleships. If not then ** it, I'll fly a stabber into wormhole space. That might have been possible if CCP didn't take speed out of equation. It's hard to believe that so many people in positions of power fail to realize that speed is one of fundamental parts of combat. Trying to pretend that speed should not matter is setting yourself up for failure. They dragged us all down with them. When will we get game designer with common sense? sorry for ranting, it just makes me angry to see such blatant incompetence. Nerfing speed wasn't a mistake. The only real problem has been the fallout inflicted on ships that never took advantage of the broken gameplay and in doing so broke all sorts of other balance. ...........anyway** (where is that dead horse gif?) T3 probably won't be worth the time and effort in the long run. We won't see something that can significantly out perform existing ships, particularly not current battleships. I guess I'm jaded, but so far CCP has a pretty consistent track record for delivering disappointing mediocre ships. That's the problem, the last few expansions have been real disappointments. Problems pointed out with them haven't been fixed for the most part even up til now. Thus as history shows us if we wait til its in game to complain it's pretty much to late. Basically its to late usually by the time it hits singularity. I don't recall many major changes coming out of singularity.
Isil Rahsen IsilZheHa Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.08 10:05:00 - [347] Originally by: Mecinia Lua That's the problem, the last few expansions have been real disappointments. Problems pointed out with them haven't been fixed for the most part even up til now. This is true, QR royally screwed overall balance on a lot of fits and tactics in order to bend over the nano fits. Quote: Thus as history shows us if we wait til its in game to complain it's pretty much to late. Basically its to late usually by the time it hits singularity. I don't recall many major changes coming out of singularity. This I still disagree with. I don't see why you want to complain about something when all we know is that you'll lose T3 Subsystem SP when the ship blows up, and that according to EON the ships learn, and that learning can be lost on repackaging. Why don't all you whiners wait until you actually get the info from the devblog and the ships hitting SiSi to complain because I guarantee you that *****ing right now will do absolutely nothing to change T3. Especially since once things hit SiSi they are set in stone. /sarcasm (Which is less than 48 hours away)
Tippia Raddick Explorations BlackWater.	Posted - 2009.02.08 10:09:00 - [348] The main problem here, and the one that is causing all the angst, is that we don't know what the Devs mean by "Skills" and "SP". Skills (and SP) have three key functions: They give you access to equipment. They provide bonuses to said equipment. They give access to other skills. I think the reason so many get upset with the idea of losing SP on ship death is because they mainly connect SP with functions #1 and #3. From this perspective, SP loss on death is horribly stupid: lose the ship ⇒ lose the skill ⇒ lose the ability to use (parts of) the ship to begin with. Ship death (something that should be very very common) then becomes the equipvalent of repeated clone death, with none of the protection (something that effectively doesn't exist unless alcohol is involved). More likely, though, what the devs are talking about is strictly function #2, and echoes the often-made suggestion about "trainable crews": you, as a character, can always use the equipment, but some or all of the bonuses — and only the bonuses — are tied to the ship's SP pool. In other words, they'd decouple the "use at all" skills from the "use well" skills, and the latter aren't really skills at all… Right now, these two are one and the same: to use a HAC at all, you need Cruiser V and HAC I; to use well you still need the same skills: Cruiser V and HAC [insert training time pain threshhold here]. With T3, it may rather be a matter of needing Fancypants Ship I + Rigging V to use at all and Fancypants Engineering III to use well, and if you choose to, you can buy Fancypants Engineering III right off the market. Or, put another way, the ship bonuses will essentially be a form of (semi)permanent boosters: if you have the skills to use them, then you can always use them. However, those boosters can be used up (by exploding or being repackaged), at which point you need to make new ones yourself or buy some pre-made ones off the market. This should allow the SP requirements to be fairly low, but the ISK/production cost of good bonses high (again, see boosters for comparison). These bonues are, effectively, just a new thing for industrialists to cultivate and harvest, and sell off to the market — no different (conceptually, if not production-wise) than building T1 or T2 or farming for meta-[whatever] level modules. </ramble> tl;dr version: I think (and only think — I have nothing to back that belief up) the main upset here is the fact that the devs are calling these things "Skills" and "SP", which gives the wrong associations. They should rather be called "Bonus abilities" and "bonus XP" or some such, to lead our thoughts away from the usual image of something that provides Equipment Access + Equipment Bonus + Skill Access.
Isil Rahsen IsilZheHa Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.08 10:16:00 - [349] Yes I also think that your on the right track with this train of thought. What gets on my nerves are all the people in this thread that insist on judging T3 before they even know anything instead of offering possible alternatives to it just sucking.
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.08 10:20:00 - [350] Originally by: MotherMoon I bet that dev is kicking himself in the ass right now :P I think the Dev's are probably laughing at the people in this thread running panicked in the streets, eating each other and screaming "the sky is falling"... Pretty much nothing posted in this thread is even remotely close to what little the Dev's said on EVETV.. One person makes a baseless and idiotic assumption based on nothing but their own insanity, and some one else comes in reads it, parrots it as fact and nerd-rages about it, gathering others as they go, like a giant snowball of fail and stupidity. This thread is the closest I've seen to the WOW forums on EVE, congrats and GTFO and go crap up some other game. Originally by: StevieSG Verone looks like data from star trek. that is all.

Pliauga Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2009.02.08 10:22:00 - [351] This is most peculiar. Waiting for that blog But tbh I think this entire thread is just a s**t-storm over nothing. New expansion = new gaming mechanics. And in case you guys didn't notice eve is a damn good game, so I think the devs know what they are doing. ------- "Skynet" is my internet provider, should I be worried?
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.08 10:23:00 - [352] Originally by: MotherMoon if all ships go half as slow, then there is no different in PvP now then there was before. but webs have been nerfed meaning speed is even more important. And then you factor in how an AB tanks missile better than a MWD. Almost all turrets took a tracking hit to scale down with speed changes. All speed changes we're made to make speed mean more, an interceptor is now harder to hit and can catch targets more easily than before. the vaga is now much more useful. think before you post. That kind of logic is what seems to create so much trouble in the world. From government to financial sectors, and even down to lowly game design. Every statement you made is false, but I guess it's not a lie if you really believe it. I'm tired of trying to argue same thing. I could try, but if you believe that, I doubt I can use logic to convince you otherwise.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 10:24:00 - [353] Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: MotherMoon if all ships go half as slow, then there is no different in PvP now then there was before. but webs have been nerfed meaning speed is even more important. And then you factor in how an AB tanks missile better than a MWD. Almost all turrets took a tracking hit to scale down with speed changes. All speed changes we're made to make speed mean more, an interceptor is now harder to hit and can catch targets more easily than before. the vaga is now much more useful. think before you post. That kind of logic is what seems to create so much trouble in the world. From government to financial sectors, and even down to lowly game design. Every statement you made is false, but I guess it's not a lie if you really believe it. I'm tired of trying to argue same thing. I could try, but if you believe that, I doubt I can use logic to convince you otherwise. so in other words you don't like math. That's cool, not all of us have an IQ high enough to use logic.
Polinus Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.02.08 10:35:00 - [354] Originally by: Mecinia Lua That's the problem, the last few expansions have been real disappointments. Problems pointed out with them haven't been fixed for the most part even up til now. Thus as history shows us if we wait til its in game to complain it's pretty much to late. Basically its to late usually by the time it hits singularity. I don't recall many major changes coming out of singularity. CCp need to understand that their only hope is bring either Tomb or Tux back to game design at least for a week to explain the current ones what game design and game balance is.
DeadDuck Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.08 10:36:00 - [355] So if I understand correctly you will have some base stats for a specific configuration (one of the hundreds possible). Lets think of a example: With acceleration control level 5 and using a MWD the ship will reach 1800 m/s. Lets imagine that the module combination gives a bonus to speed. With time (?) my ship will ship start be faster due to the fact that the pilot is learning how to fly that specific combination until a limit that I managed to squeeze all the potential bonus from that combo. If the ship gets blown away or dismantled (?) I loose all the accumulated experience flying that combo. But my character will still have "acceleration control level 5" in the skill tree. I didn't loose any SP but I lost experience flying that specific combo. That makes sense IF: I assemble a similar combo again I will still have the experience gained from the 1st ship. The ship is the same, so the pilot already knows the potential of that module combo. If I assemble a different combination of modules the experience will be 0 so I will have to gain experience again. Don'T know if I sum it right. ________________ God is my Wingman
Pliauga Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2009.02.08 10:45:00 - [356] Edited by: Pliauga on 08/02/2009 10:46:16 Originally by: DeadDuck So if I understand correctly you will have some base stats for a specific configuration (one of the hundreds possible). Lets think of a example: With acceleration control level 5 and using a MWD the ship will reach 1800 m/s. Lets imagine that the module combination gives a bonus to speed. With time (?) my ship will ship start be faster due to the fact that the pilot is learning how to fly that specific combination until a limit that I managed to squeeze all the potential bonus from that combo. If the ship gets blown away or dismantled (?) I loose all the accumulated experience flying that combo. But my character will still have "acceleration control level 5" in the skill tree. I didn't loose any SP but I lost experience flying that specific combo. That makes sense IF: I assemble a similar combo again I will still have the experience gained from the 1st ship. The ship is the same, so the pilot already knows the potential of that module combo. If I assemble a different combination of modules the experience will be 0 so I will have to gain experience again. Don'T know if I sum it right. That would actually make sense. But I still say we should wait for the blog. It should cut out a lot of speculation. - spelling ------- "Skynet" is my internet provider, should I be worried?
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp KenZoku	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:01:00 - [357] Too much speculation at the moment. Wait for the blog or sisi update. For all we know, Ship SP might take like a hour, in which case its a non issue. What some people think, is that ship SP means you cannot train up your normal SP skills. This may or may not be the case. Others think it is going to turn flying t3 ships into traditional MMO style grinding to level up. Lets just wait for the actual release first
Xenalee	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:02:00 - [358] T3 ships are gonna rock Level 3's like nobody's business, much like Mauraders do for Level IV's. And virtually nothing else. FFS, PVP'ers are already penalized in SP; how many do you know flying around with +5's in their skull? I'll fly Tech 1 crap (like I usually do anyhow) and keep skilling for something useful. Not the same damn ship ad infinatum.
Dristra Amarr Idle Haven	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:05:00 - [359] Originally by: Lord WarATron Others think it is going to turn flying t3 ships into traditional MMO style grinding to level up. I guess this
Jalif Black Sinisters Freedom of Elbas	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:06:00 - [360] Only thing I see happening: Skillpointloss or not It will give a lot of time/isk to fly just in 1 of those ships. Which tells me only 1 more thing: MORE SHIPS JUST TO KILL 1 **ING SHIP! = BLOBING I prefere that there will be more player skill involved to every single ship then instead just t3 which will get blobbed while pvp-ing. Its just going to be another carebare ship where jsut a handfull of people will use it in pvp. And not to forget it will be probably be pre-nerfed so they are useless like **.

MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:11:00 - [361] Originally by: Jalif Only thing I see happening: Skillpointloss or not It will give a lot of time/isk to fly just in 1 of those ships. Which tells me only 1 more thing: MORE SHIPS JUST TO KILL 1 **ING SHIP! = BLOBING I prefere that there will be more player skill involved to every single ship then instead just t3 which will get blobbed while pvp-ing. Its just going to be another carebare ship where jsut a handfull of people will use it in pvp. And not to forget it will be probably be pre-nerfed so they are useless like **. how you blob when the number of ships allowed into wormhole space is capped at mass?
Jalif Black Sinisters Freedom of Elbas	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:15:00 - [362] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Jalif Only thing I see happening: Skillpointloss or not It will give a lot of time/isk to fly just in 1 of those ships. Which tells me only 1 more thing: MORE SHIPS JUST TO KILL 1 **ING SHIP! = BLOBING I prefere that there will be more player skill involved to every single ship then instead just t3 which will get blobbed while pvp-ing. Its just going to be another carebare ship where jsut a handfull of people will use it in pvp. And not to forget it will be probably be pre-nerfed so they are useless like . how you blob when the number of ships allowed into wormhole space is capped at mass? How are you going to construct t3? In non-wormhole space. Where will they eventually end up? In non-wormhole space. Well, just wormhole space is dangeraus and nobody will bring shiny ships there. Its just probably going to be recons like falcons and pilgrims. Whats the point of a t3 ship if it will be permajammed by a falcon? Meh.. maybe I am just saying stuff a bit to early, I just hope this won't be **ed up and that I get rewarded for smart playing instead of bringing numbers & having SP.
Isil Rahsen IsilZheHa Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:19:00 - [363] Originally by: Jalif Whats the point of a t3 ship if it will be permajammed by a falcon? LOL Awesome now this thread has everything, T3 whines rolled in with Falcon whines. Why don't we just tell ccp to screw their new content cause it'll just get permajammed the second you undock anyway.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:23:00 - [364] Originally by: Jalif Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Jalif Only thing I see happening: Skillpointloss or not It will give a lot of time/isk to fly just in 1 of those ships. Which tells me only 1 more thing: MORE SHIPS JUST TO KILL 1 **ING SHIP! = BLOBING I prefere that there will be more player skill involved to every single ship then instead just t3 which will get blobbed while pvp-ing. Its just going to be another carebare ship where jsut a handfull of people will use it in pvp. And not to forget it will be probably be pre-nerfed so they are useless like . how you blob when the number of ships allowed into wormhole space is capped at mass? How are you going to construct t3? In non-wormhole space. Where will they eventually end up? In non-wormhole space. Well, just wormhole space is dangeraus and nobody will bring shiny ships there. Its just probably going to be recons like falcons and pilgrims. Whats the point of a t3 ship if it will be permajammed by a falcon? Meh.. maybe I am just saying stuff a bit to early, I just hope this won't be ed up and that I get rewarded for smart playing instead of bringing numbers & having SP. maybe, we'll see how they handle ECM. I've been thinking of these ships more and more as super explorer ships. they are fast, low mass, high output damage, great tanking. I hope considering the draw backs. so yes I will build a tech 3 ship in non w-sapce, and then fly a fleet of them (me and my corpees) and ** anything on the other side. Bring a logistics and a rook just be careful. but yeah , small gang warfare to the max.
Pistonbroke Le Cosa Nostra	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:42:00 - [365] The loss of T3 related SP seems to me to be a perfect foil against those individuals and organisations which have access to (almost) unlimited ISK, whether thru OMG POS HAX, GTC Selling, T2 BPO or just epic trading acumen. This reinroduces the sense of loss to these people, which is one thing, I'm sure that starts to make the game grow stale to them. Here's an idea to make carebears cry like ickle babies thos, how about you can only use T3 in low sec or 0.0, just like caps. Perhaps the weapons systems will not activate in empire, or perhaps you simple cant move them into empire, and they must be manufactured in low sec....? This way at least the playing field is levelled for the risk/reward aspect, preventing the "Extremely low risk" empire mission farming crowd from making the most, while risking the least..... Just my 2 cents, flame on
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:46:00 - [366] Originally by: Pistonbroke The loss of T3 related SP seems to me to be a perfect foil against those individuals and organisations which have access to (almost) unlimited ISK, whether thru OMG POS HAX, GTC Selling, T2 BPO or just epic trading acumen. Trust me - these will be those players that cry the hardest if this mechanic is realised. C.
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp KenZoku	Posted - 2009.02.08 11:50:00 - [367] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 08/02/2009 11:51:16 Originally by: Pistonbroke The loss of T3 related SP seems to me to be a perfect foil against those individuals and organisations which have access to (almost) unlimited ISK, whether thru OMG POS HAX, GTC Selling, T2 BPO or just epic trading acumen. This reinroduces the sense of loss to these people, which is one thing, I'm sure that starts to make the game grow stale to them. Here's an idea to make carebears cry like ickle babies thos, how about you can only use T3 in low sec or 0.0, just like caps. Perhaps the weapons systems will not activate in empire, or perhaps you simple cant move them into empire, and they must be manufactured in low sec....? This way at least the playing field is levelled for the risk/reward aspect, preventing the "Extremely low risk" empire mission farming crowd from making the most, while risking the least..... Just my 2 cents, flame on I do not really think it would effect the super rich much. They would just use a alt to level up the ships, or pay lots of isk for someone else to level them up. Both of which make life harder for the non rich who lack isk to buy tons of GTC's. I personally am planning to use them in pvp, if they are not pre-nerfed to hell and more convenient than a faction ship. I think the two main issues is about creating a disposable SP timesink as well as turning t3 into a traditional grind baised MMO style level up system. I remember I used to laugh at all those threads that had people asking for leveling up while flying a ship. Well, I guess their wish is granted :) I will wait and see how it pans out before I condemm or promote t3. CCP could be on a winner or they could be making a massive mistake of the same order as when they linked Sovrignity to mining pos's.
Rennion	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:02:00 - [368] More risk = good. Hoping it gets the blood pumping again.
Lem2J Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:02:00 - [369] so, i'll be skipping tech 3, like w-space... Both being great ideas with silly little things that make it not worth it... sigh
Caldari Jesus State War Academy	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:05:00 - [370] Excellent news, looking forward to it. Losing SP is a good way to balance the risk vs reward issue.

CrabClaw McGraw	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:05:00 - [371] what a crappy idea
Pistonbroke Le Cosa Nostra	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:07:00 - [372] Originally by: Lord WarATron I do not really think it would effect the super rich much. They would just use a alt to level up the ships, or pay lots of isk for someone else to level them up. I was kind of assuming that the SPs related to the ship would only be created by your own personal use of the ship. If not then its open to even more abuse than the likely scenario of two permatanked buddies orbiting each other afk for hours shooting at each other with a small laser to gain ship SPs
Red 7	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:08:00 - [373] Originally by: Lethos Aranis I cbf reading through all this in detail right now and formulating another reply, but here's what I wrote on SHC that applies to this thread: Originally by: "Garr Anders" I remember that somewhere someone from CCP said that your ship learns stuff, so when you disasemble it or loose it the stuff that was learned gets lost. Yeah, I know thats very vague, but it could make sense, as in that when you fly your T3 assemebled, it gains SP to reduce drawbacks from whatever increasing its abilities/boost/boni, so being a different pool of SP. If you dont fly it, it doesnt learn anything but well if you loose it, SP of that particular ship are gone. But that just put together from hearsay.... Best post so far. I think you're the closest to the truth out of anyone. To expand on your thoughts, it seems that the Sleepers are some sort of sentient drones or maybe even infected Jove. Therefore the ships have a mind of their own and it also ties into the new AI and the fact they are meant to be tough. Obviously if you take parts from these ships to assemble your own, you're taking characteristics of each part. In other words, you are no longer just a pilot in a hunk of metal, but a pilot in a ship that is "alive" and works together with you, not for you. As you fly it the ship learns. Not only from it's own experience fighting but from you as well. You develop a sort of bond. It's stats increase and a parallel sort of SP increases. It might even reach into your own SP to boost it's attributes. Therefore when it dies, you don't lose a hunk of metal but a sentient ship. You are still there but the ships experience and everything it has learned dies with it. The trauma of the loss can also affect your own SP, hence the loss of it. We really do need details on whether it's a parallel SP, same SP or a combination of both. I'm not going to panic like almost everyone else about it but I can certainly see why people are complaining already and why it's such a ****storm. That's completely understandable. We just need more (much more) details before we can make a proper judgment and test it out on SiSi. This would be interesting. It could also be bi-directional - as your ship gains SP the pilot could gain SP over time from the ship.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:23:00 - [374] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 08/02/2009 12:23:18 Originally by: Zurin Arctus Your sentimental tripe is making me sick to my stomach. Look, maybe you're passive enough to 'adapt' to any lame, idiotic changes CCP makes with your money. I'm not. /point @ door. My money is spent on me playing, i'm not paying them to create THEIR game as I want.
Rennion	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:25:00 - [375] I am jacks raging sense of entitlement.
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:25:00 - [376] Edited by: Jowen Datloran on 08/02/2009 12:26:20 This thread bears reminiscence of the threads we saw when the first tech 2 ships were released. At that time people were whining their heads off about how nobody would fly these incredible expensive ships due to the marginal insurance payout you would get when they blow up. And look how that went... It is only sensible that you up the ante again if you want to fly tech 3 ships, they are tech 3 after all. And like then whining peeps were told back in the tech 2 days: "Just because you pay for this game it does not give you a RIGHT to fly certain ships. Do NOT fly what you NOT can afford to lose." And if this loss includes skillpoints, then so be it.
Pikkuhukka Caldari Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:27:00 - [377] if this comes to live, i will not simply fly t3 :<
Tibilo	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:28:00 - [378] I like the idea. Just some guesses here but taking an example you have all of the relevant skill to fly a deimos at level 5. you will never lose these skills unless you get podded without a clone. you buy some rigs to put on it that increase its top speed. when you lose the ship you also have to buy new rigs for the same performance. You have all of the relevant skills to fly a t3 ship at level 5. you will never lose these skills unless you get podded without a clone. you spend some time flying the ship and it gets a higher top speed. when you lose the ship you have to spend some time flying it again to get the same performance. We all know that time=money so really its a different flavour of rigging for ships. Of course I could be wrong but that's how i imagine it works. As with many things the isk cost of t3 ships is what will make or break their usefulness in pvp.
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp KenZoku	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:51:00 - [379] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 08/02/2009 12:50:58 Originally by: Pistonbroke Originally by: Lord WarATron I do not really think it would effect the super rich much. They would just use a alt to level up the ships, or pay lots of isk for someone else to level them up. I was kind of assuming that the SPs related to the ship would only be created by your own personal use of the ship. If not then its open to even more abuse than the likely scenario of two permatanked buddies orbiting each other afk for hours shooting at each other with a small laser to gain ship SPs I know. It is going to be intresting to see exactly how it works. As you said, I hope it does not end up being a couple of permatanked t3 ships shooting each other for a few hours afk to level up.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.08 12:58:00 - [380] Originally by: Jowen Datloran Edited by: Jowen Datloran on 08/02/2009 12:26:20 This thread bears reminiscence of the threads we saw when the first tech 2 ships were released. At that time people were whining their heads off about how nobody would fly these incredible expensive ships due to the marginal insurance payout you would get when they blow up. And look how that went... It is only sensible that you up the ante again if you want to fly tech 3 ships, they are tech 3 after all. And like then whining peeps were told back in the tech 2 days: "Just because you pay for this game it does not give you a RIGHT to fly certain ships. Do NOT fly what you NOT can afford to lose." And if this loss includes skillpoints, then so be it. Well put. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.

Lyra Blazing	Posted - 2009.02.08 13:23:00 - [381] Well done CCP. Ship Leveling. I already see it. Cheap Legal ISK and T3 Ship Leveling WWW.isk-gold.com. Well the whiners who wanted a way to buy their way to sp finaly got it. Thx for that ccp PS: I can understand that as Islandic company with a failing economy you need to do something. Nice new jobs for your ppl as ISK and SP Farmers
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.08 13:31:00 - [382] Originally by: Lyra Blazing Well done CCP. Ship Leveling. I already see it. Cheap Legal ISK and T3 Ship Leveling WWW.isk-gold.com. Well the whiners who wanted a way to buy their way to sp finaly got it. Thx for that ccp PS: I can understand that as Islandic company with a failing economy you need to do something. Nice new jobs for your ppl as ISK and SP Farmers er...how are they going to buy there way to SPs exactly? I you privy to some information we're not - or are you just chucking baseless flames around for no reason? C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Rennion	Posted - 2009.02.08 13:32:00 - [383] Originally by: Lyra Blazing Well the whiners who wanted a way to buy their way to sp finaly got it. Thx for that ccp Dude they allready had it.. Sell GTC's, buy character and faction battleship/cap ship, produce comedy killmail.
Lyra Blazing	Posted - 2009.02.08 13:34:00 - [384] Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Lyra Blazing Well done CCP. Ship Leveling. I already see it. Cheap Legal ISK and T3 Ship Leveling WWW.isk-gold.com. Well the whiners who wanted a way to buy their way to sp finaly got it. Thx for that ccp PS: I can understand that as Islandic company with a failing economy you need to do something. Nice new jobs for your ppl as ISK and SP Farmers er...how are they going to buy there way to SPs exactly? I you privy to some information we're not - or are you just chucking baseless flames around for no reason? C. Pretty easy done a lot in wow. You give them your account data and they grind it out for you.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.08 13:37:00 - [385] Originally by: Lyra Blazing Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Lyra Blazing Well done CCP. Ship Leveling. I already see it. Cheap Legal ISK and T3 Ship Leveling WWW.isk-gold.com. Well the whiners who wanted a way to buy their way to sp finaly got it. Thx for that ccp PS: I can understand that as Islandic company with a failing economy you need to do something. Nice new jobs for your ppl as ISK and SP Farmers er...how are they going to buy there way to SPs exactly? I you privy to some information we're not - or are you just chucking baseless flames around for no reason? C. Pretty easy done a lot in wow. You give them your account data and they grind it out for you. I still dont see how thats going to happen with the mechanics we know about so far. You're going to hand over your character to someone just so they can er..wait..until your skills have gone up??? There's no suggestion of any grinding mechanic so far - so youre just talking rubbish tbh. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Lyra Blazing	Posted - 2009.02.08 13:42:00 - [386] Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Lyra Blazing Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Lyra Blazing Well done CCP. Ship Leveling. I already see it. Cheap Legal ISK and T3 Ship Leveling WWW.isk-gold.com. Well the whiners who wanted a way to buy their way to sp finaly got it. Thx for that ccp PS: I can understand that as Islandic company with a failing economy you need to do something. Nice new jobs for your ppl as ISK and SP Farmers er...how are they going to buy there way to SPs exactly? I you privy to some information we're not - or are you just chucking baseless flames around for no reason? C. Pretty easy done a lot in wow. You give them your account data and they grind it out for you. I still dont see how thats going to happen with the mechanics we know about so far. You're going to hand over your character to someone just so they can er..wait..until your skills have gone up??? There's no suggestion of any grinding mechanic so far - so youre just talking rubbish tbh. C. Well i see two way ccp can do implement this: 1.) Ships skills are gained by just flying around with the ship. You can just park your ship cloaked somewhere 237 and voila you have the sp. 2.) You need to do something with the ship do gain sp. Well someone already suggested perma tanked setups that shoot each other for sp. Or you just mission grind 237 with the ship = Thats called exp in other games
Khorkrak	Posted - 2009.02.08 13:55:00 - [387] This mechanic will help keep T3 ships from becoming the norm - keeping them for only those willing, skilled and smart enough to fly them well. It's a brilliant idea really. Maybe permadeath could be introduced with T4 as well - would be awesome to risk it for incredible abilities as well as be able to truly knock someone out of play - permanantly
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 14:00:00 - [388] lyra, it's eve, it'll be train over time :P
Seibicoe	Posted - 2009.02.08 14:10:00 - [389] This is rly cool cuz with ships getting XP to level up skills newer players can catch up to vets jus dont fly to pvp whit the ship and its cool. CCP jus need to make the FW battlegrounds better so we can get rewards to like and then we can level up and pvp to earn some epic stuffs we can use cccp are being very clever whit making it like this as wow is the bestest selling game and if atari wants some monies the boxed eve must sell lots off coppies.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.08 14:12:00 - [390] Originally by: Khorkrak This mechanic will help keep T3 ships from becoming the norm - keeping them for only those willing, skilled and smart enough to fly them well. It's a brilliant idea really. Maybe permadeath could be introduced with T4 as well - would be awesome to risk it for incredible abilities as well as be able to truly knock someone out of play - permanantly When T5 hits, if you lose your ship you get fined $100.00 on your credit card...

MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 14:13:00 - [391] Originally by: Seibicoe This is rly cool cuz with ships getting XP to level up skills newer players can catch up to vets jus dont fly to pvp whit the ship and its cool. CCP jus need to make the FW battlegrounds better so we can get rewards to like and then we can level up and pvp to earn some epic stuffs we can use cccp are being very clever whit making it like this as wow is the bestest selling game and if atari wants some monies the boxed eve must sell lots off coppies. but here is the thing, in wow you can level your character. in eve you might be able to level you ship someday, but when the ship pops, it's gone FOREVER. hus keeping that distance gap between wow, and eve.
Kiran Minmatar EXPLORATIS Delinquent Habits	Posted - 2009.02.08 14:33:00 - [392] I like this idea T3 ships are going to be rare for one, and so the skills to fly one should be like wise. This reminds me of the good old days of Jedi Permadeath in SWG. CCP please keep this in the game and dont let the whinning PvP'ers change this. You guys want to pvp/fly T3 ships then prepare to lose it and your skills. But then no one knows how tough these new ships will be yet so stop moaning. ----------------------------------------------- Kiran-"Falling is a kind of a peacful experience. But its the sudden stop at the end thats the killer."
Dr Resheph Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY	Posted - 2009.02.08 14:37:00 - [393] I'm not sure this is worth a threadnaught until they actually put it in a blog. Cause from what I hear it's been scrapped already, but that was a couple days ago and here Chorontis is suggesting it's still in. The simple truth is, they wanted to release a new tech level so they have some newness and breathing room. Rehashing the same stuff over and over brings about diminishing returns for development and marketing purposes. But despite that, I doubt any designer at CCP is truly confident his/her ideas on Tech 3 will be the best choice for longevity and fun. Simply put, they have no effing clue on what tech 3 is one month before release. Its introduction was planned around a modularity gimmick, and content additions.
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2009.02.08 14:42:00 - [394] Originally by: Kiran I like this idea T3 ships are going to be rare for one, and so the skills to fly one should be like wise. This reminds me of the good old days of Jedi Permadeath in SWG. CCP please keep this in the game and dont let the whinning PvP'ers change this. You guys want to pvp/fly T3 ships then prepare to lose it and your skills. But then no one knows how tough these new ships will be yet so stop moaning. Pvpers will just need to suicide kill enought bears in t3 shinies, then bears start screaming so bad so ccp will change it.
Caiman Graystock Caldari	Posted - 2009.02.08 14:47:00 - [395] If ship levels can't be traded to other players, and remain specific to your ship when you're flying it, then there's no problem.
Moonlord	Posted - 2009.02.08 15:09:00 - [396] Im sorry ccp but if this was the best "feature" u could come up with making t3 diffrent from t2 then my hopes for walking in station and other hyped features are crashing down. Please think things through before comming out publicly with stuff like this, it makes u look realy bad.
Carniflex Caldari StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2009.02.08 15:12:00 - [397] Sounds interesting. It remains to be seen, if the risk will be worth the added functionality. To all those lamenting, if you are afraid dont train the skill higher than lev 1, you can replace it in half a hour or so. Level 1 and all that.
Jelek Coro Caldari Dark-Rising	Posted - 2009.02.08 15:26:00 - [398] Edited by: Jelek Coro on 08/02/2009 15:26:18 So much crying... and people don't even know the details. They don't even know how powerful (or not) the new t3 ships will be. If T3 is uber - there is the reward. Losing SP - there is the risk. However, t3 would have to be powerful to offset the risk... Now, you may resume cying without knowing any facts :)
Smertrios Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2009.02.08 15:38:00 - [399] I like the idea... The risk in eve is what makes this game different. For some the risk of losing just a ship is nothing, they have enough isk to not even register the loss. This is great, a new thing to put on the line to make fights more fun and if you don't want the risk don't fly them! Eve is not a softly softly game.. the consequences are why it is different and so much fun. Me likes... now the ships need to be awesome!
Jack Gilligan Dragon's Rage Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.08 16:00:00 - [400] Skill loss from losing a ship? Stupid. Unless these things are ridiculously overpowered, who would risk USING one in pvp? These things will end up being PVEPwnmobiles for empire farmers.

Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.08 16:18:00 - [401] Originally by: Jack Gilligan Skill loss from losing a ship? Stupid. Unless these things are ridiculously overpowered, who would risk USING one in pvp? People with big cahoonas. C.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.02.08 16:34:00 - [402] So will T4 ships give SP? snort
DaveW Caldari South Park Development	Posted - 2009.02.08 16:35:00 - [403] I have no idea what this thread is about. I just want to say I was there "at the beginning"
Flinchey Amarr	Posted - 2009.02.08 17:03:00 - [404] posting in a sh**storm thread.
Vaedon Roid Ripper Industries	Posted - 2009.02.08 17:06:00 - [405] Edited by: Vaedon on 08/02/2009 17:07:57 Originally by: Lethos Aranis I cbf reading through all this in detail right now and formulating another reply, but here's what I wrote on SHC that applies to this thread: Originally by: "Garr Anders" I remember that somewhere someone from CCP said that your ship learns stuff, so when you disasemble it or loose it the stuff that was learned gets lost. Yeah, I know thats very vague, but it could make sense, as in that when you fly your T3 assemebled, it gains SP to reduce drawbacks from whatever increasing its abilities/boost/boni, so being a different pool of SP. If you dont fly it, it doesnt learn anything but well if you loose it, SP of that particular ship are gone. But that just put together from hearsay.... Best post so far. I think you're the closest to the truth out of anyone. To expand on your thoughts, it seems that the Sleepers are some sort of sentient drones or maybe even infected Jove. Therefore the ships have a mind of their own and it also ties into the new AI and the fact they are meant to be tough. Obviously if you take parts from these ships to assemble your own, you're taking characteristics of each part. In other words, you are no longer just a pilot in a hunk of metal, but a pilot in a ship that is "alive" and works together with you, not for you. As you fly it the ship learns. Not only from it's own experience fighting but from you as well. You develop a sort of bond. It's stats increase and a parallel sort of SP increases. It might even reach into your own SP to boost it's attributes. Therefore when it dies, you don't lose a hunk of metal but a sentient ship. You are still there but the ships experience and everything it has learned dies with it. The trauma of the loss can also affect your own SP, hence the loss of it. We really do need details on whether it's a parallel SP, same SP or a combination of both. I'm not going to panic like almost everyone else about it but I can certainly see why people are complaining already and why it's such a ***storm. That's completely understandable. We just need more (much more) details before we can make a proper judgment and test it out on SiSi. Now this also brings up an interesting thing about salvaging. If you salvage a T3 ship, is it possible to bring over some experience to the next ship that uses that T3 component? How do you determine the value of the T3 component? Do you see what attributes and bonuses it will have before you use it or do you only know that there is a bonus but have no idea what it is before it's used to make the next ship? Are the bonuses standard amongst the same components or are even the components sentient and carry their own individuality? The possibilities with T3 in this way are endless and it's actually mind boggling how much potential this has if executed correctly. I'm more excited than ever about this. I'm in the optimistic camp as well. Actual player SP loss doesn't feel like CCP game design to me. Ship SP loss does. I mean think about it. This would be classic CCP IMO. Give us ships that are easily and almost infinitely interchangable and versatile (simply dock and swap out parts to alter the capabilities of the ship on the fly), but make it so that if you DON'T swap parts, the ship actually improves in performance. You can have the equivalent of an entire fleet of different ships at your disposal with only 25 parts. Likely easy to pack up and move your operations from one area to another. But one ship left intact will continually get better and better. Versatility vs Ability You choose. Choices (or, if you like, temptation ). That* is what CCP is giving us, forcing us to make. Again, all IMO of course. We still don't know for sure. Until we do, I prefer to give CCP the benefit of the doubt. Edit for sneaky typos.
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.02.08 17:16:00 - [406] Originally by: Cailais I think what we'll see is something whereby T3 ships have their own skill paths. Personally I think it's a brilliant concept - and Im stunned by the comments so far. I guess we can bin all the 'eve's a cold harsh universe' claims now huh? I really hope CCP keeps this concept and dont bow to the weak kneed whiners here. C. Agreed, for a bunch of eve players, all these nancy-boys sure are scared of the Risk of Loss. I welcome it with open arms.
Seibicoe	Posted - 2009.02.08 17:23:00 - [407] Teh funnist thing itt is peaple talking bout risk and they never take no risk and fly ceptors and t1 junkers, if you leik risk so much why are you not flying faction fit bhallgorns or vindicaters? big talking little action imo tbqfh
Lao Suko Tankt	Posted - 2009.02.08 21:05:00 - [408] If they want to hardwire us into our ships, then make us get augmentations. and when the ship dies, so do the augments. --------------------------- I found freedom only in the emptiness of space...
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.08 21:32:00 - [409] In case you missed the clarification today: There are a total of 6 skills to fly t3 ships, 1 to fly the ship, and 5 devoted to the subsystems. The subsystem skills are all RANK 1 skills. Upon the loss of your ship, you lose one level of one of the sub system skills, so at MOST, you lose 5 days of training off the ship. To be clear, you lose NO OTHER SKILLS. I think you can turn panic mode off.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.08 21:32:00 - [410] Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 08/02/2009 21:32:25 Edit- dammit, beaten to the punch. Hah! Clarified! You lose one of your rank one subsystem skills when you lose a T3 ship.

Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.08 21:32:00 - [411] Edited by: Kendrix Arathan on 08/02/2009 21:33:41 I just want to be the 1st(Edit3rd) to LOL at the people forum waring over things that never even existed. GG and watch EVE tv
Nyphur Pillowsoft	Posted - 2009.02.08 21:33:00 - [412] Edited by: Nyphur on 08/02/2009 21:34:46 Originally by: Grath Telkin In case you missed the clarification today: Link? EDIT: Oh, EVETV. If it's a maximum of 5 days that's alright I suppose. I was kind of hoping the ship itself would be the one with the skill, not the player. I'll wait for the devblog for more details.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2009.02.08 21:34:00 - [413] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Hah! Clarified! You lose one of your rank one subsystem skills when you lose a T3 ship. Rank 1 skills and the loss is isolated from normal skills. Sounds acceptable to me, if they aren't pre-nerfed. Can't wait to know more details on the actual ships.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 21:49:00 - [414] I love how if you eject you dont' lose skill points. AWESOME. dude, get out of ship and I won't take your sp!
Sazkyen	Posted - 2009.02.08 21:53:00 - [415]
Pottsey Enheduanni Foundation	Posted - 2009.02.08 21:55:00 - [416] Nyphur said "If it's a maximum of 5 days that's alright I suppose. I was kind of hoping the ship itself would be the one with the skill, not the player. I'll wait for the devblog for more details." The only thing that worries me is some of the older pilots have nothing left to train. I was hoping T3 would give us goals and training perhaps as much as 6months worth of training. But if the skills are mostly rank 1 we are talking under 1 month of training. What I don't like is those who have invested more into the skills lose more. It might be worth keeping your skills at lvl 4 just so you don't lose that lvl 5. I dont see why someone with a lvl 5 skill should lose 5 days of skills while someone with a lvl 4 skill would lose much less. The better you are the more you lose. Surely the better the pilot is the less he would lose. ____ Telltale sign of their presence is non-linear teleportation (www.eve-online.com/races/theodicy/Theodicy_All.pdf)
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 21:58:00 - [417] Originally by: Pottsey Nyphur said "If it's a maximum of 5 days that's alright I suppose. I was kind of hoping the ship itself would be the one with the skill, not the player. I'll wait for the devblog for more details." The only thing that worries me is some of the older pilots have nothing left to train. I was hoping T3 would give us goals and training perhaps as much as 6months worth of training. But if the skills are mostly rank 1 we are talking under 1 month of training. What I don't like is those who have invested more into the skills lose more. It might be worth keeping your skills at lvl 4 just so you don't lose that lvl 5. I dont see why someone with a lvl 5 skill should lose 5 days of skills while someone with a lvl 4 skill would lose much less. The better you are the more you lose. Surely the better the pilot is the less he would lose. under a month? fool there are 25 pieces. that's 5 days each. and like they said you dont' have to loos skill points ever you can just eject :)
Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:02:00 - [418] ALRIGHT!! Bring on the whiners who can't handle a pitiful rank one skill loss that is easily avoided by ejecting. Omg CCP ruined T3!!11one amirite?
Pottsey Enheduanni Foundation	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:03:00 - [419] Edited by: Pottsey on 08/02/2009 22:06:15 MotherMoon said " under a month? fool there are 25 pieces." The way I understand it is, a skill per subsection not a skill per piece. There are 5 sections with one skill per section. The one skill applies to all pieces in that section. In which case you can perhaps max out T3 in 2 months or just under. 1 month for the 5 section skills and 1 month for the main ship skill.
Javius Rong Caldari Sigillum Militum Xpisti	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:04:00 - [420] well IMO this breaks some of the basic foundations of the game, such that skill points do not get lost if you have clone... This does not seem like a good idea and could tank the whole T3 introduction...

Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:05:00 - [421] Edited by: Yeshua Christ on 08/02/2009 22:06:25 Seems perfectly acceptable to me. Takes longer than T2 to train even with the rank one skills. Originally by: Javius Rong well IMO this breaks some of the basic foundations of the game, such that skill points do not get lost if you have clone... This does not seem like a good idea and could tank the whole T3 introduction... HAHA took 2 replies for more whines to commence. I should be a prophet.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:06:00 - [422] Originally by: Pottsey MotherMoon said " under a month? fool there are 25 pieces." The way I understand it is, a skill per subsection not a skill per piece. There are 5 sections with one skill per section. The one skill applies to all pieces in that section. In which case you can perhaps max out T3 in perhaps 2 months or just under. 1 month for the 5 section skills and 1 month for the main ship skill. oh well in that case... uuuh... huh
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:07:00 - [423] Originally by: MotherMoon I love how if you eject you dont' lose skill points. AWESOME. dude, get out of ship and I won't take your sp! Yes, interesting piracy opportunities indeed.
Tippia Raddick Explorations BlackWater.	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:10:00 - [424] Edited by: Tippia on 08/02/2009 22:11:40 …and of course, then there's the perpetual question of whether lvl V is really worth it. Personally, I can bash out lvl IV on a ship-related Rank 1 skill in ~16h. Not much of a loss. I would still have preferred the ship-based, industralist-farmable solution though…
Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:12:00 - [425] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 08/02/2009 22:10:08 àand of course, then there's the perpetual question of whether lvl V is really worth it. Personally, I can bash out lvl IV on a ship-related Rank 1 skill in ~16h. Not much of a loss. Exactly but if skillpoint loss hits the server the whines generated in this thread alone will multiple by a factor of n. (n being the number of carebear wannabe PvPers who can't handle a little risk ever at all)
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:13:00 - [426] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: MotherMoon I love how if you eject you dont' lose skill points. AWESOME. dude, get out of ship and I won't take your sp! Yes, interesting piracy opportunities indeed. hell, now I kinda want ship crews in eve, like a crew that trains over time,(not one you buy, just the basic dudes that come with it) the longer you are in a ship. That way maybe more people would give up their ships before they die. that would be really cool. but then how would you balance it, ect ect.
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:36:00 - [427] Edited by: Kendrix Arathan on 08/02/2009 22:37:38 Originally by: Pottsey What I don't like is those who have invested more into the skills lose more. It might be worth keeping your skills at lvl 4 just so you don't lose that lvl 5. I dont see why someone with a lvl 5 skill should lose 5 days of skills while someone with a lvl 4 skill would lose much less. The better you are the more you lose. Surely the better the pilot is the less he would lose. It's one of the basic principals of EVE Benefit/Risk balancing, the higher the benefit the higher the risk. IE: I spent a ton of time on skills to be able to fly my fancy ship, fancy ships (in general) cost more. So i gain the benefit of "fanciness" but also gain the risk of added potential loss. This is just a loss that everyone is guaranteed to feel to at least some degree, even those with potentially limitless money.
vvizard NOR	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:37:00 - [428] Originally by: Javius Rong well IMO this breaks some of the basic foundations of the game, such that skill points do not get lost if you have clone... This does not seem like a good idea and could tank the whole T3 introduction... Have you considered the fact that CCP probably dont want every guy and his cat flying a T3 ship? Much like T2 ships when they where still expensive. If the risk is to high for you, simply dont fly them. It's simple.
Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:40:00 - [429] Originally by: vvizard NOR Originally by: Javius Rong well IMO this breaks some of the basic foundations of the game, such that skill points do not get lost if you have clone... This does not seem like a good idea and could tank the whole T3 introduction... Have you considered the fact that CCP probably dont want every guy and his cat flying a T3 ship? Much like T2 ships when they where still expensive. If the risk is to high for you, simply dont fly them. It's simple. QFT QF ****ing T
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:44:00 - [430] Originally by: vvizard NOR Originally by: Javius Rong well IMO this breaks some of the basic foundations of the game, such that skill points do not get lost if you have clone... This does not seem like a good idea and could tank the whole T3 introduction... Have you considered the fact that CCP probably dont want every guy and his cat flying a T3 ship? Much like T2 ships when they where still expensive. If the risk is to high for you, simply dont fly them. It's simple. I'm hoping they will be cheaper isk wise and just have skill risk

James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:51:00 - [431] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: vvizard NOR Originally by: Javius Rong well IMO this breaks some of the basic foundations of the game, such that skill points do not get lost if you have clone... This does not seem like a good idea and could tank the whole T3 introduction... Have you considered the fact that CCP probably dont want every guy and his cat flying a T3 ship? Much like T2 ships when they where still expensive. If the risk is to high for you, simply dont fly them. It's simple. I'm hoping they will be cheaper isk wise and just have skill risk That I'd take. What I don't want is to have them insanely expensive (because everyone in eve is rich, right?) _and_ burn time whenever you lose one.
Yaggher Xanuben Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:55:00 - [432] It's a new and fresh addition to the game, I like it! There should be more risk involved in PvP and ISK is just not the issue anymore. Losing SP on the other hand is. Now you can't just lose a T3 ship, dock up and sit in another one. There should be more penalties in game that make you think twice! T3 ships won't be blob-ships. They also won't be high-sec carebear mission running ships due to cruiser hull and thus probably not stronger compared to current mission hulls. This leaves us specialized, small, tactical groups. Who knows, this might be the beginning of re-doing the 0.0 and sov schematics. Anyway, I like the SP loss feature. I'd say make there even more penalties, make a 5% chance to lose some implant when your T3 ships gets blown up!
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:56:00 - [433] Originally by: James Lyrus Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: vvizard NOR Originally by: Javius Rong well IMO this breaks some of the basic foundations of the game, such that skill points do not get lost if you have clone... This does not seem like a good idea and could tank the whole T3 introduction... Have you considered the fact that CCP probably dont want every guy and his cat flying a T3 ship? Much like T2 ships when they where still expensive. If the risk is to high for you, simply dont fly them. It's simple. I'm hoping they will be cheaper isk wise and just have skill risk That I'd take. What I don't want is to have them insanely expensive (because everyone in eve is rich, right?) _and_ burn time whenever you lose one. then eject before death.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:06:00 - [434] Originally by: Grath Telkin In case you missed the clarification today: There are a total of 6 skills to fly t3 ships, 1 to fly the ship, and 5 devoted to the subsystems. The subsystem skills are all RANK 1 skills. Upon the loss of your ship, you lose one level of one of the sub system skills, so at MOST, you lose 5 days of training off the ship. To be clear, you lose NO OTHER SKILLS. I think you can turn panic mode off. Pretty much what was expected then. Seeing as it sounds as if you only lose the subsystem skills (i.e improving the performance of the ship, rather than just flying one) then the loss isnt anywhere near what the drama bombs were predicting. Best the hard core whiner so called "pvp'ers" make some pretty rapid U turns I think eh? C.
Tychus	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:15:00 - [435] Edited by: Tychus on 08/02/2009 23:16:08 Hi, Prof Tychus here, PHd in common sense... The irony of time loss vs. hardcore playstyle is not lost on me. My only real question is if it will be fun. If fun, then play. Tychus whips out his handy fun detector... beep boop click no fun detected as currently explained... plus, i can SMELL the exploit allready. Make ship active -> go to work, while ship gains exp -> cat ship spins for 10 hours -> come home to better boat violencer -> profit! or if its based on your personal skills: Buy t3 cruiser. It is now the "battery boat" and never undocks while you're at uni/work. clone jump to identical ship in distant system when ready. As long as the battery boat never undocks, you don't lose skills. Also a good way to splash kill mails, going down? EJECT!! Maybe. Pre-nerfed, grindy, time wasting game mechanic either way . PLEASE MAKE IT FUN CCP, thats all i ask. T [/i]
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:15:00 - [436] Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Grath Telkin In case you missed the clarification today: There are a total of 6 skills to fly t3 ships, 1 to fly the ship, and 5 devoted to the subsystems. The subsystem skills are all RANK 1 skills. Upon the loss of your ship, you lose one level of one of the sub system skills, so at MOST, you lose 5 days of training off the ship. To be clear, you lose NO OTHER SKILLS. I think you can turn panic mode off. Pretty much what was expected then. Seeing as it sounds as if you only lose the subsystem skills (i.e improving the performance of the ship, rather than just flying one) then the loss isnt anywhere near what the drama bombs were predicting. Best the hard core whiner so called "pvp'ers" make some pretty rapid U turns I think eh? C. I'l definitely be flying them. If they don't horribly suck that is.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:15:00 - [437] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: MotherMoon I love how if you eject you dont' lose skill points. AWESOME. dude, get out of ship and I won't take your sp! Yes, interesting piracy opportunities indeed. Originally by: Bellum Eternus Frankly, I think that the SP loss idea is total crap.. Er.so Bellum..are you for or against? C.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:18:00 - [438] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Grath Telkin In case you missed the clarification today: There are a total of 6 skills to fly t3 ships, 1 to fly the ship, and 5 devoted to the subsystems. The subsystem skills are all RANK 1 skills. Upon the loss of your ship, you lose one level of one of the sub system skills, so at MOST, you lose 5 days of training off the ship. To be clear, you lose NO OTHER SKILLS. I think you can turn panic mode off. Pretty much what was expected then. Seeing as it sounds as if you only lose the subsystem skills (i.e improving the performance of the ship, rather than just flying one) then the loss isnt anywhere near what the drama bombs were predicting. Best the hard core whiner so called "pvp'ers" make some pretty rapid U turns I think eh? C. I'l definitely be flying them. If they don't horribly suck that is. yeah if they are no better than tech 2 then there will be no reason to fly them.
Grarr Dexx Amarr Divinity's Edge	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:21:00 - [439] Another boost to carebears...
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:22:00 - [440] Originally by: MotherMoon yeah if they are no better than tech 2 then there will be no reason to fly them. Well yeah, but if they're just cruisers and don't out perform my existing command ships and BS, or do some other job really well, I won't be flying them much either, as there simply isn't any point. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting

Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:22:00 - [441] Originally by: Grarr Dexx Another boost to carebears... Really? How so?
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:23:00 - [442] Originally by: Tychus Edited by: Tychus on 08/02/2009 23:16:08 plus, i can SMELL the exploit allready. Make ship active -> go to work, while ship gains exp -> cat ship spins for 10 hours -> come home to better boat violencer -> profit! or if its based on your personal skills: Buy t3 cruiser. It is now the "battery boat" and never undocks while you're at uni/work. clone jump to identical ship in distant system when ready. As long as the battery boat never undocks, you don't lose skills. Thing is, if you get a T3 ship blown up - you lose those subsystem skills - regardless of what ships youve got docked up somewhere. As your skills train all the time your first suggestion is not relevant. Simple thing to do is use your skill que to rack up what ever subsystem skills you want trained. Go to work (carry on playing, whatever) at a point that suits you jump into T3 ship and use it. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Glengrant TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:23:00 - [443] Originally by: Grath Telkin In case you missed the clarification today: There are a total of 6 skills to fly t3 ships, 1 to fly the ship, and 5 devoted to the subsystems. The subsystem skills are all RANK 1 skills. Upon the loss of your ship, you lose one level of one of the sub system skills, so at MOST, you lose 5 days of training off the ship. To be clear, you lose NO OTHER SKILLS. I think you can turn panic mode off. Sounds like an interesting idea to me. We'll see how it plays out on test. And people please not the "at most". That's for a maxed skill. If you have that subsystem skill at lvl 3 and have to retraining from lvl 2 - that's just a few hours. It's rarely worth going beyond lvl 4 anyway - that's a couple days. Actually not such a big deal. --- Save the forum: Think before you post. ISK BUYER = LOSER EVE TV- Bring it back! Laptop, NVidia7900GS, Ubuntu 8.04, WINE
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:27:00 - [444] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: MotherMoon yeah if they are no better than tech 2 then there will be no reason to fly them. Well yeah, but if they're just cruisers and don't out perform my existing command ships and BS, or do some other job really well, I won't be flying them much either, as there simply isn't any point. Well their hall mark feature is their flexibility. In theory you can swap out sub systems for the role you want to perform. I can't see them being that much better than commands (we'll have to wait for T3 BC and BS for that). Plus you've got the unpredictability factor to throw in. Admittedly those are slight advantages, but sometimes that's all you need. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Tychus	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:35:00 - [445] Cailais wrote: Thing is, if you get a T3 ship blown up - you lose those subsystem skills - regardless of what ships youve got docked up somewhere. As your skills train all the time your first suggestion is not relevant. Simple thing to do is use your skill que to rack up what ever subsystem skills you want trained. Go to work (carry on playing, whatever) at a point that suits you jump into T3 ship and use it. C. Ok, if thats hows it gonna work, ok. We're all dealing largely with speculation here anyway. But you can detect the grind factor right? This should not take a crayon schematic for anyone to see. LOTHAR OF THE HILL PEOPLE DEMANDS FUN! NOT MORE GRINDY! LOTHAR HIT WITH STICK! T
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:41:00 - [446] Originally by: Tychus Cailais wrote: Thing is, if you get a T3 ship blown up - you lose those subsystem skills - regardless of what ships youve got docked up somewhere. As your skills train all the time your first suggestion is not relevant. Simple thing to do is use your skill que to rack up what ever subsystem skills you want trained. Go to work (carry on playing, whatever) at a point that suits you jump into T3 ship and use it. C. Ok, if thats hows it gonna work, ok. We're all dealing largely with speculation here anyway. But you can detect the grind factor right? This should not take a crayon schematic for anyone to see. LOTHAR OF THE HILL PEOPLE DEMANDS FUN! NOT MORE GRINDY! LOTHAR HIT WITH STICK! T EVE is an MMO, generally speaking anything in an MMO that takes either time, or effort, could be classed as a 'grind'. For me grinding means doing exactly the self same activity over an over and over again rather than say doing lots of different things for the self same benefit. e.g repeatedly killing goblins or whatever (even though you could go and splat a whole range of different NPCs). EVEs skill system isnt exactly a grinding process as it happens continuously over time with relatively little direct input. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:50:00 - [447] T3 is going to be a failure in practice. T3 sounds great in a theroycrafting lag free make-believe land where blobs and just plain unfairness don't exist. T3 sounds great in a fairy-tale world where you are the center of the show, and your cunning gameplay will allow you to avoid SP loss while inflicting it on others. Fact of the matter is that your average, and your cunning gameplay isn't any more cunning that anyone else's. SP is a resource you gain at a fixed rate. You can't play better to get more SP. Losing SP when your ship blows up means that your character is going to become r.etarded. Your character is going to be r.etarded because your average and you die as often as you kill. Or maybe your above average, and you still die because average people ganged up on you. Actually, the people in T2 ships are going to primary you EVERY SINGLE TIME. So you going to die a lot more. Because people know that killing your ship makes your character r.etarded. People play MMOs to make their character better. In that context, the design of T3 is mindbogglingly horrible and isn't going to be a popular option. If T3 is not a popular option, then wormhole space is not going to be popular.
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:51:00 - [448] Originally by: Tychus Cailais wrote: Thing is, if you get a T3 ship blown up - you lose those subsystem skills - regardless of what ships youve got docked up somewhere. As your skills train all the time your first suggestion is not relevant. Simple thing to do is use your skill que to rack up what ever subsystem skills you want trained. Go to work (carry on playing, whatever) at a point that suits you jump into T3 ship and use it. C. Ok, if thats hows it gonna work, ok. We're all dealing largely with speculation here anyway. But you can detect the grind factor right? This should not take a crayon schematic for anyone to see. LOTHAR OF THE HILL PEOPLE DEMANDS FUN! NOT MORE GRINDY! LOTHAR HIT WITH STICK! T A) you fail at quotes, thus making your posts unreadable... 2) You fail at reading, while subject to change, what is currently being discussed (except by you) was stated as "how it works" by the Devs (and is how it will be on SiSi tomorrow) c) Did you just complain about having to train skills to fly a ship and call it "grindy" Originally by: StevieSG Verone looks like data from star trek. that is all.
Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:57:00 - [449] Originally by: Dr Ming T3 is going to be a failure in practice. T3 sounds great in a theroycrafting lag free make-believe land where blobs and just plain unfairness don't exist. T3 sounds great in a fairy-tale world where you are the center of the show, and your cunning gameplay will allow you to avoid SP loss while inflicting it on others. Fact of the matter is that your average, and your cunning gameplay isn't any more cunning that anyone else's. SP is a resource you gain at a fixed rate. You can't play better to get more SP. Losing SP when your ship blows up means that your character is going to become r.etarded. Your character is going to be r.etarded because your average and you die as often as you kill. Or maybe your above average, and you still die because average people ganged up on you. Actually, the people in T2 ships are going to primary you EVERY SINGLE TIME. So you going to die a lot more. Because people know that killing your ship makes your character r.etarded. People play MMOs to make their character better. In that context, the design of T3 is mindbogglingly horrible and isn't going to be a popular option. If T3 is not a popular option, then wormhole space is not going to be popular. All I could read said WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH CCP ruined T3 cause it is risky!
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:00:00 - [450] Originally by: Dr Ming T3 is going to be a failure in practice. Fact of the matter is that your average, and your cunning gameplay isn't any more cunning that anyone else's. Speak for youself - personally Im l33t. Originally by: Dr Ming SP is a resource you gain at a fixed rate. You can't play better to get more SP. Funny, because if you dont die, in comparison to someone in a T3 ship who does - you will, in fact get more SP. Quote: Losing SP when your ship blows up means that your character is going to become r.etarded. Dont like em, dont fly em. Personally I dont get myself in a twist over whether someone else thinks Im rubbish or not - I just play the game. Quote: . Actually, the people in T2 ships are going to primary you EVERY SINGLE TIME. So you going to die a lot more. Because people know that killing your ship makes your character r.etarded. And vs the all T3 gang? Or when actually calling primary on the uber tanked T3 ship is just plain stupid and gets you killed? Quote: People play MMOs to make their character better. In that context, the design of T3 is mindbogglingly horrible and isn't going to be a popular option. If T3 is not a popular option, then wormhole space is not going to be popular. We'll see - but when those first T3 ships hit the market I'm pretty confident they'll be very expensive, and every man and his dog will want one - if only because they're new. And finally, wormholes arent just about scooping T3 NPC loot, they'll also offer new environmental challenges, not to mention remarkably useful short cuts to distant areas of space. C.

Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:01:00 - [451] Originally by: Yeshua Christ Originally by: Dr Ming T3 is going to be a failure in practice. T3 sounds great in a theroycrafting lag free make-believe land where blobs and just plain unfairness don't exist. T3 sounds great in a fairy-tale world where you are the center of the show, and your cunning gameplay will allow you to avoid SP loss while inflicting it on others. Fact of the matter is that your average, and your cunning gameplay isn't any more cunning that anyone else's. SP is a resource you gain at a fixed rate. You can't play better to get more SP. Losing SP when your ship blows up means that your character is going to become r.etarded. Your character is going to be r.etarded because your average and you die as often as you kill. Or maybe your above average, and you still die because average people ganged up on you. Actually, the people in T2 ships are going to primary you EVERY SINGLE TIME. So you going to die a lot more. Because people know that killing your ship makes your character r.etarded. People play MMOs to make their character better. In that context, the design of T3 is mindbogglingly horrible and isn't going to be a popular option. If T3 is not a popular option, then wormhole space is not going to be popular. All I could read said WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH CCP ruined T3 cause it is risky! I'm training this character as a falcon alt. Don't cry on the forms when you know what happens to you.
Akor Flandres	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:05:00 - [452] I cannot believe people are whinging, probably the same people who wanted more risk, the same people who constantly scream 'go back to wow'- really,get over it. You're also probably the same people who scream how every ****ing change is going to kill eve, yet once again there are more people playing than ever! Shut up.
Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:05:00 - [453] Originally by: Dr Ming Originally by: Yeshua Christ Originally by: Dr Ming T3 is going to be a failure in practice. T3 sounds great in a theroycrafting lag free make-believe land where blobs and just plain unfairness don't exist. T3 sounds great in a fairy-tale world where you are the center of the show, and your cunning gameplay will allow you to avoid SP loss while inflicting it on others. Fact of the matter is that your average, and your cunning gameplay isn't any more cunning that anyone else's. SP is a resource you gain at a fixed rate. You can't play better to get more SP. Losing SP when your ship blows up means that your character is going to become r.etarded. Your character is going to be r.etarded because your average and you die as often as you kill. Or maybe your above average, and you still die because average people ganged up on you. Actually, the people in T2 ships are going to primary you EVERY SINGLE TIME. So you going to die a lot more. Because people know that killing your ship makes your character r.etarded. People play MMOs to make their character better. In that context, the design of T3 is mindbogglingly horrible and isn't going to be a popular option. If T3 is not a popular option, then wormhole space is not going to be popular. All I could read said WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH CCP ruined T3 cause it is risky! I'm training this character as a falcon alt. Don't cry on the forms when you know what happens to you. Wtf does your falcon alt have to do with anything? Besides the fact that it only further goes to show how risk adverse you are. You going to come find me ingame and permajam me? I hope so.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:06:00 - [454] Originally by: Dr Ming Originally by: Yeshua Christ Originally by: Dr Ming T3 is going to be a failure in practice. T3 sounds great in a theroycrafting lag free make-believe land where blobs and just plain unfairness don't exist. T3 sounds great in a fairy-tale world where you are the center of the show, and your cunning gameplay will allow you to avoid SP loss while inflicting it on others. Fact of the matter is that your average, and your cunning gameplay isn't any more cunning that anyone else's. SP is a resource you gain at a fixed rate. You can't play better to get more SP. Losing SP when your ship blows up means that your character is going to become r.etarded. Your character is going to be r.etarded because your average and you die as often as you kill. Or maybe your above average, and you still die because average people ganged up on you. Actually, the people in T2 ships are going to primary you EVERY SINGLE TIME. So you going to die a lot more. Because people know that killing your ship makes your character r.etarded. People play MMOs to make their character better. In that context, the design of T3 is mindbogglingly horrible and isn't going to be a popular option. If T3 is not a popular option, then wormhole space is not going to be popular. All I could read said WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH CCP ruined T3 cause it is risky! I'm training this character as a falcon alt. Don't cry on the forms when you know what happens to you. Oh noes! A falcon! You're going to jam him to death? -amirite? C.
Novantco The Tuskers	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:08:00 - [455] Ah lovely. Tech 3 ships that are going to be called primary by everyone and everything when they arrive, will now have the added bonus of removing time spent on SP training. It will almost be like an instant double podding.
Tychus	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:08:00 - [456] Kendrix- Lighten up Francis. Cailais- Well said sir. The thing that i think needs to be nipped in the bud is CCP's decision to implement this as a "working mechanic" of T3 entirely. I would hate to see the sps loss mechanic apply to all fields of game play. Lose a T3 cruiser in pvp, and lose sps? ok. Get ganked in your T3 hulk equivalent to suicide squads in high sec and lose training days? OMG- Whambulance to forums at light speed. It will make the forum whines about falcons look like cotton candy complaints. And T3 will expand, and all fields of game play will adopt it, if CCP puts it in. The whole "not everyone and they're dog will use T3" doesn't hold water after a while, much the same was said for T2. Give it a year or two. I just don't want players to be penalized for making the most of they're game play time. And thanks for reading. T
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:12:00 - [457] Edited by: Kendrix Arathan on 09/02/2009 00:16:05 Originally by: Dr Ming Originally by: Yeshua Christ Originally by: Dr Ming T3 is going to be a failure in practice. T3 sounds great in a theroycrafting lag free make-believe land where blobs and just plain unfairness don't exist. T3 sounds great in a fairy-tale world where you are the center of the show, and your cunning gameplay will allow you to avoid SP loss while inflicting it on others. Fact of the matter is that your average, and your cunning gameplay isn't any more cunning that anyone else's. SP is a resource you gain at a fixed rate. You can't play better to get more SP. Losing SP when your ship blows up means that your character is going to become r.etarded. Your character is going to be r.etarded because your average and you die as often as you kill. Or maybe your above average, and you still die because average people ganged up on you. Actually, the people in T2 ships are going to primary you EVERY SINGLE TIME. So you going to die a lot more. Because people know that killing your ship makes your character r.etarded. People play MMOs to make their character better. In that context, the design of T3 is mindbogglingly horrible and isn't going to be a popular option. If T3 is not a popular option, then wormhole space is not going to be popular. All I could read said WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH CCP ruined T3 cause it is risky! I'm training this character as a falcon alt. Don't cry on the forms when you know what happens to you. QQing at challenging, game mechanics, crying the game being unfair causing your repeated death, rather than accepting that it's because of player skill, or lack there of... Thinking there should be no penalty for death (the majority of MMO's have some kind of XP/Skill penalty for death, except for 1...) Training the FOTTM in a desperate attempt to be OP despite having no idea how to play... Your defiantly from WOW... If you want a NERF MMO, EVE is not for you... P.S GL w/ the falcon, for all we know one of the T3 Module benefits could be ECCM
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:23:00 - [458] Originally by: Tychus Kendrix- Lighten up Francis. Was that a gay joke? If so.. um thanks? but your not my type, the ability to form coherent sentences i something i prefer in the men I date... And I have stopped reading your posts do to your apparent lack of reading comprehension and an enter key...
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:24:00 - [459] Originally by: Tychus Kendrix- Lighten up Francis. Cailais- Well said sir. The thing that i think needs to be nipped in the bud is CCP's decision to implement this as a "working mechanic" of T3 entirely. I would hate to see the sps loss mechanic apply to all fields of game play. Lose a T3 cruiser in pvp, and lose sps? ok. Get ganked in your T3 hulk equivalent to suicide squads in high sec and lose training days? OMG- Whambulance to forums at light speed. It will make the forum whines about falcons look like cotton candy complaints. And T3 will expand, and all fields of game play will adopt it, if CCP puts it in. The whole "not everyone and they're dog will use T3" doesn't hold water after a while, much the same was said for T2. Give it a year or two. I just don't want players to be penalized for making the most of they're game play time. And thanks for reading. T T3 ships will, 100% cast iron guarantee, be suicide ganked in high sec. That's just the nature of EVE and some folks just like to inflict hurt on others for no other reason than because they can. And yes, there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth on the forums about it, because - when all is said and done - those who get ganked just cant believe it will happen to them, or that there are 'nasty people' out there and they fail to act accordingly. But, as T3 becomes more and more common, the 'novelty value' of these attacks will gradually wear off. I mean, who really raises an eyebrow now if a freighter goes down in high sec? Ultimately it will be about player choice. You can choose to risk next to nothing and fly a T1 Cruiser. Or risk a bag of ISK (and that risk is proportionate to your wealth) and fly a pimped up T2 Cruiser. Or you can risk even more and fly a T3 ship. It all boils down to the same thing, the first rule of EVE that every noob has to learn or fail hard: never ever fly what you cant afford to lose. C.
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:26:00 - [460] My point is that EVE isn't fair. Falcons are not fair. They are recon ships, they are designed to not be fair. You think people emoraged about EWAR before... Combine that with T3 and SP loss. Because thats the bottom line with SP loss for flying T3. No T3 pilot better open their mouth and utter a single word about getting perma jammed, or hit by a DDD, or dying because the server is lagged. Anyone who isn't stupid knows that isn't going to happen.

Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:35:00 - [461] Edited by: Kendrix Arathan on 09/02/2009 00:36:41 Originally by: Dr Ming My point is that EVE isn't fair. Falcons are not fair. They are recon ships, they are designed to not be fair. You think people emoraged about EWAR before... Combine that with T3 and SP loss. Because thats the bottom line with SP loss for flying T3. No T3 pilot better open their mouth and utter a single word about getting perma jammed, or hit by a DDD, or dying because the server is lagged. Anyone who isn't stupid knows that isn't going to happen. So your argument is that they shouldn't have t3 because stupid people will complain about it? stupid people complain about EVERYTHING, there is no change to this this game that they could make (or decide not to make)that some stupid person wouldn't complain about... and you do realize that the skill loss is confined to 1 of a hand full(5?) of rank 1 skills, so the potential loss is as little as a few hours of training, right? No ones going back to a alpha clone becuase they flew t3 (unless they didn't bother to clone). Originally by: StevieSG Verone looks like data from star trek. that is all.
Aeo IV Amarr Xomic OmniCorporation	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:38:00 - [462] At least we're not talking about BoB anymore. Right guys? Right? :(
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:40:00 - [463] Originally by: Dr Ming My point is that EVE isn't fair. Falcons are not fair. They are recon ships, they are designed to not be fair. You think people emoraged about EWAR before... Combine that with T3 and SP loss. Because thats the bottom line with SP loss for flying T3. No T3 pilot better open their mouth and utter a single word about getting perma jammed, or hit by a DDD, or dying because the server is lagged. Anyone who isn't stupid knows that isn't going to happen. So your argument is, 'dont introduce SP loss because people will get killed whilst jammed and whine about it on the forums'?! 99% of forum posts are whines - why the heck should T3 be any different?! Not introducing a mechanic, purely on the basis that someone might whine about it (and lets face it here they'll have whined if they'd lost their T1 Frigate) is absurd. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:42:00 - [464] Originally by: Kendrix Arathan So your argument is that they shouldn't have t3 because stupid people will complain about it? Hey - youre not watching me type are you? /me checks house for spy cams. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Novantco The Tuskers	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:47:00 - [465] Originally by: Aeo IV At least we're not talking about BoB anymore. Right guys? Right? :( I see this thread as a cleverly engineered ploy to stop us talking about BoB and whatever their new alliance name is. TO THE CONSPIRACY MOBILE!!
Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:53:00 - [466] Edited by: Yeshua Christ on 09/02/2009 00:55:10 Edited by: Yeshua Christ on 09/02/2009 00:53:55 Originally by: Dr Ming My point is that EVE isn't fair. Falcons are not fair. They are recon ships, they are designed to not be fair. You think people emoraged about EWAR before... Combine that with T3 and SP loss. Because thats the bottom line with SP loss for flying T3. No T3 pilot better open their mouth and utter a single word about getting perma jammed, or hit by a DDD, or dying because the server is lagged. Anyone who isn't stupid knows that isn't going to happen. No **** EvE isn't fair, that's what all these hardcore pvpers like to say but the minute SP loss is brought into the equation to add risk they claim to love their posistion changes to all gnashing of teeth and whine when we still haven't even gotten the blog. The Devs even said that once testing begins if the majority say it's a bad mechanic it can be removed. So why not stfu until it hits the servers and you can see for yourself whether the ships are worth the additional risk instead of pointing out that eve isn't fair and then complaining that SP loss isn't fair. Get over it.
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:55:00 - [467] Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Kendrix Arathan So your argument is that they shouldn't have t3 because stupid people will complain about it? Hey - youre not watching me type are you? /me checks house for spy cams. C. I kinda hope so.. some one else thinking like me is a scary prospect, one of me is bad enough lol
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:59:00 - [468] Originally by: Kendrix Arathan Edited by: Kendrix Arathan on 09/02/2009 00:36:41 Originally by: Dr Ming My point is that EVE isn't fair. Falcons are not fair. They are recon ships, they are designed to not be fair. You think people emoraged about EWAR before... Combine that with T3 and SP loss. Because thats the bottom line with SP loss for flying T3. No T3 pilot better open their mouth and utter a single word about getting perma jammed, or hit by a DDD, or dying because the server is lagged. Anyone who isn't stupid knows that isn't going to happen. So your argument is that they shouldn't have t3 because stupid people will complain about it? stupid people complain about EVERYTHING, there is no change to this this game that they could make (or decide not to make)that some stupid person wouldn't complain about... and you do realize that the skill loss is confined to 1 of a hand full(5?) of rank 1 skills, so the potential loss is as little as a few hours of training, right? No ones going back to a alpha clone becuase they flew t3 (unless they didn't bother to clone). My argument is that more often than not you lose ships in 'unfair' ways. My argument is that re-training a skill that you already trained because you lose your ship in an 'unfair' manner is going to make people even more ****ed than they already were over losing their ship in the first place. My argument is that losing a steady stream of ships will steadily chip away at your training rate. My argument is that when you look at how excited people are at the news of stat redistribution, and you turn that into negative excitement and you've got the reaction that T3 is going to have over time. Only take that negative excitement, and add to it that it will come into focus when they just lost their ship, in what is likely an unfair manner (because fights are about who can be the most unfair). My argument is that T3 is a great sounding daydream, but in practice people will hate it. They will hate it because it involves things we already know most people don't like. My argument is that if most people hate it, they won't use it. If most people don't use it, then there won't be demand for it. If there is no demand for it, then wormhole space will likely be a failure. That is my argument.
Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:07:00 - [469] Originally by: Dr Ming Originally by: Kendrix Arathan Edited by: Kendrix Arathan on 09/02/2009 00:36:41 Originally by: Dr Ming My point is that EVE isn't fair. Falcons are not fair. They are recon ships, they are designed to not be fair. You think people emoraged about EWAR before... Combine that with T3 and SP loss. Because thats the bottom line with SP loss for flying T3. No T3 pilot better open their mouth and utter a single word about getting perma jammed, or hit by a DDD, or dying because the server is lagged. Anyone who isn't stupid knows that isn't going to happen. So your argument is that they shouldn't have t3 because stupid people will complain about it? stupid people complain about EVERYTHING, there is no change to this this game that they could make (or decide not to make)that some stupid person wouldn't complain about... and you do realize that the skill loss is confined to 1 of a hand full(5?) of rank 1 skills, so the potential loss is as little as a few hours of training, right? No ones going back to a alpha clone becuase they flew t3 (unless they didn't bother to clone). My argument is that more often than not you lose ships in 'unfair' ways. My argument is that re-training a skill that you already trained because you lose your ship in an 'unfair' manner is going to make people even more ****ed than they already were over losing their ship in the first place. My argument is that losing a steady stream of ships will steadily chip away at your training rate. My argument is that when you look at how excited people are at the news of stat redistribution, and you turn that into negative excitement and you've got the reaction that T3 is going to have over time. Only take that negative excitement, and add to it that it will come into focus when they just lost their ship, in what is likely an unfair manner (because fights are about who can be the most unfair). My argument is that T3 is a great sounding daydream, but in practice people will hate it. They will hate it because it involves things we already know most people don't like. My argument is that if most people hate it, they won't use it. If most people don't use it, then there won't be demand for it. If there is no demand for it, then wormhole space will likely be a failure. That is my argument. Your argument fails because you have no idea whether the additional risk is worth the capabilities of the ships. As I said why not wait until testing begins to make sweeping judgements based on SP loss? You have no idea if people will hate it, you don't speak for the rest of us. Some people like to make informed decisions before arguing over speculation.
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:16:00 - [470] Edited by: Kendrix Arathan on 09/02/2009 01:19:00 Originally by: Dr Ming My argument is that more often than not you lose ships in 'unfair' ways. I think you meant to type "I" insted of you, cause I sure don't... Originally by: Dr Ming My argument is that re-training a skill that you already trained because you lose your ship in an 'unfair' manner is going to make people even more **ed than they already were over losing their ship in the first place. This is no different from having to re-earn the isk you already earned to re-buy the ship. This is just a new resource that can suffer limited loss, that you will have to replenish on top of what you normally do (People like you said no one would ever fly marauders because they cost too much to loose and plenty of people fly them now) Originally by:** Dr Ming My argument is that losing a steady stream of ships will steadily chip away at your training rate. Why the hell are you loosing so many ships??? do you auto pilot though low-sec as a hobby or what? Originally by: Dr Ming My argument is that when you look at how excited people are at the news of stat redistribution, and you turn that into negative excitement and you've got the reaction that T3 is going to have over time. Only take that negative excitement, and add to it that it will come into focus when they just lost their ship, in what is likely an unfair manner (because fights are about who can be the most unfair). My argument is that T3 is a great sounding daydream, but in practice people will hate it. They will hate it because it involves things we already know most people don't like. My argument is that if most people hate it, they won't use it. If most people don't use it, then there won't be demand for it. If there is no demand for it, then wormhole space will likely be a failure. That is my argument. The rest of this I can only assume is because your butt-hurt because you feel you can't fly T3 because you for some reason loose more ships than anyone else in eve (you might wanna get that looked at by the way, at some people you have to stop and think maybe it's not the game, its the person playing it. If i stub my toe, i don't blame the couch i stubbed it on lol). You feel that Santa is bringing everyone else a toy but you and your solution is to try and take all the kids toys away.. Or you were expecting a SOLO-WTF-PWN Mobil and CCP "tries" to ballance things so they don't hand those out.

Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:17:00 - [471] Originally by: Yeshua Christ Your argument fails because you have no idea whether the additional risk is worth the capabilities of the ships. As I said why not wait until testing begins to make sweeping judgements based on SP loss? You have no idea if people will hate it, you don't speak for the rest of us. Some people like to make informed decisions before arguing over speculation. They are not going to be solopwnmobiles. They are going to be cruisers. They are going to be non-solopwnmobiles which will explode under any sort of concentrated fire that burn you for SP when it happens.
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:20:00 - [472] Edited by: Kendrix Arathan on 09/02/2009 01:20:52 Originally by: Dr Ming Originally by: Yeshua Christ They are going to be non-solopwnmobiles which will explode under any sort of concentrated fire that burn you for SP when it happens. So you have exact stats on their resists and tanking abilities then? if so please share
Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:21:00 - [473] Originally by: Dr Ming Originally by: Yeshua Christ Your argument fails because you have no idea whether the additional risk is worth the capabilities of the ships. As I said why not wait until testing begins to make sweeping judgements based on SP loss? You have no idea if people will hate it, you don't speak for the rest of us. Some people like to make informed decisions before arguing over speculation. They are not going to be solopwnmobiles. They are going to be cruisers. They are going to be non-solopwnmobiles which will explode under any sort of concentrated fire that burn you for SP when it happens. Any ship no matter the class will pop under concentrated fire, so if the risk is too great then simply don't use the T3 ships. They shouldn't be solopwnmobiles anyway, does that mean the miniscule SP loss is worth the abilities they have? No one knows, so yet again stop the rabble rabble rabble and wait til you actually know what they can do. If they're worth the risk then you can always use that falcon alt to keep it alive, and if your really that worried about SP loss, just eject from the ****ing ship before it goes down and poof SP loss avoided. FFS some people will complain about everything no matter how little they know.
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:26:00 - [474] Originally by: Yeshua Christ you don't speak for the rest of us. you hit the nail on the head... He can't see past himself, he thinks that he some how speaks for the entire player base, and that they share his awful point of view, as well as lack of piloting skill (player skill, not character skill, you need both.) And I'm done, there is only so long you can punch an idiot in the face before it stops being fun and starts being sad..
fairimear Gallente S.A.S Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:34:00 - [475] 4 years of eve. Worst idea ever heard from ccp. sums it up tbh.
Yeshua Christ	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:37:00 - [476] Gah screw this thread, have fun with the rabble rabble rabble everyone.
Thaylon Sen Boyz from the Dwarf	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:39:00 - [477] I dont get it... It's a great idea. Why is everyone complaining about loosing a few days of skills?
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:47:00 - [478] Originally by: Thaylon Sen I dont get it... It's a great idea. Why is everyone complaining about loosing a few days of skills? Because nobody will use t3 ships, because the nature of eve is that you 'know' you are going to die eventually. You can not escape it. Be it a bad situation, a screwy bug, or whatever, your ships get exploded. People wont use t3 for the same reason they don't undock their shiny imperial apoc. The gain is not worth the risk. IF t3 ships are so ungodly good that its worth losing potentialy months (over the course of time) of skill points just to use them semi-frequently, then t3 ships will be overpowered and unbalance things. If they are NOT so ungodly good etc, then nobody will bother using them. DO NOT FORGET that unstable wormholes are also betting THEIR sucsess on t3 'working out'. With out the desire to farm them for their t3 components they will become less important and just another 'neat thing to mess with' in eve. If nobody uses t3 ships then these wormholes will also be under-used. And that's the entire expansion wasted.
Thaylon Sen Boyz from the Dwarf	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:53:00 - [479] Originally by: bff Jill Originally by: Thaylon Sen I dont get it... It's a great idea. Why is everyone complaining about loosing a few days of skills? Because nobody will use t3 ships, because the nature of eve is that you 'know' you are going to die eventually. You can not escape it. Be it a bad situation, a screwy bug, or whatever, your ships get exploded. People wont use t3 for the same reason they don't undock their shiny imperial apoc. The gain is not worth the risk. IF t3 ships are so ungodly good that its worth losing potentialy months (over the course of time) of skill points just to use them semi-frequently, then t3 ships will be overpowered and unbalance things. If they are NOT so ungodly good etc, then nobody will bother using them. DO NOT FORGET that unstable wormholes are also betting THEIR sucsess on t3 'working out'. With out the desire to farm them for their t3 components they will become less important and just another 'neat thing to mess with' in eve. If nobody uses t3 ships then these wormholes will also be under-used. And that's the entire expansion wasted. Nope... still dont get it. I wont be training the skills to lvl5 only lvl4, so what's that? 24hrs or there abouts? How does that compare to faction battleships? I certainly hope I wont be loosing more than 1 a day anyway :)
The Hardman Amarr Uncle Fester's Olde Tyme Barbershoppe	Posted - 2009.02.09 02:04:00 - [480] Depending on what the fleet needs, I fly a Recon, a BS, a Cruiser, a BC, an Interceptor, or a HAC. I see no problem including a T3 ship in that lineup. Sure, it isn't something I will fly every operation, but occasionally? No problem.

Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Black Legion.	Posted - 2009.02.09 02:05:00 - [481] Couple of things also said on EVE-TV which was ignored (on the early pages at least) in this thread so far; - Studio asking CCP: You say we lose the sp on the 'ship destruction', what if we eject? CCP answers: Then you're fine, no sp lost. Much laughing ensured, and someone suggested to Verone that he and fellow pirates might actually have this as a new means to ransom people.. 'give me your ship and you will keep your skillpoints'. - CCP Soundwave asking KIAEddz: What do you look forward to about this expansion? Eddz: Alot of older players sit with near maxed skills, we just got a bunch of longer level 5's to train. Training new skills and ships is exciting. That's just two reasons why "losing sp on ship destruction" will work. As it's limited to the ship (and you can eject and/or hand it over to save your skillpoints) you can to some extent control it. Also, there's alot of players, like Eddz say, that can "waste" their SP. This is a way to level the field between younger and older players, to be honest. Personally, I'm full Amarr right now, there's not a ship I don't fly, all skills 4 or 5 basicly (just lolOps and a few other that I have trained but not to a high level). It's not too long til I have to either crosstrain or just max all capital stuff out. And I'm fairly "young", there's a bunch of players that are 2,5 years older than me.. Overall, the losing-skillpoints-on-death takes the risk vs reward to a new level, at the same time it gives older player something to 'dare to risk' that younger ones can't afford to the same extent (but can chose to do). It doesn't look all that bad to me, tbh.
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 02:09:00 - [482] Originally by: Thaylon Sen Nope... still dont get it. I wont be training the skills to lvl5 only lvl4, so what's that? 24hrs or there abouts? How does that compare to faction battleships? I certainly hope I wont be loosing more than 1 a day anyway :) Add up all those 24 hours you need to retrain after every bubble camp =P T3 ships are supposed to be an alternative to t2. Why fly t3 and lose sps when you can just fly t2 then? It makes no sense. All this will do is make people even less willing to engage in a fight unless they know they can win for sure, and now it goes even further making sure they can win for sure and not take any losses at all while doing it. ccp could have let t3 be super versatile and capable of handling various situations, so that people would be more willing to take risks. But with this implementation they will just make people even less willing to risk anything. I was never planning on using t3 because i don't really like cruisers other than the sheer cost effectiveness that some t1 cruisers can bring. But i don't see t3 being a success because now even people that may have wanted to use them instead of their HACs or whatever will have little incentive to actually do it. And if t3 become under-used (and this will happen with SP loss, the vast majority of people will not bother) then that effects w-spaces desirability as well, and as ive said the whole expansion would become much less an addition to the game than it could have been.
The Hardman Amarr Uncle Fester's Olde Tyme Barbershoppe	Posted - 2009.02.09 02:13:00 - [483] Edited by: The Hardman on 09/02/2009 02:15:00 Edited by: The Hardman on 09/02/2009 02:13:24 How many bonuses are we looking at? If we are looking at 2x Racial Cruiser Bonus 2x Std T3 Bonus 1-2Yx Y Subsystem bonuses We will have a really really uber ship if you have all subsystems at 5. Probably they will be balanced around having the sub systems at 1 or 2. If they come balanced around having the subsystems at 3 or 4 than I will call them 'prenerfed'. Rolling around in a T3 ship with all sub system skills at 4 should be similar to rolling around with LG implants in your head, going about with sub systems skills at a 5 should be similar to rolling around with HG implants in your head.
Lobo Noturno	Posted - 2009.02.09 02:20:00 - [484] Since the T3 are cruiser class ships, they will not have much more DPS than a T2 cruiser, or else they break balance. Since T3 are expensive ships, the risk vs. reward relation is already different than current T2 ships. Now, sp loss mechanics on other MMOs are based on the fact that player loses equivalent gameplay time, since he will need to regain it's sp. Eve sp mechanics are so different than those games that it is actually quite hard to fully comprehend the impact of losing skill points on death and the time lost. Currently, even a death without a clone protection is not too damaging, but we still have no idea on how much skill points time will actually be lost at each death. Since PVP is essentially made for fun, T3 will be rarely used(for the same reason people rarely use T2 ships that are primaried all the time and have no survivability). It is not clear what will be it's capabilities, but I am guessing it will not be a good Lv4 mission runner, so it will also be useless in empire. What is the point of getting ingame a ship that gives little benefit over T2 and much bigger penalties, and will be used by almost no one if that doesn't change? I really don't think this is a good idea as people are interpreting it. Lots of people were also against speed nerfs, and yet the game clearly improved for many after that. PVPers are not stupid people, they know they are not invulnerable nor infalible, and they will not risk losing SP or training time flying a ship that ends up being only marginaly better, perhaps more flexible than the T2 counterparts.... And my guess is that T3 is to be used for PVP. If it is to be used for exploration, then maybe this have a different equation, but i pretty much prefer to keep flying my Profission EOS... Lobo
Soporo Caldari The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.02.09 03:36:00 - [485] Well, like it or not we now know something about the other risks of flying these (likely very expensive) T3 ships. I wish we knew a bit more about the potential benefits.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.09 03:50:00 - [486] where the hell is the dev blog with it coming out for testing in under 20 hours?
Myra2007 Shafrak Industries	Posted - 2009.02.09 04:55:00 - [487] Can't really say much at this point. It depends too much on what these ships will be capable of. But from my point of view they would have to be substantially better and more survivable than t2 cruisers to make it any viable. Many people who use the risk vs. reward argument shouldn't forget that the reward in that case is clearly not flying the ship but what you can accomplish with it. If its not much better then what you can do with t1 or t2 then its probably not worth the greatly increased risk either. So before you cherish the idea i'd wait for what the capabilities of those ships really turn out to be. That being said it could still be fun. I am not gonna say its a bad idea until i know what ships we're talking about. -- Originally by: kublai on Ankhesentapemkah That said, the "i'm a girl who plays your computer game and i'm not that ugly" has always been a certain winner in the mmo world
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.09 05:12:00 - [488] I wonder what all you people thought happened when T2 first came out? The ships were astronomically expensive compared to now, and yet, miraculously people still flew them into combat. Hell, BoB built an alliance around the fact that they had so many high sp alts in the alliance, all packing t2 when everybody else was still fumbling in the dark. The ships will get used, I'd bet my billions on it.
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.02.09 05:57:00 - [489] I think it's mainly targetted at the high-SP people who have trained most of the stuff that they really want.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.09 06:11:00 - [490] To be honest. If the ships had some alternate method of skillpoints like the proposed "Ship experience". It would all be good. You can train is normal. and "old" tech 3 vessels have value, personal attachment, yada yada yada. But as much as ive tried to defend CCP and tech 3. I cannot condone taking away from players normal training time as a mechanic of flying tech 3 vessels. The whole idea of skills is costant advancement. That is the single, core idea. You can train them offline! What other mmo does that? If you have to take time away from your normal training schedule to retrain skills youve already trained before. You are effectivly stuck in one track of advancement. You are not moving forward. This violates the core idea of skillpoints. As much as I hope and pray it will be the former, I fear that it will be the latter. Every mmo needs it sinks, and i think CCP is going to use tech 3 as a skillpoint sink for those super high sp players. Which intern makes it a bad idea to use when you still got "useful" skills to train. You are not advancing. In short tech 3 will be the toys of old or foolish. If you have 90mil sp and have trained your gallente titan to 5 out of sheer boredom. This might be a good thing for you. However if your any lower and still have other things to train before you hit that top where you shrug and start training mining skills becuase there is nothing left to train. Then you are restricting yourself and gimping your character advancement. For those who site risk. Yes you are risking something, But by nature of this risk it limits your advancement. Are you ready to risk that fact that you will effectively stop gaining skillpoints for the next week or so while you retrain? That gallente carrier is starting to look alot further off with all those tech 3 skills to retrain isnt it? But as for discussion on this thread. I would say it's useless. This late into the development cycle it's set in stone. It may be changed in the future if enough of us can whine at the exact same time, But this little thread naught is puttering in circles. The same discussions and opinions repeating endlessly. Wait until after the information is released. Then we can make a constructive thread with our varying ideals, Opinions, and proposed suggestions on how to change or otherwise improve the system we may or may not see as fundamentally flawed.

Ricdic Caldari	Posted - 2009.02.09 06:54:00 - [491] After reading 5 pages of whine I decided to skip the rest and put my opinion down. CCP has said that the ships will become more efficient with use. This indicates to me a separate action based skill path (rather than the current time based skill path). As you utilise a ship and different goals are reached your ship qualities improve. It does somewhat make sense. Much like your car at home, the more you drive it the better you get at parking, gear changing, throttle control etc. If you jump in a new car you need to learn those advanced skills all over again. My biggest concern is the markers CCP will require for ship advancement. Would a gunnery bonus be enacted after 10,000 shots are fired? If so I could shoot my own POS for a few hours to skill up. Same deal with shield, propulsion etc. Even if it was based on number of kills I could destroy my alt's shuttles repeatedly for artificial gain. Unless CCP find some really unique way to counter this grind effect they will find that before flying their ships in combat people will put time into artificially boosting their ship stats. I think the core idea is brilliant. To become more efficient with your vessel as you spend more time with it's subsystems. I have spent countless hours 0.0 ratting and doing exploration complexes in my Golem. I would love some sort of performance bonuses to show the ship is weathered and somewhat of a veteran on the field. I know that's somewhat not related as only cruisers are coming out to start with but there's a lot of potential. A lot of people are saying that this will only benefit carebears. I don't necessarily agree. With only cruiser modifications available it will allow people to really play with these setups and I don't actually think they will be all that expensive (probably cheaper than t2 (HAC etc) after the first couple of months. Now a cruiser only has a limited effectiveness in empire. They might be able to run L3 missions better or be able to solo L4 missions a bit harder than a BS but that's about it. I think pvpers will jump on these new t3 ships to cruise around 0.0 and have some fun with their new setups. As long as the price isn't too high we will see major utilisation (I would hope prices to be between 50-100m per unit). In all RL cases a person develops a bond or level of advanced interaction with their commonly used devices. We all have a special way to hold a pen, grabbing a different pen requires a restructure and readjustment. My seat at work has the perfect ass groove and it always takes new seats some time to adjust to my bum. A formula one driver spends months getting adjusted to their vehicles and in most cases the car is modified to perfectly compliment their driving styles and highest required usage (a driver who pushes corners too hard may have their car riding a different tire tread or type compared to someone who paces themselves through corners). CCP's biggest challenge I feel will be balancing this to disallow it from being a grind to improve system. I would love to see these weathered ships to be sold however that would probably be a new are for the current macro miners to jump on, or would really turn it into a grind. Just be great to sell your baby that you have lovingly used in hundreds of encounters but would basically contradict everything I said above (re: bum shaped into seat etc)
ResearchBunny Beatrix	Posted - 2009.02.09 07:31:00 - [492] Originally by: MotherMoon where the hell is the dev blog with it coming out for testing in under 20 hours? Quiet, they're still trying to make sure it doesn't nuke boot.ini again.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.09 08:01:00 - [493] Originally by: ResearchBunny Beatrix Originally by: MotherMoon where the hell is the dev blog with it coming out for testing in under 20 hours? Quiet, they're still trying to make sure it doesn't nuke boot.ini again. in that case I'll keep my mouth shut
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp KenZoku	Posted - 2009.02.09 08:07:00 - [494] Originally by: ResearchBunny Beatrix Originally by: MotherMoon where the hell is the dev blog with it coming out for testing in under 20 hours? Quiet, they're still trying to make sure it doesn't nuke boot.ini again. I guess loosing SP is nothing compared to loosing boot.ini -- Billion Isk Mission
Wendy Spacetraveller	Posted - 2009.02.09 08:27:00 - [495] this thread is lol everytime it's the same thing, everyone and their alts are whining abut how the chages or new content in the next expansion/patch is going to kill eve/create massive amounts of emoragequits/nerf pvp and boost carebears/boost pvp and nerf carebears/is **ed **ed and stupid beyond measure and everyone is like " that i'm not flying something that takes you down SP with it" and still after the patch everyone will still do it! I agree it's kind of **ed to loose SP when loosing the ship (even more ****ed to loose SP just from repacking it) but if CCP feels it's the way to go and continues to feel that way (wich they probably will tbqfh) there's nothing anyone can do to change it! whait and see... whait and see....
Navtiqes Englebarna	Posted - 2009.02.09 08:48:00 - [496] Originally by: kublai Well that just took away all the point in having t3 ships. Yea, this sentences them to carebear only. And just think of the whines when they get popped...
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.02.09 09:20:00 - [497] Edited by: Jowen Datloran on 09/02/2009 09:20:21 Originally by: Navtiqes Originally by: kublai Well that just took away all the point in having t3 ships. Yea, this sentences them to carebear only. And just think of the whines when they get popped... Yeah, it is the exact same thing with tech 2 ships that nobody flies either, due to the fact that you get practically nothing from insurance when one of those pops. Oh wait a bit... ---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.09 09:23:00 - [498] Originally by: Lord WarATron Originally by: ResearchBunny Beatrix Originally by: MotherMoon where the hell is the dev blog with it coming out for testing in under 20 hours? Quiet, they're still trying to make sure it doesn't nuke boot.ini again. I guess loosing SP is nothing compared to loosing boot.ini that's for tech 5 mate :) ou can solo like 20 battlehsips in a tech 5 jovian battleship. But when you die you lose your operating system.
Navtiqes Englebarna	Posted - 2009.02.09 09:29:00 - [499] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Lord WarATron Originally by: ResearchBunny Beatrix Originally by: MotherMoon where the hell is the dev blog with it coming out for testing in under 20 hours? Quiet, they're still trying to make sure it doesn't nuke boot.ini again. I guess loosing SP is nothing compared to loosing boot.ini that's for tech 5 mate :) ou can solo like 20 battlehsips in a tech 5 jovian battleship. But when you die you lose your operating system. Tech 6 loss and they take your house.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.09 09:31:00 - [500] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 09:31:25 Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 09:30:58 I reiterated my point on another thread, might as wlel put it in the sodastream here; You can toot around screaming "EVE is differentz" and "Risk vs reward!!" all you want, but the moment some REAL loss comes into play and people start to cry about it, like a 5 year old kid who got denied his fudcicle, you can all just shut the hell up and take it up the hiney You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have it, the facts of EVE. My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.

Tom Harry	Posted - 2009.02.09 09:37:00 - [501] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 09:31:25 Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 09:30:58 I reiterated my point on another thread, might as wlel put it in the sodastream here; You can toot around screaming "EVE is differentz" and "Risk vs reward!!" all you want, but the moment some REAL loss comes into play and people start to cry about it, like a 5 year old kid who got denied his fudcicle, you can all just shut the hell up and take it up the hiney You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have it, the facts of EVE. I just want to fly lego ships. I never asked for them to be so powerful that they needed skill loss. Can't the learning bonus + inherant skill loss be some kind of new implant, instead of boxed together with my new ships like some crappy nichT product.
Reven Cordelle Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2009.02.09 09:39:00 - [502] Aye, Wheres your Risk Vs Reward now? You convoluted **ers. This is the game you so apparently love - reinforcing that its "harsh" and "not for carebears". Then CCP serve up a fresh, steaming nugget of Harsh and look at you all, whining that you can't fly the most powerful weaponary in space because you will lose effective SP if you're a enough pilot to get blown up in one. Stop ing crying about it and grow some **ing balls. Hell, if you can't handle that - jump into a Hulk in Empire like the rest of us and be apparently devoid of risk, so you say.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2009.02.09 09:46:00 - [503] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 09:31:25 Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 09:30:58 I reiterated my point on another thread, might as wlel put it in the sodastream here; You can toot around screaming "EVE is differentz" and "Risk vs reward!!" all you want, but the moment some REAL loss comes into play and people start to cry about it, like a 5 year old kid who got denied his fudcicle, you can all just shut the hell up and take it up the hiney You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have it, the facts of EVE. To be fair this risk is different. They both cost time, but you can always catch up with others with a little hard work, if the loss is only isk. With skill loss your character will be permanently nudged behind, and no amount of hard work will change that. Ofcource there is a limit to what you can learn, so at some point you will catch up in relevant skill, but never in total skillpoints.
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.02.09 09:54:00 - [504] Originally by: Reven Cordelle Aye, Wheres your Risk Vs Reward now? You convoluted **ers. This is the game you so apparently love - reinforcing that its "harsh" and "not for carebears". Then CCP serve up a fresh, steaming nugget of Harsh and look at you all, whining that you can't fly the most powerful weaponary in space because you will lose effective SP if you're a enough pilot to get blown up in one. Stop ing crying about it and grow some **ing balls. Hell, if you can't handle that - jump into a Hulk in Empire like the rest of us and be apparently devoid of risk, so you say. Well if the risk vs reward balance isn't worth it, people won't fly the ships. Has nothing to do with balls or anything else. People just want the new content to be worth using. I don't think we know enough to even guess at if it will or won't be worth using. However it has nothing to do with what your griping about. The worst the whiners are doing is assuming too much and too soon. Funny how quick "carebears" seem to jump at people's throats trying to call them cowards though. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.09 09:56:00 - [505] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 09:59:08 Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 09:57:35 Originally by: Gorefacer Well if the risk vs reward balance isn't worth it, people won't fly the ships. Has nothing to do with balls or anything else. People just want the new content to be worth using. I don't think we know enough to even guess at if it will or won't be worth using. However it has nothing to do with what your griping about. The worst the whiners are doing is assuming too much and too soon. Funny how quick "carebears" seem to jump at people's throats trying to call them cowards though. For someone who says a lot of "it's not about", the carebear comment is a bit ironic. You may not complain about it if the balance is right, but others will. Majority of them will. No matter if you could fly a frigate with a DD strappd to its back, people would complain about SP loss still. People only ocmplain when it effects them, it's a fact of EVE. very rarely people actually discuss things from a "neutral" point of view. SP loss would be risk vs reward. People have used it before, it applies here. Balance is ofcourse given, with any game add-on. Finally; Don't fly what you can't afford to lose And the hypocrisy i mentioned on the other thread; it's due to people complaining when there's new risks to them. My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:01:00 - [506] Originally by: Grath Telkin I wonder what all you people thought happened when T2 first came out? The ships were astronomically expensive compared to now, and yet, miraculously people still flew them into combat. Hell, BoB built an alliance around the fact that they had so many high sp alts in the alliance, all packing t2 when everybody else was still fumbling in the dark. The ships will get used, I'd bet my billions on it. Isk can always be remade, skillpoints are lost forever 0_0 You only need enough isk to do what you want to do, but you always need more skillpoints. Only people with everyskillat5 can afford to lose skillpoints, and those people who have everyskillat5 are obviously going to be flying a typhoon
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:04:00 - [507] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 09:59:08 Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 09:57:35 Originally by: Gorefacer Well if the risk vs reward balance isn't worth it, people won't fly the ships. Has nothing to do with balls or anything else. People just want the new content to be worth using. I don't think we know enough to even guess at if it will or won't be worth using. However it has nothing to do with what your griping about. The worst the whiners are doing is assuming too much and too soon. Funny how quick "carebears" seem to jump at people's throats trying to call them cowards though. For someone who says a lot of "it's not about", the carebear comment is a bit ironic. You may not complain about it if the balance is right, but others will. Majority of them will. No matter if you could fly a frigate with a DD strappd to its back, people would complain about SP loss still. People only ocmplain when it effects them, it's a fact of EVE. very rarely people actually discuss things from a "neutral" point of view. SP loss would be risk vs reward. People have used it before, it applies here. Balance is ofcourse given, with any game add-on. Finally; Don't fly what you can't afford to lose And the hypocrisy i mentioned on the other thread; it's due to people complaining when there's new risks to them. I quoted "carebear" as that is how the people I was responding to characterized themselves. Personally I think if the rewards of t3 justify the risk of SP loss you will see tons of PVPers using t3 and happy to do so. I don't see the complaints as complaints just about SP loss but of assumptions that SP loss risk will eclipse the rewards of using the ships, thereby rendering the new content pointless to most PVP type players. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:08:00 - [508] Originally by: Gorefacer I quoted "carebear" as that is how the people I was responding to characterized themselves. Personally I think if the rewards of t3 justify the risk of SP loss you will see tons of PVPers using t3 and happy to do so. I don't see the complaints as complaints just about SP loss but of assumptions that SP loss risk will eclipse the rewards of using the ships, thereby rendering the new content pointless to most PVP type players. I think we're going into a semantic discussion about "what is acceptable". You're talking from the camp of "if it's fair, it's ok", and i'm talking about the people who complain just because it's a SP loss. I for one would accept that, say, you get a 10% damage increase in a battleship and you lose 12 hours of training if you pop. Some would not. That 10% is a big difference though. My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:09:00 - [509] Originally by: bff Jill Originally by: Grath Telkin I wonder what all you people thought happened when T2 first came out? The ships were astronomically expensive compared to now, and yet, miraculously people still flew them into combat. Hell, BoB built an alliance around the fact that they had so many high sp alts in the alliance, all packing t2 when everybody else was still fumbling in the dark. The ships will get used, I'd bet my billions on it. Isk can always be remade, skillpoints are lost forever 0_0 You only need enough isk to do what you want to do, but you always need more skillpoints. Only people with everyskillat5 can afford to lose skillpoints, and those people who have everyskillat5 are obviously going to be flying a typhoon I can afford to lose skill points. I flew my ships just fine months ago with millions less SP and could do so again with that same amount. In fact I didn't upgrade my clone and got popped losing BS V not long ago. While frustrating I continued to play as I always do right up to the time I got the skill back. If I were to risk those SP though I would want an acceptably powerful advantage for doing so. Skillpoints are only lost until they can be retrained. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:11:00 - [510] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Gorefacer I quoted "carebear" as that is how the people I was responding to characterized themselves. Personally I think if the rewards of t3 justify the risk of SP loss you will see tons of PVPers using t3 and happy to do so. I don't see the complaints as complaints just about SP loss but of assumptions that SP loss risk will eclipse the rewards of using the ships, thereby rendering the new content pointless to most PVP type players. I think we're going into a semantic discussion about "what is acceptable". You're talking from the camp of "if it's fair, it's ok", and i'm talking about the people who complain just because it's a SP loss. I for one would accept that, say, you get a 10% damage increase in a battleship and you lose 12 hours of training if you pop. Some would not. That 10% is a big difference though. I can agree with that. For those that are complaining JUST about SP loss in general no matter what the balancing factors are, and if these are the same people spouting risk vs reward on other subjects, then yes they are being hypocritical. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus

L046 Stripey Industrial Beast Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:12:00 - [511] From concord. we are sorry for you recent loss, as you were in a t3 ship we have taken 256,000 skill points from the t3 group. as ccp is feeling nice, you can have your skill points back if you pay us teh very resonible price of 15 euros. please enter you CC details below and foward this to the 'you just got scammed by ccp department.
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:13:00 - [512] Since skill points are based on fixed time, a system that loses skillpoints rewards people who play less. Since they will lose fewer ships in a given period of time, but gain the same amount of skill points as someone who plays more. Isk on the other hand is different, since everyone has to put effort into making it, and everyone loses it.
Reven Cordelle Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:15:00 - [513] Everyone knows T3 are just going to be the new CNR's anyway...
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:19:00 - [514] Originally by: Gorefacer Originally by: bff Jill Originally by: Grath Telkin I wonder what all you people thought happened when T2 first came out? The ships were astronomically expensive compared to now, and yet, miraculously people still flew them into combat. Hell, BoB built an alliance around the fact that they had so many high sp alts in the alliance, all packing t2 when everybody else was still fumbling in the dark. The ships will get used, I'd bet my billions on it. Isk can always be remade, skillpoints are lost forever 0_0 You only need enough isk to do what you want to do, but you always need more skillpoints. Only people with everyskillat5 can afford to lose skillpoints, and those people who have everyskillat5 are obviously going to be flying a typhoon I can afford to lose skill points. I flew my ships just fine months ago with millions less SP and could do so again with that same amount. In fact I didn't upgrade my clone and got popped losing BS V not long ago. While frustrating I continued to play as I always do right up to the time I got the skill back. If I were to risk those SP though I would want an acceptably powerful advantage for doing so. Skillpoints are only lost until they can be retrained. Actually CCP, go ahead and do this. I hope everyone uses t3 ships and i will continue to gain power while they all sit there with fixed number of skillpoints constantly retraining the same skills over and over and over. Also you can not have a more powerful ship, CCP already said t3 is just an alternative to t2, meaning they will not be more powerful than t2, just more flexible. Im assuming this means for example, a t3 ship will do less dps than a hac, but probably have more mid slots. Or less damage than a hac, but be quite fast. Or less damage than a hac, but have loads of cargo space for cap injectors to tank that hac 0_0. Or as much damage as a hac, and thats it, because its on par with t2
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:23:00 - [515] Originally by: bff Jill Isk can always be remade, skillpoints are lost forever 0_0 Uh... What? Aren't both of those pretty much based in Time = X amount of either? If it takes me 2 hours to make 50 mil isk or 2 hours to make 5000 SP, what is the real difference if I lose either of them? I would argue that it is easier to lose the SP since I can get that back while watching MacGuiver reruns. The isk otoh, I have to at least do a bit of hauling/trading to recoup. Or run some missions. Or whatever. Some sort of engage brain a bit activity. SP gain = stupid easy mode ISK gain = easy (just not as easy as SP) mode I think people have just got it so ingrained in their noggins that SP ever increasing is the only way to be. SP going down = OMG FREAKOut Time!! It's silly this thread is 17 pages. Let's wait for the dev blog. ---- ≡v≡
Aylara	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:25:00 - [516] If our T3 ships will be alive and have their own skill tree, i don't see why not lose SP when they'll get destroyed or repackaged. Those SP's will be taken from the ship, not from your character. And your ship could be resurrected pretty much like your own clone by making a backup of "the core" in a station. Now, this will be OK in my opinion!
Paul Morphy	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:26:00 - [517] Originally by: L046 From concord. we are sorry for you recent loss, as you were in a t3 ship we have taken 256,000 skill points from the t3 group. as ccp is feeling nice, you can have your skill points back if you pay us teh very resonible price of 15 euros. please enter you CC details below and foward this to the 'you just got scammed by ccp department. lol
Dristra Amarr Idle Haven	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:45:00 - [518] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Lord WarATron Originally by: ResearchBunny Beatrix Originally by: MotherMoon where the hell is the dev blog with it coming out for testing in under 20 hours? Quiet, they're still trying to make sure it doesn't nuke boot.ini again. I guess loosing SP is nothing compared to loosing boot.ini that's for tech 5 mate :) ou can solo like 20 battlehsips in a tech 5 jovian battleship. But when you die you lose your operating system. Epic win.
Atius Tirawa Minmatar Destructive Influence KenZoku	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:55:00 - [519] Edited by: Atius Tirawa on 09/02/2009 10:56:05 forget it. . .srsly. . .worst idea ever T3 ships are gonna be for mission runners I guess. . .
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:57:00 - [520] Originally by: Atius Tirawa Edited by: Atius Tirawa on 09/02/2009 10:56:05 forget it. . .srsly. . .worst idea ever T3 ships are gonna be for mission runners I guess. . . just eject.

bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 10:58:00 - [521] Originally by: Roy Batty68 Originally by: bff Jill Isk can always be remade, skillpoints are lost forever 0_0 Uh... What? Aren't both of those pretty much based in Time = X amount of either? If it takes me 2 hours to make 50 mil isk or 2 hours to make 5000 SP, what is the real difference if I lose either of them? I would argue that it is easier to lose the SP since I can get that back while watching MacGuiver reruns. The isk otoh, I have to at least do a bit of hauling/trading to recoup. Or run some missions. Or whatever. Some sort of engage brain a bit activity. SP gain = stupid easy mode ISK gain = easy (just not as easy as SP) mode I think people have just got it so ingrained in their noggins that SP ever increasing is the only way to be. SP going down = OMG FREAKOut Time!! It's silly this thread is 17 pages. Let's wait for the dev blog. No, its different. Isk is made with work, skillpoints are just pure time. While work takes time, some work is better at making isk than others. Also you only need a certain ammount of isk. Get more isk and theres not much you can do with it. You only need enough isk to do the things that you are able to do, which is defined by your skillpoints. While isk may dictate what you can do at any given time skillpoints are your characters potential. A characters potential continues to grow from the day its born until it stops gaining skillpoints. You dont say i have an Xisk character, you say the character is xskillpoints, because that's what matters. You can always use more skill points, even if you max out every skill for a certain profession in the game, you can start training another one. Once you get those skills all trained up you have another option, another thing you can do. Nobody has every skill trained, as its been said that's impossible as CCP always adds skills faster than you can train them. your skill points are a continuing journey~, what training path will you take?~
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:00:00 - [522] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Atius Tirawa Edited by: Atius Tirawa on 09/02/2009 10:56:05 forget it. . .srsly. . .worst idea ever T3 ships are gonna be for mission runners I guess. . . just eject. and leave all your poor crew behind, how horrible
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:00:00 - [523] Originally by: bff Jill You can always use more skill points, even if you max out every skill for a certain profession in the game, you can start training another one. Once you get those skills all trained up you have another option, another thing you can do. Nobody has every skill trained, as its been said that's impossible as CCP always adds skills faster than you can train them. your skill points are a continuing journey~, what training path will you take?~ I wil take the risky path, which may lead me to many great victories, and many devastating loses. But for me, the risk is worth the reward. This is why I play eve This is why I fly a firetail into PVP!
Ivena Amethyst	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:02:00 - [524] 'tis stealth-boost to ejecting to make it a viable option in pvp methinks
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:03:00 - [525] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 09/02/2009 11:02:50 Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: bff Jill You can always use more skill points, even if you max out every skill for a certain profession in the game, you can start training another one. Once you get those skills all trained up you have another option, another thing you can do. Nobody has every skill trained, as its been said that's impossible as CCP always adds skills faster than you can train them. your skill points are a continuing journey~, what training path will you take?~ I wil take the risky path, which may lead me to many great victories, and many devastating loses. But for me, the risk is worth the reward. This is why I play eve This is why I fly a firetail into PVP! And this is why some people fit beams and armor rep to a blackbird
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:03:00 - [526] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: bff Jill You can always use more skill points, even if you max out every skill for a certain profession in the game, you can start training another one. Once you get those skills all trained up you have another option, another thing you can do. Nobody has every skill trained, as its been said that's impossible as CCP always adds skills faster than you can train them. your skill points are a continuing journey~, what training path will you take?~ I wil take the risky path, which may lead me to many great victories, and many devastating loses. But for me, the risk is worth the reward. This is why I play eve This is why I fly a firetail into PVP! you dont get a reward with t3 ships other than 'ohh! modular!1' Only risk. you gain nothing but risk. Frigates are fairly low risk ships because they can get away easily, particularly when they are that fast =P
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:04:00 - [527] Originally by: bff Jill you dont get a reward with t3 ships other than 'ohh! modular!1' Only risk. you gain nothing but risk. Frigates are fairly low risk ships because they can get away easily, particularly when they are that fast =P First, don't know the rewards. Second, HC mode in diablo was fun as hell even if the risk was to lose a character you've worked on for ages.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:06:00 - [528] Originally by: bff Jill you dont get a reward with t3 ships other than 'ohh! modular!1' Only risk. you gain nothing but risk. Frigates are fairly low risk ships because they can get away easily, particularly when they are that fast =P sounds like what they said about tech 2
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:10:00 - [529] Originally by: bff Jill Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Atius Tirawa Edited by: Atius Tirawa on 09/02/2009 10:56:05 forget it. . .srsly. . .worst idea ever T3 ships are gonna be for mission runners I guess. . . just eject. and leave all your poor crew behind, how horrible I'm sure the guy that beat me will love his new free tech 3 cruiser.
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:14:00 - [530] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: bff Jill you dont get a reward with t3 ships other than 'ohh! modular!1' Only risk. you gain nothing but risk. Frigates are fairly low risk ships because they can get away easily, particularly when they are that fast =P sounds like what they said about tech 2 The problem here, is that even if a t3 cruiser is slightly better than a t2 cruiser. (and if it is then CCP has messed up somewhere anyway) its still a cruiser. If you have the skillpoints to throw away you obviously should have enough skillpoints to fly a BC well enough for roaming around and soloing. Currently tier2 BCs are better than HACs anyway. t3 cruiser will be failure. And ejecting? The enemy will just capture your ship them. That sounds really neat and nice and awesome, particularly for piracy, but the problem is w-space. It exists to supply t3 ship parts. If suddenly t3 ships stop being blown up but just get traded around because everyone's always ejecting, t3 ship prices will fall, w-space will lose its 'reward', and thus will not be worth the risk, and it will sit there. In order for w-space to be a huge success t3 ship must also be a huge sucsess. And not just being used, but being used to pvp and being destroyed so that they need to be replaced.

Navtiqes Englebarna	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:20:00 - [531] Originally by: Roy Batty68 Originally by: bff Jill Isk can always be remade, skillpoints are lost forever 0_0 Uh... What? Aren't both of those pretty much based in Time = X amount of either? You forgot the important part: ISK is spent to give you stuff. SP accumulates to unlock stuff. You can always get back the 100k ISK you spent, but you'll never get back the 100k SP you lost, because the time spent training it "back" is time you'd otherwise use on getting new SP. The exception would be if there's a payback system which lets you double how much SP you train untill you made back the 100K.
Bethulsunamen	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:29:00 - [532] Originally by: Navtiqes Originally by: Roy Batty68 Originally by: bff Jill Isk can always be remade, skillpoints are lost forever 0_0 Uh... What? Aren't both of those pretty much based in Time = X amount of either? You forgot the important part: ISK is spent to give you stuff. SP accumulates to unlock stuff. You can always get back the 100k ISK you spent, but you'll never get back the 100k SP you lost, because the time spent training it "back" is time you'd otherwise use on getting new SP. The exception would be if there's a payback system which lets you double how much SP you train untill you made back the 100K. But its the same thing..... You spend TIME to get isk. You spend TIME to get skillpoints. If you loose isk, you have to spend that TIME again to regain it. If you loose skillpoints, you have to spend that TIME again to regain it. Its all the same!
Navtiqes Englebarna	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:36:00 - [533] Originally by: Bethulsunamen Originally by: Navtiqes Originally by: Roy Batty68 Originally by: bff Jill Isk can always be remade, skillpoints are lost forever 0_0 Uh... What? Aren't both of those pretty much based in Time = X amount of either? You forgot the important part: ISK is spent to give you stuff. SP accumulates to unlock stuff. You can always get back the 100k ISK you spent, but you'll never get back the 100k SP you lost, because the time spent training it "back" is time you'd otherwise use on getting new SP. The exception would be if there's a payback system which lets you double how much SP you train untill you made back the 100K. But its the same thing..... You spend TIME to get isk. You spend TIME to get skillpoints. If you loose isk, you have to spend that TIME again to regain it. If you loose skillpoints, you have to spend that TIME again to regain it. Its all the same! ISK is like urine. You spend time building up urine and then you waste it away. SP is like blood. Your body spends time reproducing it and keeping it fresh, but if you waste your blood away you grow weaker.
Bethulsunamen	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:38:00 - [534] Originally by: Navtiqes ISK is like urine. You spend time building up urine and then you waste it away. SP is like blood. Your body spends time reproducing it and keeping it fresh, but if you waste your blood away you grow weaker. You just won the thread.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:43:00 - [535] Originally by: Navtiqes ISK is like urine. You spend time building up urine and then you waste it away. SP is like blood. Your body spends time reproducing it and keeping it fresh, but if you waste your blood away you grow weaker. no, sorry. Isk and sp aren't much different in terms of what they are wroth when compared to time. the only real differenance is new players and vets gain sp at thwe same rate. but in fact this is also a lie, as sp is not important, levels are. so newer players gain levels about 50 times faster than vets. which means vets lose more sp when they don't update a clone, and such. Poor vets will have to risk something again, oh noes.
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:46:00 - [536] Originally by: Bethulsunamen Originally by: Navtiqes Originally by: Roy Batty68 Originally by: bff Jill Isk can always be remade, skillpoints are lost forever 0_0 Uh... What? Aren't both of those pretty much based in Time = X amount of either? You forgot the important part: ISK is spent to give you stuff. SP accumulates to unlock stuff. You can always get back the 100k ISK you spent, but you'll never get back the 100k SP you lost, because the time spent training it "back" is time you'd otherwise use on getting new SP. The exception would be if there's a payback system which lets you double how much SP you train untill you made back the 100K. But its the same thing..... You spend TIME to get isk. You spend TIME to get skillpoints. If you loose isk, you have to spend that TIME again to regain it. If you loose skillpoints, you have to spend that TIME again to regain it. Its all the same! No, its not. And if you start talking about sp training time in equivalency to isk making time, then things start looking even worse, dieing once in a t3 cruiser and deleveling from 5 ro 4 is the same as mining 1.2billion isk in a hulk.
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:48:00 - [537] Originally by: Navtiqes You can always get back the 100k ISK you spent, but you'll never get back the 100k SP you lost, because the time spent training it "back" is time you'd otherwise use on getting new SP. The exception would be if there's a payback system which lets you double how much SP you train untill you made back the 100K. Well, you've proved my point. It's just a matter of how you look at it. If you are trying to round up enough isk for a carrier, that 100mil isk you lost to pirates "you will never get back" because you would have been making more isk towards your goal rather than making that 100mil isk over again. Samey same. Another thing that adds to this is that we all sort of lie to each other about our SPs. If some corp hires you as an intercepter pilot, and you are absolutely maxed in those skills (lets say 20mil SP), but you tell them you are a 50mil SP intercepter pilot, who really cares about that other 30mil SP? Besides you? Yeah, you may have other goals such as I want to fly a marauder at some point, but that doesn't really fit the current context of discussing your SP. Meh, whatever. I'm not trying to argue for whatever this t3 design might be (because it sounds a bit lame tbh). I just think that people are little skewed in their thinking about SP. We're all just used to having the clone security blanket to ensure that we are always progressing in that area of character development. The thought of having that security blanket removed is what is freaking us out. Not that it is totally different than other areas of the game, it's just not what we're used to. Besides, are we even sure that this is about character SP? What if it is something the ship itself accrues? That'd be weird, eh? But it would make sense that you would lose those skill points if it's attributed to the ship. That's why I say we should wait for the dev blog.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:52:00 - [538] Originally by: bff Jill ] dieing once in a t3 cruiser and deleveling from 5 ro 4 is the same as mining 1.2billion isk in a hulk. IF your dumb enough to train that high. If you think the risk of that bonus being that much higher is wroth 1.2 billion isk then do it.
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:56:00 - [539] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: bff Jill ] dieing once in a t3 cruiser and deleveling from 5 ro 4 is the same as mining 1.2billion isk in a hulk. IF your dumb enough to train that high. If you think the risk of that bonus being that much higher is wroth 1.2 billion isk then do it. A skill that is hurts you by training it to 5 sounds broken to me.
Navtiqes Englebarna	Posted - 2009.02.09 11:58:00 - [540] Edited by: Navtiqes on 09/02/2009 11:59:02 Originally by: Roy Batty68 Originally by: Navtiqes You can always get back the 100k ISK you spent, but you'll never get back the 100k SP you lost, because the time spent training it "back" is time you'd otherwise use on getting new SP. The exception would be if there's a payback system which lets you double how much SP you train untill you made back the 100K. Well, you've proved my point. It's just a matter of how you look at it. If you are trying to round up enough isk for a carrier, that 100mil isk you lost to pirates "you will never get back" because you would have been making more isk towards your goal rather than making that 100mil isk over again. Samey same. Another thing that adds to this is that we all sort of lie to each other about our SPs. If some corp hires you as an intercepter pilot, and you are absolutely maxed in those skills (lets say 20mil SP), but you tell them you are a 50mil SP intercepter pilot, who really cares about that other 30mil SP? Besides you? Yeah, you may have other goals such as I want to fly a marauder at some point, but that doesn't really fit the current context of discussing your SP. Meh, whatever. I'm not trying to argue for whatever this t3 design might be (because it sounds a bit lame tbh). I just think that people are little skewed in their thinking about SP. We're all just used to having the clone security blanket to ensure that we are always progressing in that area of character development. The thought of having that security blanket removed is what is freaking us out. Not that it is totally different than other areas of the game, it's just not what we're used to. Besides, are we even sure that this is about character SP? What if it is something the ship itself accrues? That'd be weird, eh? But it would make sense that you would lose those skill points if it's attributed to the ship. That's why I say we should wait for the dev blog. True, I realize now when you put it like that. The ship having a SP pool of it's own sounds very gimicky though. All we really wanted were modular (custom) ships :P I can hardly wait for the dev blog to clear this up.

Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.09 12:02:00 - [541] This inspired me: Once, there was this noob who, wouldn't fly tech 3 ships 'cause he thought that it was pointless, but when, they finally made him, he, popped... and lost his skillpoints so precious. He couldn't quite explain it, they'd always just beeeeeen, theeeeeere. Mmm mmm mmm mm mmm mmm mmm mm. runs My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Noriko Rei	Posted - 2009.02.09 12:09:00 - [542] This is a delightful mechanic that will actually introduce some risk for the folks who are only good at PvP because they have mountains of ISK to throw away. Now you guys will have the risk of losing something meaningful to you, too. The whiners who can't deal with this mechanic are the folks who aren't any good without ISK insulating them from having to be selective about what they fly. Now there will actually be ships that you might not think you can afford to lose, so clearly some of you won't fly them, even though you've been expecting your billions of ISK to put you at the top of the T3 heap since it was announced. Real PvP aces who know they're hot sh*t won't care about this at all because they know their victories are backed more by their skills than their wallets.
Bandoral Morgenstern	Posted - 2009.02.09 12:26:00 - [543] I really like the idea of learning how to interact with that knew technology. Since there really is no "theory" in form of skill books about those ships, pilots have to learn how to pilot them "learning by doing" Skill losses, however, would only make sence this way: (My own idea CAUTION ): A pilot learns how to fly his unique ship, but it gets blown up. He should lose all skilloints except a third That third will become "hard skillpoints" you can't lose EVER. The reason for this would be, that, eventually the pilot will learn how to really interact with the new technology. The more ships he has flown, the more skillpoints should be kept, as he should learn to virtually fly any composition of that Sleeper technology tinkered together. After around 10 ships he should practically be able to fly T3 ships without any skill penalty as he should by then know the new technology inside out. This would cut down endless re-learning with a little RP bonus and it makes T3 worthwhile in the long run.
Davlos Re-Awakened Technologies Inc Electus Matari	Posted - 2009.02.09 12:31:00 - [544] Originally by: Erica 'cowpig'Lafehr Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Revan Starstrider Originally by: Sheriff Jones I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic Considering pvp ships go pop alot more often than ships flown in pve, I'd say we have a good argument. Still, you can't deny the irony /This. The irony is so thick it can be cut with a knife. I appreciate that I am not the only one to notice that the biggest whiners in the game are the 'leet' pvp'ers. Like a bunch of old ladies to be exact. STFU and play the game Because it's loss-free to them anyway, buying ISK and/or GTCs. ;)
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.09 12:58:00 - [545] Originally by: Sheriff Jones This inspired me: Once, there was this noob who, wouldn't fly tech 3 ships 'cause he thought that it was pointless, but when, they finally made him, he, popped... and lost his skillpoints so precious. He couldn't quite explain it, they'd always just beeeeeen, theeeeeere. Mmm mmm mmm mm mmm mmm mmm mm. runs the day you leave eve will be the day I stop posting. dead serious.
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.02.09 13:00:00 - [546] Originally by: bff Jill Originally by: Bethulsunamen Originally by: Navtiqes Originally by: Roy Batty68 Uh... What? Aren't both of those pretty much based in Time = X amount of either? You forgot the important part: ISK is spent to give you stuff. SP accumulates to unlock stuff. You can always get back the 100k ISK you spent, but you'll never get back the 100k SP you lost, because the time spent training it "back" is time you'd otherwise use on getting new SP. The exception would be if there's a payback system which lets you double how much SP you train untill you made back the 100K. But its the same thing..... You spend TIME to get isk. You spend TIME to get skillpoints. If you loose isk, you have to spend that TIME again to regain it. If you loose skillpoints, you have to spend that TIME again to regain it. Its all the same! No, its not. And if you start talking about sp training time in equivalency to isk making time, then things start looking even worse, dieing once in a t3 cruiser and deleveling from 5 ro 4 is the same as mining 1.2billion isk in a hulk. But it is. It's just that time spent to make ISK varies per character where as SP trains at approximately the same speed for everyone. The time it takes to replace 1m SP won't vary TOO much between players. The time it takes to replace 100m ISK varies vastly between pilots. At their core they both just take time to replace. What this means is that for those that make ISK very quickly, SP loss comparatively will seem much more dire a penalty. Since we don't know how the t3 ships will perform nor how much SP training time will be lost you can't really make a ISK making to SP training or risk vs reward comparison here.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2009.02.09 13:03:00 - [547] Originally by: MotherMoon the day you leave eve will be the day I stop posting. dead serious. The day i laeve EVE, Wrangler and his thugs have to come to my house and drag my sorry hiney off the server manually, kicking and screaming how i'm not done yet
Xia Kairui	Posted - 2009.02.09 13:31:00 - [548] How the devs figure it will work: - character explores wormholes, carefully collects components, skills and what else is needed to build a T3 ship. - character builds the T3 ship, painstakingly sets it up to be optimal for his needs. - character proudly undocks in his T3 ship. - T3 ship performs gloriously what it was built for, running missions in high sec or hunting pirates in low-sec, EVE is a better world for the presence of T3. - character lovingly and painstakingly maintains his ship and grows attached to it. - at some time death of the ship happens somehow during these tasks, _player_ grieves not only for the ship but also for the skill points lost. - player gets back on track, relearns the skills and builds another ship to start the cycle again. This is how it will actually work: - character explores wormholes, carefully collects components, skills and what else is needed to build a T3 ship. - character builds the T3 ship, painstakingly sets it up to be optimal for his needs. - character proudly undocks in his T3 ship. - various channels go ablaze with "... undocked in T3 ship at ... headed ..." - a gang of 17 suicide BS forms two gates away. - T3 ship jumps in, is blown to smithereens before it has finished loading the system. - local fills with "L0LZ I t00k you skillz u N00B! U Suck!" An alternative is: - character explores wormholes, carefully collects components, skills and what else is needed to build a T3 ship. - character builds the T3 ship, painstakingly sets it up to be optimal for his needs. - character proudly undocks in his T3 ship and never leaves the deep and secure 0.0 alliance system he built the ship in, noone ever sees it except alliance mates. If the points lost are being skill points trained in parallel to the regular skill points things are somewhat more balanced (in fact, it would be logical to lose them then), but if they need to be trained instead of regular skills it's a horrible idea.
Omu Negru Caldari Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.09 13:55:00 - [549] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocrypha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. THE SKILLS LOSS THING will drive away ppl from using t3 ships in PVP. Rich ppl have enogh sp so they dont care about loosing skills or 5 days of training anyway. Do you think this will stop them from use more t3 ships in pvp? Do you think this will bring more poor and less skilled ppl wit t3 ships in pvp? no....
Pac SubCom A.W.M	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:15:00 - [550] Originally by: Xia Kairui "L0LZ I t00k you skillz u N00B! U Suck!" As if someone gives a **** about your 2 hours 48 minutes of skill training.

Sneaky Tiger Minmatar Republic University	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:17:00 - [551] As can be said to T1 and T2, can be said to T3: Don't Fly What You Cannot Afford To Lose! Scared to lose 2* days of SP, fly T2. After all, if you see things go downhill, eject- you only lose ISK. *more if you train the skills to 5.
Navtiqes Englebarna	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:19:00 - [552] Originally by: Sneaky Tiger eject- you only lose ISK. Assuming this new T3 SP is something that grows the more you fly the T3 ship, it's likely that you'll lose it no matter if you were piloting your ship or not when it was popped.
Sneaky Tiger Minmatar Republic University	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:23:00 - [553] Originally by: Navtiqes Originally by: Sneaky Tiger eject- you only lose ISK. Assuming this new T3 SP is something that grows the more you fly the T3 ship, it's likely that you'll lose it no matter if you were piloting your ship or not when it was popped. I have not seen any official note about gaining SP while flying T3 ships. Please point me to that source if you have any. Until then, for me there doesn't exist such a feature.
Quark Fireborn	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:50:00 - [554] Sounds like Genius... go ccp We love eve for the real sense of loss that it gives us... and there is nothings worse than loosing sp. Do we really want t3 to be as popular as caps are becoming? Pretty soon everyone will have a carriers. Remember Houses in UO... the road into every major city became like a Delhi shanty town. I fear Eve is headed that way. We need a way to kill Outposts (Make it that t3 can and ull have o.o pilot wanting to fly them)and we definitely don't want everyone and their sister in T3. Let the Carebears have them in HS... who cares. The real men and women will be flying them in 0.0 with fleets to back them up. There should be a real cost to flying these t3. Isk is no barrier anymore. If u are a corp head of any alliance isk is nothing to you. t3 should be rare... and they should pack a punch! They should invoke fear and awe and they shouldn't be flown on a whim to some gate camp. If one is spotted they should want people to want to kill them. And thus they should require a fleet to protect them. The way CCP is setting them up it wont matter if u had all the isk in EVE. It wont matter because once a pilot is killed he cant just jump in another and titan bridge back into the fight. There a real cot to it and that's awesome! I think CCP has thought long and hard about this and it looks like they don't want them going the way BS and caps have... I remember a time when u saw a BS u were in awe... then it was with caps... Motherships still hold a little... but they loosing it fast. I support CCP and what you are setting out to do. Dont let a gallery of screaming little girls change your mind. All I ask is you make them worth the risk! Dont make them useless as you have the covert BS
Brugar	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:54:00 - [555] Hmmmmm... This actually trumps the whole BoD vs. Goons stuff. So much drama in EvE lately. /gets some popcorn
yesfool	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:59:00 - [556] Actually Bob planned this post 6 months ago at their BBQ Originally by: Brugar Hmmmmm... This actually trumps the whole BoD vs. Goons stuff. So much drama in EvE lately. /gets some popcorn
Zey Nadar Gallente Stormwatch Galactic	Posted - 2009.02.09 15:02:00 - [557] Edited by: Zey Nadar on 09/02/2009 15:03:12 Originally by: Davlos Because it's loss-free to them anyway, buying ISK and/or GTCs. ;) Thats quite a thing to say. You could say that they are on the contrary getting the biggest loss if they lose real life money in the form of isk. Quote: edit: If the points lost are being skill points trained in parallel to the regular skill points things are somewhat more balanced (in fact, it would be logical to lose them then), but if they need to be trained instead of regular skills it's a horrible idea. seconded.
Huan CK Gallente GK inc. R.U.R.	Posted - 2009.02.09 16:36:00 - [558] Lol, so if you'd use the t3 ships for pvp, you'd constalty be training the subsystem skills to keep them alive, unable to skill anything else LOL?! WTF!! <-- sais it all. If that won't change, I'll MAYBE get a t3 ship to sit in my hangar, lol. This is definately the wrong aproach guys. The skill-tree already eats soooo much time, you really should not mess with it at all, not in such a manner!! My videos: Watch on youtube.
AngryMax Gallente Executable Inc	Posted - 2009.02.09 17:14:00 - [559] Without testing this out and just reading about it - this is a thumbs down. Way to eliminate all the excitement i had about T3.
Hiroshima Jita	Posted - 2009.02.09 17:37:00 - [560] Hmm t3 ships. Lets run the ****tiness checklist. Cost 1 billion. Check Only cruiser sized. I like battlecruisers. Check I lose skillpoints when I die. Check Damn... I own a machariel. I'd rather replace that when it eventually explodes than ever buy a t3 ship. Especially since people are going to be more likely to blob together and come after me in a t3 ship. My machariel does 600dps, tanks 500 with 80K EHP and zooms along at 2 klicks. It also has two heavy neuts. And it cost me 900 million. For me to even begin considering t3 ships they would have to beat that. 700 dps cruiser with 90K EHP and 3 klicks anybody? Ack losing something like engineering 5 because of ship choice is crud. Now if there was a t3 specific skill that took the hit when you died fine. But if we're going to go resurect old Everquest mechanics I would also like a sp gain every time I killed something.

Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.02.09 17:51:00 - [561] Obviously not reading the thread or ftw Originally by: Hiroshima Jita Cost 1 billion. Check I hope to god you don't do this, the process of collecting the parts doesn't sound like a chore, just something you actually have to do. Originally by: Hiroshima Jita Only cruiser sized. I like battlecruisers. Check Unless these ships out perform your battlecruiser class ships. How can you form an opinion on something you haven't even seen yet? Originally by: Hiroshima Jita I lose skillpoints when I die. Check Jesus its a rank 1 skill!! You lose one level from one of 5 rank one skills, so AT MOST, your looking at losing 5 days of training. For PVP, its a ship you may not want to train to 5, because 4 is going to be more functional, but for PVE, the risk is lower, so training it to 5 may be better, and the likely hood of loss lower. Originally by: Hiroshima Jita Ack losing something like engineering 5 because of ship choice is crud. Now if there was a t3 specific skill that took the hit when you died fine. But if we're going to go resurect old Everquest mechanics I would also like a sp gain every time I killed something. Go back and actually read through the thread, this is more like loosing one level of...warp drive operation, or something like that. Lvl 4 takes all of 15-18 hours to train i think.
Randibuggah	Posted - 2009.02.09 18:00:00 - [562] Originally by: Sheriff Jones This inspired me: Once, there was this noob who, wouldn't fly tech 3 ships 'cause he thought that it was pointless, but when, they finally made him, he, popped... and lost his skillpoints so precious. He couldn't quite explain it, they'd always just beeeeeen, theeeeeere. Mmm mmm mmm mm mmm mmm mmm mm. runs P.S. for those who DON'T know.. the song is by a group called the "Crash Test Dummies".... and the song IS called "Mmm mmMm Mmmm" Once again Sheriff has left definative proof of having trained "Thread Pwnzorship Lvl5" Bloody brilliant...
Hiroshima Jita	Posted - 2009.02.09 18:03:00 - [563] For your statements Dau Imperius and anyone who shares his sentiments we will find you with a scout alt. We will fly our flashy red pirate ships into highsec and we will suicide gank your t3 ship.
Delclara Nancekuke Gallente Frisky Space Vixens	Posted - 2009.02.09 18:25:00 - [564] BBQ sauce anyone?
Kendrix Arathan Minmatar N00bs With Guns	Posted - 2009.02.09 18:30:00 - [565] I said it in another thread and I'll say it again, these threads are great, Pirate/"l33t"PVPer tears are even sweeter than carebear tears oh so good, keep it up i can't get enough lol = Originally by: Hiroshima Jita Ack losing something like engineering 5 because of ship choice is crud. Now if there was a t3 specific skill that took the hit when you died fine. The bold section is how it works, your eyes were just too full of tears for you to read it Originally by: Hiroshima Jita For your statements Dau Imperius and anyone who shares his sentiments we will find you with a scout alt. We will fly our flashy red pirate ships into highsec and we will suicide gank your t3 ship. come find me! Unlike some people(you) i welcome a challenge in pvp though we both know you won't, this is just E-thug posturing cause your E-peen got bent Originally by: StevieSG Verone looks like data from star trek. that is all.
Jenny' JoJo Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.02.09 19:27:00 - [566] Any idea on what Amarr t3 ships will be like? Refresh to see next real life CCP Sig(25 total)
Kukki Gallente ZiTek Deepspace Explorations	Posted - 2009.02.09 20:38:00 - [567] No one will fly a T3 ship when you lose SP. This mens no one will buy the Parts to Produce T3 ships. This means no one will try to get the T3 stuff out of Wormholes. There is no T3 in the Game! T3 is just a lie and CCP knows that!
Akor Flandres	Posted - 2009.02.09 20:41:00 - [568] Originally by: Kukki No one will fly a T3 ship when you lose SP. This mens no one will buy the Parts to Produce T3 ships. This means no one will try to get the T3 stuff out of Wormholes. There is no T3 in the Game! T3 is just a lie and CCP knows that! Hai could I borrow that crystal ball of yours please? I wish I could see the future.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.09 20:42:00 - [569] Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 09/02/2009 20:42:28 We have the info now. You have 5 lvl 1 skills. Trained with your main training time. And their is only 5 skills. What does this mean? When your training tech 3 you are not advancing your character. At all. You are retraining things youve lost. It's good that they are so small. But i cant help but feel sad. Tech 3 is the toys of those who have nothing left to train. For them. It is a godsend. CCP, I had such high expectations for this. But with the small amount of skills and how they are implemented, I feel both underwhelmed and put out for the first time since i started playing eve. You are great developers, But for the first time, With just this 1 part of apoch. You dropped the ball. Granted the rest of the expansion is awesome. But this part is lame.
Dirk Magnum Royal Hiigaran Navy	Posted - 2009.02.09 20:42:00 - [570] Originally by: Pac SubCom Originally by: Xia Kairui "L0LZ I t00k you skillz u N00B! U Suck!" As if someone gives a **** about your 2 hours 48 minutes of skill training. Obviously someone cares, considering the size of this thread

Kukki Gallente ZiTek Deepspace Explorations	Posted - 2009.02.09 20:42:00 - [571] Sure. You can have it. I have another one.
Koala Bare The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.02.09 20:52:00 - [572] You're all getting worked up over this for nothing. First of all we do not have all the details yet. Secondly, this is not something thought up for the current playerbase, this is a next marketing / player attraction niche, to attract folks coming with the wierdo concept of "levelling up" being the way an MMO works.
Jhagiti Tyran Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2009.02.09 20:57:00 - [573] The ships will have to be worth it and if they cannot provide anything more than T2 already does I wont be flying them to often I would rather invest the 3-4 days retraining time after a loss on other skills, an occasional loss wouldn't be to bad but I wouldn't spend as much time in a T3 ship as I do in HACs and recons however if the ships are a massive improvement or offer new roles and abilities it would be worth neglecting other skill training to keep training and flying the T3 ships. Based on retraining the five subsystem skills back to level four.
Clair Bear Perkone	Posted - 2009.02.09 21:20:00 - [574] Originally by: Grath Telkin Jesus its a rank 1 skill!! You lose one level from one of 5 rank one skills, so AT MOST, your looking at losing 5 days of training. For PVP, its a ship you may not want to train to 5, because 4 is going to be more functional, but for PVE, the risk is lower, so training it to 5 may be better, and the likely hood of loss lower. Except cruisers are only used in PvE by trail accounts. PvE is about pumping out as much DPS as you can to chew through a stupid number of rats as quickly as possible. And cruisers aren't the way to do that. In highsec PvE is all about the battleships. Sure, if these guys can pump out 700-1100 DPS while tanking 400 carebears like yours truly may consider switching out of a 50 million ISK Domi or 700 million isk Paladin to one. Maybe. After all, it is like you said, only 25 days or so to get all the racial skills to V.
Pac SubCom A.W.M	Posted - 2009.02.10 00:20:00 - [575] Edited by: Pac SubCom on 10/02/2009 00:22:04 From what I can see already on the test server I say this: I'd give all my level V spaceship command skills except cruiser V to get those strategics. A day of training per ship loss - is a small price to pay. Actually I'd rather lose a week's worth of sp than grind for the 150 mil these things will cost in the end. Skilling costs no life time.
Nyx STeeLGamers	Posted - 2009.02.10 01:25:00 - [576] I completely condemn and fully spilt in the face of this idea of losing sp when you lose tech 3 ships. i mean, WTF! Were you devs on dope when you came up with this idea. Stop bloody regulating eve so much that it becomes less fun to play. A game should be fun to play. Losing sp is not fun. The sp loss when medical clone isnt up to date is bad enough. WTF!
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.10 01:29:00 - [577] Originally by: Nyx STeeLGamers I completely condemn and fully spilt in the face of this idea of losing sp when you lose tech 3 ships. i mean, WTF! Were you devs on dope when you came up with this idea. Stop bloody regulating eve so much that it becomes less fun to play. A game should be fun to play. Losing sp is not fun. The sp loss when medical clone isnt up to date is bad enough. WTF! go play wow then, play eve if you want to risk real loss.
Pac SubCom A.W.M	Posted - 2009.02.10 01:30:00 - [578] This thread is an emotional response. People are conditioned to always keep their clone up to date. It's time to break that conditioning and start to realize that t3 bears no resemblance to the horrors of sp loss we've learned to be so aversive to.
Ezekiel Sulastin Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.02.10 02:00:00 - [579] Originally by: Pac SubCom This thread is an emotional response. People are conditioned to always keep their clone up to date. It's time to break that conditioning and start to realize that t3 bears no resemblance to the horrors of sp loss we've learned to be so aversive to. ... but it's SP loss, and that's what we're averse to, so it bears perfect resemblance :P ----
Poast Warrior Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.02.10 02:04:00 - [580] yeah, if it turns out that way I likely won't even bother with T3. oh well.

Ice Pirateer	Posted - 2009.02.10 02:10:00 - [581] Well I'm glad there are pod out there too scared to get into a T3 ship. I for one will enjoy having more to loose in a fight... it will make the wins more satisfying and the losses more irritating! I think it will make gameplay more exciting.
Pac SubCom A.W.M	Posted - 2009.02.10 02:11:00 - [582] Edited by: Pac SubCom on 10/02/2009 02:14:29 Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin Originally by: Pac SubCom This thread is an emotional response. People are conditioned to always keep their clone up to date. It's time to break that conditioning and start to realize that t3 bears no resemblance to the horrors of sp loss we've learned to be so aversive to. ... but it's SP loss, and that's what we're averse to, so it bears perfect resemblance :P No it doesn't, since here you can choose to what extent you will lose sp. You don't have to skill it to V or even IV. Also you know that you might lose it beforehand, and can invest to the extent you see fit. "I won't bother with it" or "this kills t3 before it has begun" is hardly rational when you keep in mind that you might lose only 30 minutes skill time. The isk loss if far more important and inconvenient than this. --------------- ∞ TQFE
Rondo Gunn Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2009.02.10 02:38:00 - [583] Originally by: Sheriff Jones This inspired me: Once, there was this noob who, wouldn't fly tech 3 ships 'cause he thought that it was pointless, but when, they finally made him, he, popped... and lost his skillpoints so precious. He couldn't quite explain it, they'd always just beeeeeen, theeeeeere. Mmm mmm mmm mm mmm mmm mmm mm. runs +1000 internets points to Sherriff for making me slightly nostalgic.
Nyx STeeLGamers	Posted - 2009.02.10 02:39:00 - [584] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Nyx STeeLGamers I completely condemn and fully spilt in the face of this idea of losing sp when you lose tech 3 ships. i mean, WTF! Were you devs on dope when you came up with this idea. Stop bloody regulating eve so much that it becomes less fun to play. A game should be fun to play. Losing sp is not fun. The sp loss when medical clone isnt up to date is bad enough. WTF! go play wow then, play eve if you want to risk real loss. You're condemning that game for a wrong reason. WoW is fun in part because you can risk stuff without fear of losing it. It makes gameplay more fun. It makes gameplay more involved. And F**K you, i do play WoW aswell.
Vikarion Caldari White Rose Society	Posted - 2009.02.10 10:27:00 - [585] After carefully reading many of the arguments and responses in the thread, I have my conclusion: If T3 ships require skills to fly that will be lost when the ship is destroyed, I will not fly T3 ships. I do my best to optimize my skill-training, and I am not going to throw that away simply because CCP releases a nice hull. The core of eve is improving your character and your character's wallet, and every minute I spend training SP that will be lost is time that I could train "safe" and usable SP.
Zephyr Rengate Caldari Wrath of Fenris	Posted - 2009.02.10 10:35:00 - [586] ** me you guys are morons, you complain that EvE is becoming too easy and less hardcore, CCP responds by adding in ships that are for hardcore players, and you whine? **TARDS ITT
Kumi Unn	Posted - 2009.02.10 11:19:00 - [587] I just noticed how bad adults complain... The reason to add the very MINIMAL skillpoint loss is to keep things in balance, and somewhat equal. I'd also like to familiarize the many idiots here with this magical thing called a patch, sounds mystical doesn't it? Well if the response is not what they were looking for, then hmm, maybe those dev's might listen and change it. T3 add something to EVE, more risk. It will make combat so different...
Fire Sweet	Posted - 2009.02.10 11:42:00 - [588] Originally by: Kumi Unn I just noticed how bad adults complain... The reason to add the very MINIMAL skillpoint loss is to keep things in balance, and somewhat equal. I'd also like to familiarize the many idiots here with this magical thing called a patch, sounds mystical doesn't it? Well if the response is not what they were looking for, then hmm, maybe those dev's might listen and change it. T3 add something to EVE, more risk. It will make combat so different... Yet you bash the people who are here disagreeing with sp loss, telling them not to disagree, because of the patch that CCP might do if enough people disagree??? I for one wont even fly, nor support the building research of flying them until the idiotic system that does nothing but benifit carebears living in highsec is done away with.
Balansero	Posted - 2009.02.10 11:44:00 - [589] Originally by: Toramii Edited by: Toramii on 07/02/2009 18:56:55 Source EVE TV: CCP Chronitis - You will lose one level of the related 'racial' subsystem skill required to fly that T3 ship if its destroyed. i'd like to see how this system works, before giving opinion on it. It only sais you will lose one level of related 'racial' subsystem skill, not actual sp. There might be diferent ways of gaining skills. But lets see.
Ancy Denaries Caldari Solaris Operations	Posted - 2009.02.10 11:47:00 - [590] Originally by: Sheriff Jones This inspired me: Once, there was this noob who, wouldn't fly tech 3 ships 'cause he thought that it was pointless, but when, they finally made him, he, popped... and lost his skillpoints so precious. He couldn't quite explain it, they'd always just beeeeeen, theeeeeere. Mmm mmm mmm mm mmm mmm mmm mm. runs Oh god! My stomach! I found myself humming along there :D Another 1000 intarwebs points for you :D ----- EVE is a PvP game. Adaptation is your survival.

Pytria Le'Danness Placid Reborn	Posted - 2009.02.10 11:52:00 - [591] Originally by: Zephyr Rengate ... ships that are for hardcore players I fail to see why these ships are for hardcore players. They aren't supposed to be much better than T2 (I am unable to verify this at the moment because all subsystem stats are placeholders right now, so there is no way to determine their effect). At the moment these ships are for the novelty jocks and those curious enough to try them regardless of skill loss. Why? Getting the parts is going to be a major effort through exploration and aparently quite tough combat against the WH NPCs, and thus we can assume the ships will be very expensive. Now take a very expensive ship into PvP, and chances are high that everyone and his brother will focus fire on it. That alone will be a big deterrent to using these ships in PvP. Now, what else are they good for? Missions? Well, maybe, but as it is right now it's much better to use a Dominix in a L4 mission than an Ishtar - why should T3 ships be any better? You cannot reconfigure them once built, so they become more or less static once you've assembled it, and there are too many missions out there to make THE perfect ship. Thus, based on high costs alone the market for T3 ships will be rather small - PvPers lose too many of them, and missioneers have no real use for them. Add an unavoidable skill loss to that and I wonder if anyone even bothers to explore the WHs except for some hardcore folks after the initial rush and the novelty has worn off. Now the whole expansion is based around T3 ships and the stuff needed to build them, and if they are not attractive enough for a significant number of people to fly them the whole expansion becomes kinda moot. And I don't even know how tough it will be to get the components - if it's anything close to the COSMOS modules it will take ages before the first T3 ships appear on TQ. Corporation RP channel: "PlacidReborn"
jst tstng	Posted - 2009.02.10 11:52:00 - [592] I too at first thought it was not so smart an idea. But the skill levels you will be losing are rank 1 skills and you only need level 1 to fly, so getting blown up will never disable you flying the cool new ships for more than 5 minutes or less. It will only make you a little less good at it.
Pytria Le'Danness Placid Reborn	Posted - 2009.02.10 11:53:00 - [593] Originally by: Balansero not actual sp. There might be diferent ways of gaining skills. But lets see. Blew myself up in a Legion yesterday, lost one level of "Amarr Defensive Subsystems" skill that I trained to L1 earlier. Only five minutes due to being rank 1, but it was a skill like Navigation or Trade or Hybrid Weapons that I trained, not my ship. Corporation RP channel: "PlacidReborn"
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 11:58:00 - [594] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 10/02/2009 12:01:21 Originally by: Zephyr Rengate ** me you guys are morons, you complain that EvE is becoming too easy and less hardcore, CCP responds by adding in ships that are for hardcore players, and you whine? TARDS ITT You cant differ hardcore from stupidity i see. Hardcore: fighting against the odds, winnig etc. Stupid - training SPs just to lose em, so you can train em again, to lose em again. Both t2 ships and t3 will surely pop as fast when faced with 10 ships shooting at you. Both ships can evade this fate by player skill (deciding when to engage). Both ships will be probably similiar in their abilities (heck even if t3 is 1,5x better all round its not much). And yet one who spends more time is penalized more. Nope, not worth the risk. But i can tell you one thing: suicide ganking them will be FUN. Imagine the whines on forums, hate mails, emoragequits. Hell - its worth every isk. Quote:** Now the whole expansion is based around T3 ships and the stuff needed to build them, and if they are not attractive enough for a significant number of people to fly them the whole expansion becomes kinda moot. This. The WHOLE expansion is based on t3. "Look we give you new ships". its almost as good as giving you expansion with titans. Will you fly one? Maybe in 2-3 years. Maybe. Same is with t3 at a glance. Will you fly them? Maybe. Once or twice. And then they will just rest in hangars as a novelty item and everyone gets back to t1/t2. Insurable, easy to lose and replace, no penalties.
Nicholas Barker Black Nova Corp KenZoku	Posted - 2009.02.10 11:59:00 - [595] Tech3 = first class of ship specifically engineered for ship spinning in stations. ------
Ratchman	Posted - 2009.02.10 12:09:00 - [596] I see all rationale has disappeared out of this topic and it has descended into emorage after emorage. Simple statement for the emotionally overwhelmed: Give this change a chance before condemning it. You haven't even tried it out properley yet. There were two alternatives to this skill training: they could tack this onto the end of the existing skill queues, making the far end of the queue evermore distant for the new starter, or they could introduce a new system. This new system has prerequisites, like the existing one, but it has a difference. In order to prevent training times becoming ridiculously long, CCP have made the training time short, with the caveat that if you get blown up, you start again. Realistically, I expect this training time to take a couple of hours to get the basics back, maybe a day or two to get the top rank. This isn't a major time sink, and will balance out the fact that T3 will probably be so much more powerful than T2. It also stops people getting straight into another after having one blown up, so they can't keep jumping into the same fight in an uber-machine. Let's be honest here. If T3 released a ship that could wipe the floor with everything else, and didn't put some limitations in with it, there would be a massive outcry and whinging about it. And also, it's going to take most people longer to earn the ISK than it will to retrain, so lets get a sense of proportion. I may be wrong about any number of the asserions I have made, but this is why I will wait until it is implemented before I make any real judgments on it. It seems many of the posters here just want to go superfly TNT at the merest hint of change.
Fire Sweet	Posted - 2009.02.10 12:14:00 - [597] Originally by: Ratchman I see all rationale has disappeared out of this topic and it has descended into emorage after emorage. Simple statement for the emotionally overwhelmed: Give this change a chance before condemning it. You haven't even tried it out properley yet. There were two alternatives to this skill training: they could tack this onto the end of the existing skill queues, making the far end of the queue evermore distant for the new starter, or they could introduce a new system. This new system has prerequisites, like the existing one, but it has a difference. In order to prevent training times becoming ridiculously long, CCP have made the training time short, with the caveat that if you get blown up, you start again. Realistically, I expect this training time to take a couple of hours to get the basics back, maybe a day or two to get the top rank. This isn't a major time sink, and will balance out the fact that T3 will probably be so much more powerful than T2. It also stops people getting straight into another after having one blown up, so they can't keep jumping into the same fight in an uber-machine. Let's be honest here. If T3 released a ship that could wipe the floor with everything else, and didn't put some limitations in with it, there would be a massive outcry and whinging about it. And also, it's going to take most people longer to earn the ISK than it will to retrain, so lets get a sense of proportion. I may be wrong about any number of the asserions I have made, but this is why I will wait until it is implemented before I make any real judgments on it. It seems many of the posters here just want to go superfly TNT at the merest hint of change. Actually the devs have already said they wont be any better than t2, so your point is moot, back to emoraging, kkthxbye.
Ratchman	Posted - 2009.02.10 12:15:00 - [598] Originally by: Sheriff Jones I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic Damn straight. All that 'taurus excretus' they came up with when whinging about there needing to be a greater sense of loss, and they moan when they get what they wanted.
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 12:17:00 - [599] Originally by: Ratchman Originally by: Sheriff Jones I just have to say; for a bunch of people advocating risk vs reward, the antipathy towards skillpoint loss when death occurs, is a bit ironic Damn straight. All that 'taurus excretus' they came up with when whinging about there needing to be a greater sense of loss, and they moan when they get what they wanted. Why dont we just make it so if you lose ANY ship (be it t1, t2, t3) you lose skillpoints. For example lose HAC - you lose 1 day from amarr cruiser. And why you will say its bad idea now?
Ratchman	Posted - 2009.02.10 12:22:00 - [600] Originally by: Fire Sweet Actually the devs have already said they wont be any better than t2, so your point is moot, back to emoraging, kkthxbye. Did you read what I had written there? I did state that my assertions could be wrong, but I'm going to wait before the final released version before I pass judgement, whereas a lot of people have just gone into a seething emorage without even seeing the final version. If people object to the idea, and posit an impassioned, but eloquent and reasonable response, I don't have a problem with it, but the majority of posts I've seen have been blind emotional responses. And the angry and dismissive 'kkthxbye' terminology only goes to prove my point.

rciq	Posted - 2009.02.10 12:26:00 - [601] I don't like it. I know the sp loss is minimal and I'm sure I will fly a tengu around lowsec anyway. Still I don't like the logic behind this. I also fear that (if gets implemented) it will clear a path for more rules like this in future expansions, which could eventually make pvpers train skills up and down round with little or no progress.
Ratchman	Posted - 2009.02.10 12:29:00 - [602] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Why dont we just make it so if you lose ANY ship (be it t1, t2, t3) you lose skillpoints. For example lose HAC - you lose 1 day from amarr cruiser. And why you will say its bad idea now? It would be a bad idea for existing skills, because they take so long to learn (but you can still lose skill points if you don't renew your clone), but these new skills supposedly take a very short time to learn, so the effect of losing those skill points is only minor. But like I say, wait until you try it out before passing judgement.
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 12:29:00 - [603] Its easy to guess that skill levels will be required either for ship bonuses (ROF, damage etc) or for higher tier components. Thus to fly ships efficiently lvl1/2 wont suffice (i guess hac would do better at those levels). Also im still wondering what will be average price on them. My bet is 300ish mil or more.
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 12:31:00 - [604] Originally by: Ratchman Originally by: Deva Blackfire Why dont we just make it so if you lose ANY ship (be it t1, t2, t3) you lose skillpoints. For example lose HAC - you lose 1 day from amarr cruiser. And why you will say its bad idea now? It would be a bad idea for existing skills, because they take so long to learn (but you can still lose skill points if you don't renew your clone), but these new skills supposedly take a very short time to learn, so the effect of losing those skill points is only minor. But like I say, wait until you try it out before passing judgement. I said 1 day. Painful? Not (like most t3 sp loss defenders say). But lose 50 ships (be it even ceptors) and you will start to feel it, that you arent advancing at all with your character - just sitting in one place always getting back skills you just lost.
Fire Sweet	Posted - 2009.02.10 12:39:00 - [605] Originally by: Ratchman Originally by: Fire Sweet Actually the devs have already said they wont be any better than t2, so your point is moot, back to emoraging, kkthxbye. Did you read what I had written there? I did state that my assertions could be wrong, but I'm going to wait before the final released version before I pass judgement, whereas a lot of people have just gone into a seething emorage without even seeing the final version. If people object to the idea, and posit an impassioned, but eloquent and reasonable response, I don't have a problem with it, but the majority of posts I've seen have been blind emotional responses. And the angry and dismissive 'kkthxbye' terminology only goes to prove my point. Actually theres been plenty of good responses, so you can play catch up heres a few: 1. This system does nothing but benefit high sec carebears who rarely(if ever) lose ships, while further devaluing and making living in 0.0 space worthless and a waste of time. 2. This system stagnates character devolpement, especially for pvp centric players, as they tend to lose more ships more often and will be forced to spend time retraining skills, while not advancing their char. 3. Most people that strongly disagree with this system see it as nothing more then the start of a very dangerous path, one that many would not like if it did go that direction. Now please, argue those points, that have been brought up a while ago, those have nothing at all to do with whatever end state the publish gets to, if its got SP loss involved, all of those points will hold true. Its not so much the amount of sp loss that I have an issue with, I honestly dont care if it takes 1 minute or 1 day to recover, the point is, I dont agree with the mechanic of SP loss, I think its a dangerously slippery slope, and will lead to a dark place for this game if it makes it live and is accepted by the community, and it probably will, since as I said, most people living in carebear land wont notice and wont care.
Cyriel Longinus XERCORE	Posted - 2009.02.10 13:18:00 - [606] Edited by: Cyriel Longinus on 10/02/2009 13:23:58 Would it be wise to deviate from the winning concept that is the skill training system in EvE? No. Slipping this sort of time sink mechanic into the game now and sugar coating a story over it seems to be a very lazy. Players are intelligent enough to see right thru this as a way to sink our time on the same skills over and over again. More time in the same skills equal more time waiting to play the game and paying subscriptions. I don't mind supporting clever and innovative ... but this sort of skill progession design is what I would expect from amatuers and not innovative game designers such as CCP. If we really want to test how happy players would be about ship losses = skill losses ... lets all lose one skill level for any ship destroyed ... let's see how popular that would be. Yea, I'm annoyed and opposed of any system where that I would be required to retrain the same skills over and over again plus sinking time into obtaining a T3 Ship. It's going to make T3 a novelty much like Factional Warfare. What happened to never making eve skill training into a grind? or do we forget what works.
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2009.02.10 13:29:00 - [607] Edited by: Rodj Blake on 10/02/2009 13:28:52 Ever lost a ship to lag? Ever lost a ship to a bug? Now imagine losing SPs as well as the ship. I wouldn't want to be a GM on the reimbursement queue when this comes into effect. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
Rviii	Posted - 2009.02.10 13:33:00 - [608] Originally by: Cyriel Longinus Edited by: Cyriel Longinus on 10/02/2009 13:23:58 Would it be wise to deviate from the winning concept that is the skill training system in EvE? No. Slipping this sort of time sink mechanic into the game now and sugar coating a story over it seems to be a very lazy. Players are intelligent enough to see right thru this as a way to sink our time on the same skills over and over again. More time in the same skills equal more time waiting to play the game and paying subscriptions. I don't mind supporting clever and innovative ... but this sort of skill progession design is what I would expect from amateurs and not innovative game designers such as CCP. If we really want to test how happy players would be about ship losses = skill losses ... lets all lose one skill level for any ship destroyed ... let's see how popular that would be. Yea, I'm annoyed and opposed of any system where that I would be required to retrain the same skills over and over again plus sinking time into obtaining a T3 Ship. It's going to make T3 a novelty much like Factional Warfare. What happened to never making eve skill training into a grind? or do we forget what works. Why so many Drama Queens~? Give me a break, it's one level on a level X1 skill, not the end of EVE, While I fly my pretty T3 you fly your T3, see ya when I get back from Wormhole space. Seriously, there are many other things that are 10x worst than this minor X1 level loss on the T3 specialty skills, thats right from the T3 skills, not your 'Carldari cake baking level 5 skill' Drop the price of Game time is a bigger deal, game mechanics effect everyone, so they are not picking on you or me.... lets focus on real issues. RANT OVER.
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 13:36:00 - [609] Originally by: Rviii Give me a break, it's one level on a level X1 skill, not the end of EVE, While I fly my pretty T3 you fly your T3, see ya when I get back from Wormhole space. Seriously, there are many other things that are 10x worst than this minor X1 level loss on the T3 specialty skills, thats right from the T3 skills, not your 'Carldari cake baking level 5 skill' Today its one level of 1x skill. Tomorrow it will be "you can pay USD so you dont lose skills". And in 3 days we get "buy SP for ISK". Its something outside of game mechanics and it shouldnt EVER happen. Also the time is the only resource which is not infinite for anyone. And yes this is real issue. IMO even bigger than titan doomsdays thru cynos and other crap.
Cyriel Longinus XERCORE	Posted - 2009.02.10 13:45:00 - [610] Edited by: Cyriel Longinus on 10/02/2009 13:47:12 Oh that's right, being objective and constructive is calling other people who have an opinion "drama queens" then attempt to devalue any said opinions by aimlessly redirecting focus on off topics. Please feel free, excercise your attentions on those "real issues" of yours. I was invited to provide feedback on this topic and will do it in any way I feel about it. Originally by: Rviii Why so many Drama Queens~? Give me a break, it's one level on a level X1 skill, not the end of EVE, While I fly my pretty T3 you fly your T3, see ya when I get back from Wormhole space. Seriously, there are many other things that are 10x worst than this minor X1 level loss on the T3 specialty skills, thats right from the T3 skills, not your 'Carldari cake baking level 5 skill' Drop the price of Game time is a bigger deal, game mechanics effect everyone, so they are not picking on you or me.... lets focus on real issues. RANT OVER.

JcJet Caldari Paradise project	Posted - 2009.02.10 13:48:00 - [611] Sorry, but SP loss is just bull****, it's sounds like some nasty thing from another farm-based MMOG... ---
Cyriel Longinus XERCORE	Posted - 2009.02.10 13:50:00 - [612] You said what I said but said it more crisp and concise Originally by: JcJet Sorry, but SP loss is just bull****, it's sounds like some nasty thing from another farm-based MMOG...
Omu Negru Caldari Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.10 13:53:00 - [613] Edited by: Omu Negru on 10/02/2009 13:56:23 Edited by: Omu Negru on 10/02/2009 13:54:38 For me, just the thought that I might loose days of training is so terrifying and dreadful that I might considering to not fly t3 ship at all! ....or I might fly them just for ratting maybe, so I'll be sure I will never loose it. Awful decizion from CCP. They should make a poll to see that ppl think about this. Or maybe they dont care.... My conclusion is , t3 ships will be new carebear newbish toys for girls and boys who want to play something else then WOW. SAD.....
Ratchman	Posted - 2009.02.10 13:56:00 - [614] Originally by: Fire Sweet Actually theres been plenty of good responses, so you can play catch up heres a few: 1. This system does nothing but benefit high sec carebears who rarely(if ever) lose ships, while further devaluing and making living in 0.0 space worthless and a waste of time. You seem to be under the impression that because the forums have filled up with complaints about this, that this somehow represents 'the majority' of players. It may surprise you to find out that the population of the forums is not representative of the population of the game as a whole. Most of the posts in forums are usually from people with strong opinions, either one way or the other, and the majority of these will be the very vocal minority. The second thing I am trying to impart, is the fact that you are welcome to object to the system, but most of the posts I read, are panicked, emotional responses with little analysis. I would like to answer the three points you made: Firstly, the 'carebears' do generally tend to lose less ships, so they won't need to reskill so much. What you fail to recognise is that they already benefit from the fact they lose less ships in that they do not need to keep spending ISK on new ones. PVP is an ISK sink and always will be, but now some of that ISK will be converted to time. Secondly, you can argue to it stagnates character development, but only if you're flying (and losing) T3 ships all the time. Use them sparingly, and it will only slow you down. Besides, would you prefer a model of endless training, or a model of having to restart? What happens if you forget to renew or upgrade your clone? If you end up starting from scratch, it will take you so long to get back to where you were, you'll probably quit long before then. Thirdly, as I specified before, a few hundred posts doesn't equal the majority of EVE players. Surely you are ware how it only takes a few hundred complaints (if that) to get a film banned? Are they the majority? They're certainly the ones you hear most from. But do they respresent the majority of cinema patrons? There is always a silent majority. In fact, you make the point yourself when you state the majority of players, who just happen to be carebears (and your choice of words speaks volumes of your dislike for what you perceive to be the majority), will just accept it. I am a PVPer myself, and I am not sure what to make of this system, but what I have seen so far doesn't seem too horrific, and I am willing to give it a go. This is what I am asking people to do. Give it a go, rather than fly off the handle before you have even tried it. Have you actually tried it yet? You can argue it is the start of a slippery slope, but there is already a mechanic for skill loss. You just pay ISK to defer it by purchasing a clone. This has been accepted by every single player since the beginning. If you get killed a lot, you'll be paying more. You still have to spend time earning this back. It is also arrogant of you to state that I need to 'catch up'. So you think that because I have taken up a counterpoint to your beliefs, that I am intellectually backward? The tone of your conversation leads me to believe that you will ignore any statements contrary to your own and just stand there with fingers in ears yelling "can't hear you". Instead I have written this for the benefit of the other people reviewing this subject.
Omu Negru Caldari Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.10 14:00:00 - [615] Originally by: Ratchman Originally by: Fire Sweet Actually theres been plenty of good responses, so you can play catch up heres a few: 1. This system does nothing but benefit high sec carebears who rarely(if ever) lose ships, while further devaluing and making living in 0.0 space worthless and a waste of time. You seem to be under the impression that because the forums have filled up with complaints about this, that this somehow represents 'the majority' of players. It may surprise you to find out that the population of the forums is not representative of the population of the game as a whole. Most of the posts in forums are usually from people with strong opinions, either one way or the other, and the majority of these will be the very vocal minority. I dont stay on forums for ex. I rarely read the forums. Now Im interested about this. Thats why I read it. so...
Fire Sweet	Posted - 2009.02.10 14:02:00 - [616] Originally by: Ratchman Originally by: Fire Sweet Actually theres been plenty of good responses, so you can play catch up heres a few: 1. This system does nothing but benefit high sec carebears who rarely(if ever) lose ships, while further devaluing and making living in 0.0 space worthless and a waste of time. You seem to be under the impression that because the forums have filled up with complaints about this, that this somehow represents 'the majority' of players. It may surprise you to find out that the population of the forums is not representative of the population of the game as a whole. Most of the posts in forums are usually from people with strong opinions, either one way or the other, and the majority of these will be the very vocal minority. The second thing I am trying to impart, is the fact that you are welcome to object to the system, but most of the posts I read, are panicked, emotional responses with little analysis. I would like to answer the three points you made: Firstly, the 'carebears' do generally tend to lose less ships, so they won't need to reskill so much. What you fail to recognise is that they already benefit from the fact they lose less ships in that they do not need to keep spending ISK on new ones. PVP is an ISK sink and always will be, but now some of that ISK will be converted to time. Secondly, you can argue to it stagnates character development, but only if you're flying (and losing) T3 ships all the time. Use them sparingly, and it will only slow you down. Besides, would you prefer a model of endless training, or a model of having to restart? What happens if you forget to renew or upgrade your clone? If you end up starting from scratch, it will take you so long to get back to where you were, you'll probably quit long before then. Thirdly, as I specified before, a few hundred posts doesn't equal the majority of EVE players. Surely you are ware how it only takes a few hundred complaints (if that) to get a film banned? Are they the majority? They're certainly the ones you hear most from. But do they respresent the majority of cinema patrons? There is always a silent majority. In fact, you make the point yourself when you state the majority of players, who just happen to be carebears (and your choice of words speaks volumes of your dislike for what you perceive to be the majority), will just accept it. I am a PVPer myself, and I am not sure what to make of this system, but what I have seen so far doesn't seem too horrific, and I am willing to give it a go. This is what I am asking people to do. Give it a go, rather than fly off the handle before you have even tried it. Have you actually tried it yet? You can argue it is the start of a slippery slope, but there is already a mechanic for skill loss. You just pay ISK to defer it by purchasing a clone. This has been accepted by every single player since the beginning. If you get killed a lot, you'll be paying more. You still have to spend time earning this back. It is also arrogant of you to state that I need to 'catch up'. So you think that because I have taken up a counterpoint to your beliefs, that I am intellectually backward? The tone of your conversation leads me to believe that you will ignore any statements contrary to your own and just stand there with fingers in ears yelling "can't hear you". Instead I have written this for the benefit of the other people reviewing this subject. Actually the reason I was being dismissive to begin with is that you dont seem to grasp the point several people are trying to get at, and that is some of us have no desire to give a crap system a chance, because like it or not, no matter how much your try to polish ** its still **. You have your opinion, and your welcome to it, but the majority of people that dont like this system, as you call it the vocal minority are angry on the principale, not the implementation.
Antimony Noske	Posted - 2009.02.10 14:03:00 - [617] If T3 ships incur skillpoint loss - then I quite simply won't be flying them in PVP. Ever. [Sorry, but I'm not going to train all those skills back to level 5 over the course of a month, just so I can lose the ship in a battle and do it all over again.] And if the T3 cruisers can't do level 4 missions better than your typical battleship, I won't even be using them in PVE. This has got to be the stupidest implementation I've ever seen. CCP introduces new ships, and then designs a mechanic around them in such a way that nobody wants to use them. Not only will they end up being extremely expensive ISK-wise as demand for them rapidly dies, [People are only going to have them sit in their hangars looking pretty, and you only need one ship for that.] but they're going to be extremely expensive time-wise as well. This is one of those gameplay decisions that makes me seriously consider ending my subscription. [inb4 'can I have your stuff?'] First it'll be tech 3 ships - then it'll be skill loss for tech 3 modules, or some other thing. At that point, quite frankly, I don't want to be playing eve. This game mechanic needs to be vehemently rejected by the community before it destroys the game.
Omu Negru Caldari Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.10 14:07:00 - [618] Originally by: Antimony Noske If T3 ships incur skillpoint loss - then I quite simply won't be flying them in PVP. Ever. Here is what the majority of PVP players will say.
Karii Ildarian Caldari M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.02.10 14:08:00 - [619] CCP is just prepping all you guys for the next bold step: 10% Skill loss for being podded This will truly make EVE a harsh universe and I eagerly await the implementation.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.10 14:09:00 - [620] Originally by: Karii Ildarian CCP is just prepping all you guys for the next bold step: 10% Skill loss for being podded This will truly make EVE a harsh universe and I eagerly await the implementation. I'd support something like that

Ratchman	Posted - 2009.02.10 14:25:00 - [621] Originally by: JcJet Sorry, but SP loss is just bull****, it's sounds like some nasty thing from another farm-based MMOG... And EVE is completely free from grind? How else are you going to get your ISK, security ratings and loyalty points? Honestly, if everyone is so stoked up about this, there is one form of protest you can do which CCP will listen to, because it deprives them of money. Quit. Just make sure you specify the reason why when you do. There's little point in playing something that is going to give you so much heartache and stress.
SecHaul	Posted - 2009.02.10 14:26:00 - [622] Edited by: SecHaul on 10/02/2009 14:26:46 MMOs are about progression, it's about improving your character skills and equipment. I understand EVE and WOW are different, but WOW is so successful simply because it focuses upon what drives people to play MMOs. EVE is currently 'harsh' due to the loss of equipment through PvP, and potential loss of character skill if you forget to manage your clone (i.e. high risk, but very unlikely). Now with T3 EVE is verging on increasing the likely statement to almost 100% certain if you PvP extensively and wish to fly T3 ships. Personally I have tens of millions of skillpoints that I want to invest in 'safe' skills before I ever reach the point where I feel I can start throwing them away to fly T3 hulls. In other words, I will not be flying T3 for a very, very long time - which is a pity since CCP is so very proud of this new content, calling it a HUGE expansion, when in reality I think very few people will even use it. PvP'ers will more than likely avoid it due to risk, and PvE'ers will probably find that battleships will do what they want more effectively. I'm not sure exactly who CCP think will fly these T3 ships extensively after the novelty factor wears down a little.
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 14:40:00 - [623] Originally by: SecHaul I'm not sure exactly who CCP think will fly these T3 ships extensively after the novelty factor wears down a little. Same people who say BOps and SBombers are fine?
SecHaul	Posted - 2009.02.10 14:56:00 - [624] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Same people who say BOps and SBombers are fine? Erm, there is a difference between people flying ships that have very fine niche roles, and people flying ships that will result in their character regressing. The argument isn't whether T3 ships will have a function within game, the argument is whether the risk of flying T3 ships outweighs any advantages they provide. Obviously we haven't seen what T3 ships will do, but I cannot imagine they will gank / tank better than battleships (PvE), and I cannot imagine they will do anything better than current T2 ships in a niche role (PvP). So we have SIGNIFICANTLY elevated risk of flying the ship, and EVE is all about risk/reward. I'm not sure I see the reward being SIGNIFICANTLY elevated, which means the only time I expect to see a T3 ship is either in Empire for the novelty, or in absolutely massive blobs where people can reduce the risk level. In other words, I don't expect to see it much.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 15:14:00 - [625] Something that I don't think has been brought up so far, is that to my mind this actually implies SP gain, at least initially. Who actually thinks that the skills required to fly T3 ships would "naturally" be rank 1? In the abstract, I would expect the subsystem skills to be rank 3-5. The fact that they are rank 1 seems to be motivated and justified by the SP loss on ship destruction. Let's assume that the skills would otherwise be rank 3. The SP loss system means that you can train them up to whatever level you want in a third of the time, and so while you haven't lost any ships you are miles ahead of where you otherwise would have been. Break even point is at around 11 lost levels of training - so until you've lost 11 T3 ships, you're still ahead of where you would have been despite the retraining of skills. If we assume the skills would have been rank 5, then the breakeven point is now 22. I don't know about your wallets, but I don't expect to be able to afford 22 strategic cruisers in any reasonable amount of time - and if I can, and keep losing them, a day of retraining isn't going to be the biggest of my worries. Originally by: Omu Negru Originally by: Antimony Noske If T3 ships incur skillpoint loss - then I quite simply won't be flying them in PVP. Ever. Here is what the majority of PVP players will say. And they have a right to say that, just like people might say "I'm not going to fly a Nightmare in PvP ever, because I can't sustain a 1-2bil ISK loss". Don't fly what you can't afford to lose, and if you decide you can't afford to lose one level from your subsystems skills then you've made the right choice. However, I think that the logic is severely flawed if you go down that route. You're worried that you can't afford to lose a level in a skill that solely gives you the ability to fly T3 ships; so to guard against losing this skill, you choose to never fly T3 ships and thus never benefit from having it... That seems deliciously ironic to me. Originally by: Deva Blackfire Today its one level of 1x skill. Tomorrow it will be "you can pay USD so you dont lose skills". And in 3 days we get "buy SP for ISK". Its something outside of game mechanics and it shouldnt EVER happen. That's a ridiculous argument. Going through wormholes is outside of game mechanics by your logic, since nothing currently present allows it to happen. The game mechanics change as the game evolves, that's entirely natural. On the other hand if you're referring to buying SP as being outside of game mechanics, then I agree with you completely. But that's not what's being proposed here, nor is it fair in any way to assume that if this goes in then that will go in. I really don't see CCP ever proposing such a thing, regardless of any straw man complaints that say they will. Overall I like the idea as it gives a real sense of loss to the higher-tech ships that importantly, is roughly equal for everyone. Regardless of how quickly you can grind/GTC exchange ISK, the SP loss is still going to hit you and make you cautious about flying and losing the ship. For me, I expect the ISK loss is going to be a massively bigger motivator, but I love the concept that the ship means more than just ISK. Besides, what happened to people who enjoy EVE's famously harsh death penalty? Surely this is more of the same, and separates the men from the boys?
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 15:21:00 - [626] Originally by: Gartel Reiman Besides, what happened to people who enjoy EVE's famously harsh death penalty? Surely this is more of the same, and separates the men from the boys? If you like that harsh penalty why do you update your clones? Noone forces you to do so. So?
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 15:30:00 - [627] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Originally by: SecHaul I'm not sure exactly who CCP think will fly these T3 ships extensively after the novelty factor wears down a little. Same people who say BOps and SBombers are fine? Or the people who enjoy flying a very powerful, customisable cruiser and aren't too bothered by the prospect of an extra day's training if their 0.5-1bn ISK ship goes down. I'm frankly very surprised by all the people crying "Oh my god, I could lose a level of a T3-specific skill, I'm never going to fly it!" Once you get to a certain level, and all your core skills are trained, you've got a choice. Would you rather spend a month training HAC to 5, or would you rather spend the same time in total getting Racial Offensive Systems to 5 with enough "change" to retrain it 5 times over? Or if you're less hardcore about it, train Racial Offensive Systems to 4 with enough change to retrain it 29 times over? I can understand why younger players wouldn't want to train this as they have lots of "permanent" SP they can invest in, but by the time you have 40, 50, 60+m SP, the benefits of flying T3 ships are definitely likely to be worth the "variable" skill cost. Especially with the skills at such a low rank.
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 15:36:00 - [628] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 10/02/2009 15:37:04 Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 10/02/2009 15:36:26 I would train HAC. And if i had 30 days to waste i would train another BS to level5. And then another large weapon to lv5. Or another weapon spec to lv5. Because when i get em they are permanent. Oh yea and thats coming from 70m character. Also you didnt respond to my question. If you like it hardcore why do you update your clones? You will lose 1-2 weeks of training tops to fly EVEN MORE POWERFUL THAN T3 CRUISER ship - namely battleship (if you get podded that is). Think of adrenaline.
Antimony Noske	Posted - 2009.02.10 15:41:00 - [629] Originally by: Gartel Reiman However, I think that the logic is severely flawed if you go down that route. You're worried that you can't afford to lose a level in a skill that solely gives you the ability to fly T3 ships; so to guard against losing this skill, you choose to never fly T3 ships and thus never benefit from having it... Benefit from flying T3: - Modular - Looks cool - Possibly better than T2 Drawbacks: - Expensive - When you die, you lose effectiveness with that ship and need to retrain skills taking anywhere from hours to days to do so. Benefits don't outweigh the costs. I'll fly a T2 ship and be roughly equal to a T3, while being able to put my skillpoints to good use training skills that won't disappear on me the next day. Why spend 12 hours training a subsystem to level 5 if I lose it again ten minutes later? As a newer player, I want and need these skillpoints to go to more important things, like getting the basic Engineering/Navigation/etc. skills up to level 5. T3 is only going to serve to slow me down. It's a useless gimmick, it doesn't add anything, it only serves as a way to reduce my skillpoints/training so that I stay subscribed for longer. I simply cannot agree with CCP going in this direction. If they actually implement this, it won't be long before other things start to do the same thing. Before you know it, we'll have dozens of new skills that can be lost for any multitude of reasons that we'll need to re-train to use. Sorry, not my kind of game. I'm taking a stance against this 'feature' here and now, so that a game I enjoy doesn't turn into something I don't.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 15:51:00 - [630] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Originally by: Gartel Reiman Besides, what happened to people who enjoy EVE's famously harsh death penalty? Surely this is more of the same, and separates the men from the boys? If you like that harsh penalty why do you update your clones? Noone forces you to do so. So? It's about mitigation of risk, with a reward for doing so successfully. I don't enjoy specifically being penalised, but bad things happening when I "lose" make the winning more important and enjoyable. In fact updating clones is a bad example, because it's a trivial mechanic (i.e. I update my clone with 100% success rate and minimal cost to me, so there's no reason not to). A better example is the ISK loss you currently get when losing a ship (especially a T2 one); it makes combat mean something. Besides, whether I mitigate risk or not doesn't factor into whether I think it's a good game mechanic. Imagine if there was a super-platinum insurance, that when you were killed would give you back double the current market value of the ship and teleport all your modules back into your hangar. Would I use it? Of course, self-inflicting easily avoidable losses isn't fun. Would I think it's a good mechanic? Not at all. So yes, I do update my clone, and yes, I have no problem with the limited SP loss plan currently proposed, even though things would be easier for me if we all got the super-platinum-like insurance on our T3 SP and never lost any.

War Fairy	Posted - 2009.02.10 15:53:00 - [631] Originally by: Ratchman Originally by: Deva Blackfire Why dont we just make it so if you lose ANY ship (be it t1, t2, t3) you lose skillpoints. For example lose HAC - you lose 1 day from amarr cruiser. And why you will say its bad idea now? It would be a bad idea for existing skills, because they take so long to learn (but you can still lose skill points if you don't renew your clone), but these new skills supposedly take a very short time to learn, so the effect of losing those skill points is only minor. But like I say, wait until you try it out before passing judgement. If the skill loss is minor then what's the point? The feature is only useful if it hurts. I don't understand what the end goal is. Is it to slow down advancement? Why are they added stat moving then?
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 15:58:00 - [632] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 10/02/2009 15:37:04 Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 10/02/2009 15:36:26 I would train HAC. And if i had 30 days to waste i would train another BS to level5. And then another large weapon to lv5. Or another weapon spec to lv5. Because when i get em they are permanent. Oh yea and thats coming from 70m character. OK, that's your call. But depending on that exact benefits that the modular systems will give, and making a fair assumption that they're more powerful than HACs, I expect I would go for the T3 systems skill. Definitely so over a large weapons spec - 40 days for an extra 2% damage, or 5 days for probably 5% bonus; even if I had to train the latter many times I'd still be ahead. And given that I'll likely train the skills to level 4, we're talking 1 day for 5% bonus or 40 days for 2% bonus, i.e. in a (very basic and limited) calculation the T3 training is 100 times more efficient. Anyway, it's fine that there's different opinions on the matter anyway. Asides from the specific implementation, I like the fact that T3 has fundamentally different mechanics to T2, so that it's not just "T2 but better", in the same way that T2 basically obsoletes T1 once you have the skills and ISK to choose either. Those who are extremely averse to losing skills can still keep training and flying T1 and T2 ships, while those who are prepared to train, lose and retrain their SP get the benefit of flying T3.
Kings Slave	Posted - 2009.02.10 15:59:00 - [633] The people arguing that it's bad that u lose a few sp from a rank 1 skill... why arent you arguing that its bad if you lose SP if you forget to update your clone? Atleast make the freaking clone update automatic if you want to keep the isk sink.
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 16:02:00 - [634] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 10/02/2009 16:04:11 Originally by: Gartel Reiman In fact updating clones is a bad example, because it's a trivial mechanic (i.e. I update my clone with 100% success rate and minimal cost to me, so there's no reason not to). A better example is the ISK loss you currently get when losing a ship (especially a T2 one); it makes combat mean something. It is perfect example to show how hypocritical people who vote for "t3 SP loss" are. Losing pod without clone = loss of SP (highest skill - usually battleship). Losing t3 ships = loss of SP. In both cases (BS5 or module lv5) you will lose more-less the same amount of SPs (iirc BS loss hurts a bit more). Wasnt it you who said that t3 ships are so good that they should be penalized? Then reality check: BS are better than t2 (and i guess t3) cruisers - so penalty should be even harsher. So it is EXACTLY how you imagined it, yet you dont want to lose SP while flying BS but want ppl to lose SP while flying some new toy. Also wont it make winning even more important and enjoyable for you? You turned up ISK value as major factor. It is almost certain t3 ships will cost more than t2 ones (just look how game developed, and how expensive all new ships were/are). Thus again your point is moot. Quote: And given that I'll likely train the skills to level 4, we're talking 1 day for 5% bonus or 40 days for 2% bonus, i.e. in a (very basic and limited) calculation the T3 training is 100 times more efficient. Id advise you to train all gun skills to level 1. Isnt 10 minute skill giving 5% more time-efficient than 1 day one giving 5% (lv4)?. And did you include ability to return to combat within 3 seconds when i lose bs with same efficiency? What will be yours? Or do you plan to pvp only on weekends when you manage to re-train your skill?
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 16:36:00 - [635] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Originally by: Gartel Reiman In fact updating clones is a bad example, because it's a trivial mechanic (i.e. I update my clone with 100% success rate and minimal cost to me, so there's no reason not to). A better example is the ISK loss you currently get when losing a ship (especially a T2 one); it makes combat mean something. It is perfect example to show how hypocritical people who vote for "t3 SP loss" are. Losing pod without clone = loss of SP (highest skill - usually battleship). Losing t3 ships = loss of SP. There are a couple of very important differences here. Firstly, the mechanism by which is the skill loss is inflicted, or rather can be avoided. If you remember to upgrade your clone (which as everyone agrees is something that you should always do without question), then you trivially and complete avoid the problem of skill loss. Whereas conversely, any time you are involved in a fight in a T3 ship you will suffer skill loss if you happen to lose your ship in that fight. The first is caused by forgetfulness; the second is caused by bad performance in PvP. Consequently, the incentives involved with both are entirely different. Secondly, and more importantly, the skill loss involved when you are podded without an up-to-date clone is indiscriminate and can affect any of your skills (usually battleship as you say). However, the skill loss with T3 ships will only affect T3 skills - I think that's a critical factor in my acceptance of the whole system. You could get lose 25 strategic cruisers times in an hour, and despite your T3 subsystems skills all hitting rock bottom, you would still be exactly as competent at flying any T1 or T2 ship in the game. That's the important part - T3 giveth, and T3 taketh away. Quote: In both cases (BS5 or module lv5) you will lose more-less the same amount of SPs (iirc BS loss hurts a bit more). Since battleship skills are rank 8 and all subsystem skills are rank 1, I definitely refute this claim. All else being equal, losing the skill from podding will hurt 8 times as much. Quote: Wasnt it you who said that t3 ships are so good that they should be penalized? That wasn't really what I said; rather that T3 cruisers ought to be distinct from T2 cruisers rather than simply being more powerful. That said, they do look like they will be potentially more powerful, or at least more flexible, than their T2 counterparts; and consequently with the generally held principles of risk/reward I have no problem with them being more painful to lose. Quote: You turned up ISK value as major factor. It is almost certain t3 ships will cost more than t2 ones (just look how game developed, and how expensive all new ships were/are). Thus again your point is moot. ISK will still be a factor, of course. To be honest, for most of us I expect it will be a larger factor than the skill loss. I quoted it in context as a comparison as it's the only "death matters" factor we have right now (asides from killboard points, if you care about that sort of thing). However, one of the good things about skill loss is that it hits most people more or less equally - no matter how much ISK they have. Sure, you might have 5/5 learning skills and +5 implants, but 1 level's training is still going to be in the same order of magnitude as the guy with 4/3s and +3s. OTOH, if you have tens of billions of ISK, there's not much consequence to losing a HAC compared to someone with just 150m ISK. Quote: And did you include ability to return to combat within 3 seconds when i lose bs with same efficiency? What will be yours? Or do you plan to pvp only on weekends when you manage to re-train your skill? I don't think I'll have a fleet of strategic cruisers lined up. If I lose a T3 ship I'll jump back into a T2 or T1 one; or perhaps another T3 if I have one handy and the specific skill I lost doesn't critically affect the ship's performance.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 16:40:00 - [636] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Quote: And given that I'll likely train the skills to level 4, we're talking 1 day for 5% bonus or 40 days for 2% bonus, i.e. in a (very basic and limited) calculation the T3 training is 100 times more efficient. Id advise you to train all gun skills to level 1. Isnt 10 minute skill giving 5% more time-efficient than 1 day one giving 5% (lv4)?. Yes, it is for sure. That ties in to what I was saying earlier, that younger players are unlikely to want to train for T3 ships, when they have lots of other permanent skills they could be training to get the bonuses. However, there is an incredible factor of diminishing returns in skill training, so once you've already trained all the gun skills to level 1 (and then up to level 4) you can't spend another 10 minutes to get another 5%. There comes a time when you've trained all the short, relevant non-T3 skills, and so you get to a choice (say) between Large Turret Spec 5, or T3 skills. I'd pick T3 skills and you'd pick the turret spec.
SecHaul	Posted - 2009.02.10 16:46:00 - [637] Originally by: Gartel Reiman I can understand why younger players wouldn't want to train this as they have lots of "permanent" SP they can invest in, but by the time you have 40, 50, 60+m SP, the benefits of flying T3 ships are definitely likely to be worth the "variable" skill cost. Especially with the skills at such a low rank. I agree with this, but let's consider what you are actually saying. CCP is effectively implementing a massive chunk of new content that really only makes sense for veteran players. To reach 40 million plus SP's will take approximately 2 years, and I honestly think that many players even at this stage would rather cross-train, so that number may be even higher. In other words, there will be a very small schism of EVE that will enjoy and use T3. It's just a pity to see this massive amount of content that CCP is considering to be practical to so few. Why spend 100's of man hours developing something that so few will use, and even if they do use, probably only on a limited basis? The whole point of growing the MMO should be to expand content for the entire EVE player base, and I think that this content will miss that mark.
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 16:49:00 - [638] Quote: There are a couple of very important differences here. Firstly, the mechanism by which is the skill loss is inflicted, or rather can be avoided. If you remember to upgrade your clone (which as everyone agrees is something that you should always do without question), then you trivially and complete avoid the problem of skill loss. Whereas conversely, any time you are involved in a fight in a T3 ship you will suffer skill loss if you happen to lose your ship in that fight. The first is caused by forgetfulness; the second is caused by bad performance in PvP. Consequently, the incentives involved with both are entirely different. Wrong. In both cases skill loss is inflicted by losing ship (wheras pod counts as a ship too). Still doesnt change a thing: you are either "hardcore" and bite it or a "wuss" and try to evade skill loss. As you update clone it means you dont want to lose SPs. Thus when you say that losing SPs is good mechanic you are being a hypocrite. Quote: Secondly, and more importantly, the skill loss involved when you are podded without an up-to-date clone is indiscriminate and can affect any of your skills (usually battleship as you say). However, the skill loss with T3 ships will only affect T3 skills - I think that's a critical factor in my acceptance of the whole system. You could get lose 25 strategic cruisers times in an hour, and despite your T3 subsystems skills all hitting rock bottom, you would still be exactly as competent at flying any T1 or T2 ship in the game. That's the important part - T3 giveth, and T3 taketh away. Kewl. And when i lose 50 battleships im still as good at flying t1, t2 AND t3 ships. Why such a difference? T1 loss = t1 skills lost. it will also easily remove all blobs. 2 titan doomsdays and problem solves itself - people will stop PVPing. God this is GENIUS idea! Page CCP, blob problems solved. Quote: Since battleship skills are rank 8 and all subsystem skills are rank 1, I definitely refute this claim. All else being equal, losing the skill from podding will hurt 8 times as much. You never lose whole level. So its not 8x as much. Dont remember exact values but it was around 1-2 weeks of training lost. Quote: That wasn't really what I said; rather that T3 cruisers ought to be distinct from T2 cruisers rather than simply being more powerful. That said, they do look like they will be potentially more powerful, or at least more flexible, than their T2 counterparts; and consequently with the generally held principles of risk/reward I have no problem with them being more painful to lose. But even CCP stated multiple times they arent more powerful that t2 but "different". So another moot point. Quote: ISK stuff. Fly what you can afford. You are trying to prove that rich people will be on same level as poor people thanks to this mechanic yet you completly ignore the fact that high SP people will have huge advantage over low SP people (also ISK comes as a factor back - with +5 implants etc). Also im curious: how often do you pvp? And what ships?
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 16:50:00 - [639] Quote: In other words, there will be a very small schism of EVE that will enjoy and use T3. It's just a pity to see this massive amount of content that CCP is considering to be practical to so few. Why spend 100's of man hours developing something that so few will use, and even if they do use, probably only on a limited basis? The whole point of growing the MMO should be to expand content for the entire EVE player base, and I think that this content will miss that mark. Also this. Remember that ccp spent HAL OF A YEAR making T3 expansion. And suddenly it means that this half of the year "waste-of-time" will be used by less than 1% playerbase? Maybe just screw this expansion and fix sov/mining issues 1st? This hits way more than 1% of playerbase.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 17:13:00 - [640] Originally by: SecHaul Originally by: Gartel Reiman I can understand why younger players wouldn't want to train this as they have lots of "permanent" SP they can invest in, but by the time you have 40, 50, 60+m SP, the benefits of flying T3 ships are definitely likely to be worth the "variable" skill cost. Especially with the skills at such a low rank. I agree with this, but let's consider what you are actually saying. CCP is effectively implementing a massive chunk of new content that really only makes sense for veteran players. To reach 40 million plus SP's will take approximately 2 years, and I honestly think that many players even at this stage would rather cross-train, so that number may be even higher. In other words, there will be a very small schism of EVE that will enjoy and use T3. The point you can start using T3 is the point at which you become comfortable with the possibility of losing your skillpoints in the subsystem skills. In fact, if you look at the actual requirements, they are surprisingly low to start flying the ships. It might be prudent to train e.g. Advanced Weapon Upgrades to 4 or so before training for T3, but by no means is it necessary. It's up to the individual to decide how much risk they want to accept in this area. In fact I come to the opposite conclusion to you - for a potentially very powerful ship, I am impressed that the prerequisites are relatively low, certainly lower than I think most people expected. Obviously by definition this is good for the younger players as they can amass the SP required to fly one, should they decide to fly one, in a shorter time. I also like how they have balanced this by increasing the volatility of SP placed into T3 training - changing the issue from simply waiting for the prereqs to train, to judging for yourself when you feel comfortable with taking the plunge and training for T3. Besides, if you're happy flying a very expensive ship with the subsystem skills at level 3 or so, then you're only looking at about 5 hours' training lost if/when it pops. Again, it's risk/reward (train more for better performance and less chance of losing the ship, or train a little less so the SP loss hurts less?).

Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 17:38:00 - [641] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Quote: There are a couple of very important differences here. Firstly, the mechanism by which is the skill loss is inflicted, or rather can be avoided. Wrong. In both cases skill loss is inflicted by losing ship (wheras pod counts as a ship too). Still doesnt change a thing: you are either "hardcore" and bite it or a "wuss" and try to evade skill loss. As you update clone it means you dont want to lose SPs. Thus when you say that losing SPs is good mechanic you are being a hypocrite. I don't agree that that's a necessary conclusion. I insure my ships too; by your logic you would say that I cannot say that losing ISK is good without being a hypocrite. Fundamentally, I don't want to have any loss happen to me personally, but that doesn't mean I want all loss to be removed from the game. The fact that I take steps to minimise/avoid loss cannot be taken to assume that I want all loss mechanics removed. So yes, I try to avoid SP loss where possible. No, I don't believe that SP loss is a fundamentally bad mechanic. Quote: That's the important part - T3 giveth, and T3 taketh away. Kewl. And when i lose 50 battleships im still as good at flying t1, t2 AND t3 ships. Why such a difference? Because as I mentioned above, T3 is meant to be more specialised and different (as I understand). It plays into the risk/reward thing as well - take out a higher-tech/more powerful/whatever ship, and there is a little more risk there than undocking a T1 ship. In the same way that you get CONCORD in high-sec, but no Arkonor asteroids. If you want the good ores, you need to leave empire. And if you want the T3 ships, you need to leave behind the "no SP loss when you die" protection. That doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Quote: You never lose whole level. So its not 8x as much. Dont remember exact values but it was around 1-2 weeks of training lost. You're right, I think it's capped at half a level. In which case, it's 4 times as much SP lost when you lose a clone. Quote: Quote: they do look like they will be potentially more powerful, or at least more flexible, than their T2 counterparts; and consequently with the generally held principles of risk/reward I have no problem with them being more painful to lose. But even CCP stated multiple times they arent more powerful that t2 but "different". So another moot point. OK, perhaps "powerful" is a misleading word to use. I'll just say "better" then, given that we understand it depends on the situations, etc., etc., but we can at least agree that there will be times when all else being equal you would rather fly a T3 ship to its T2 counterpart. After all, if there weren't then balancing will have failed and there'll be no point in them at all. Now in those situations where you choose to fly the T3 ship, it's fair to assume it's better than T2 (i.e. more reward), and in that context it's reasonable for them to have more risk than T2. Besides, the skill loss mechanic certain fulfils the "different" that CCP were aiming for... Quote: Quote: ISK stuff. Fly what you can afford. You are trying to prove that rich people will be on same level as poor people thanks to this mechanic yet you completly ignore the fact that high SP people will have huge advantage over low SP people (also ISK comes as a factor back - with +5 implants etc). Not completely ignore (I mentioned the implants in fact), but realistically with bunches of ISK for the implants, you can retrain the skill in what, 80%? Perhaps 70% (at an absolute minimum) of the time than a poorer person would take to retrain it? Whereas it is entirely possible for one individual/group to have literally hundreds or even thousands more ISK available than another pilot/group. Skill training rate distribution will definitely be more uniform than ISK distribution.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 17:40:00 - [642] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Also im curious: how often do you pvp? And what ships? I "usually" PvP with Gartel (whatever that means, since of course it depends on finding willing targets). I'm not particularly tied to any specific ships, though I do probably fly Geddons, Sacrileges, Zealots, Harbingers and Maledictions notably more than the other ships (though no single ship of those five stand out as "my usual" ship).
Darado Caliensis Caldari Interstellar eXodus	Posted - 2009.02.10 18:08:00 - [643] My initial feelings on this issue were ones of extreme distaste for another game feature that would discourage the use of better ships for PVP. I have in general strongly disagreed with the penchant CCP has for discouraging use of new or advanced ships for PVP by either making them too expensive and/or nerfing their abilities to not make them worth the risk. I greatly enjoyed the addition of such ships as the marauders and black ops, but am saddened when I look back at our corp statistics and see only a total of 3 and 5 respectively of these ship classes involved out of a total of over 35,000 kills. Most ship classes like this are actively discouraged from use in PVP by FCÆs who fear being responsible for a large loss and those using the ships realize in gang fights really how little benefit they have for all its cost and priority as a target. My greatest fear is that tech 3 will follow this trend and we will have bunch of new shiny carebear toys, and EVE will continue to devolve into a commonplace MMO. I cannot understand any argument stating a skill point loss would increase losses or risk involved in tech 3 PVP. I think instead it could greatly discourage tech 3 PVP use and as many other have stated and history has suggested with previous classes of promising ships the rarity of use will result in no significant ill effect to those who could afford them. The only caveat I see here is that IF the addition of a skill point loss could convince the devs that there is enough risk and cost involved in the ship to not nerf the ships into just another flavor of tech 2, then it may be worth the concerns others have mentioned regarding this development.
Azuse Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2009.02.10 18:11:00 - [644] If i wanted to risk my sp in pvp i'd get into my ishtar and not update my clone. Oh look, now i'm risking my ship and sp, makes pvp more fun doesn't it . Somehow i doubt ccp set out planning on spending thousands of man hours just to create a system that directly counteracts one they put in place at the beginning. Train a skill that i won't loose or train one i can have the pleasure of training again and again and again.. Tough choice. To those that to those that are happy with this; at what point does minor become major? After you've lost a weeks training? Two weeks? A month? In pvp you loose ships, in wars frequently, so how many weeks of sp do you have to loose before you stop flying t3 and go back too t2? what happens to the value of those extra 2499 systems when people finally realise they can't continually loose sp like they can isk? Is there any real point in using them at that point? Also, if sp matter so little why do you never undock without an updated clone? Why do we spend hundreds of millions (or billions) on implats each year just to gain those extra few weeks training time? What happens when you realise after loosing ship no. 2/5/9/22 that all that time gain, all that isk spent, was a waste because you have to keep training skills again and again? If you want to waste afew weeks training do hac v, or recon v, or any other lvl v...
space bully Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 18:19:00 - [645] Deva Blackfire, i see your problem, it lies in the fact that you dont like the way that ccp intended this tech 3 endavour to arise.. The solution is quite simple.: A. Get the **** out of eve, or B. Stay in eve, but stop whineing like a some kid from World Of Warcraft who's epic or whatever its called just got destroyed with all its durability crap. or C. Stay in eve, and simply not use tech 3! In all cases, stop behaving like a raving lunitic and think that just because this little fact of you having to be carefull with your ship or you'll maybe have to train up a 10ish day skill with all your implants, and respecs... Grow up, and get a life! To CCP, ignore that guy who apparently likes to make whinesauce.. I personally love the idea of sp loss regarding tech 3! Makes it a very interesting twist!! Coupled with the simple fact that it is only a rank 1 skill! And if i seem to have been too harsh in some of my choices of words, please just censor them out.. Did i forget to say that it is only the testserver, and iirc then there was a mentioning of the fact that all the details in the new items technicly only is/are "placeholders"?
space bully Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 18:25:00 - [646] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Quote: In other words, there will be a very small schism of EVE that will enjoy and use T3. It's just a pity to see this massive amount of content that CCP is considering to be practical to so few. Why spend 100's of man hours developing something that so few will use, and even if they do use, probably only on a limited basis? The whole point of growing the MMO should be to expand content for the entire EVE player base, and I think that this content will miss that mark. Also this. Remember that ccp spent HAL OF A YEAR making T3 expansion. And suddenly it means that this half of the year "waste-of-time" will be used by less than 1% playerbase? Maybe just screw this expansion and fix sov/mining issues 1st? This hits way more than 1% of playerbase. Boy are you so far from the truth! They didnt use all that time on makeing a tech 3 expansion!! Maybe you havnt been around all the time buddy, but they've spent all this time makeing an expansion pack, with among other things tech 3. We get new npc's, new systems for exploration, fixing and revamping of probe/scout system, revamping of a lot of the ui systems(btw do you know anything about programming skills etc ?), creating new models, enhancing the gfx engine(Do you know ANYTHING about 3d modelling ??), changeing the way the life starts for new players(do you know what a new player is ?)... Seriously! Do i need to go on? Or is it sinking in to you already ?
Bootya	Posted - 2009.02.10 18:43:00 - [647] Originally by: space bully Do i need to go on? Or is it sinking in to you already ? Haha it probably won't. Some ppl moan about evrything! Btw, specialization skill loss sounds a lot like those suggestions to allow players to "level" their ships (pops up every couple of months in the ideas board). Obviously not exactly the same, but rather similar. Pewpew
space bully Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 18:51:00 - [648] Originally by: Bootya Originally by: space bully Do i need to go on? Or is it sinking in to you already ? Haha it probably won't. Some ppl moan about evrything! Btw, specialization skill loss sounds a lot like those suggestions to allow players to "level" their ships (pops up every couple of months in the ideas board). Obviously not exactly the same, but rather similar. Or from a guy whos hopeing, maybe this is just the "beginning" for more Soom(tm) stuff to come, to peak our brains and zealed happiness :P I'm definetly thrilled by this new approach, plus i surely hope that this is an indication that the idea of this modular ai ship stuff is not completly dismissed :P
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 19:04:00 - [649] Originally by: Darado Caliensis My greatest fear is that tech 3 will follow this trend and we will have bunch of new shiny carebear toys, and EVE will continue to devolve into a commonplace MMO. An essential part of the balancing on Sisi is going to be in ensuring that T3 ships are at the right level of utility - definitely preferable to T2 in a large number of situations, without eclipsing them completely. One of the problems with Black Ops in particular is that the first condition didn't hold; there are very few, feasible situations where they would perform notably better than an equivalent T1 battleship. Assuming that the balancing succeeds and we have a ship that (in whatever its niches are) is worth potentially flying over T2 due to being more performant, the distinguishign factor as to whether it gets used in PvP or not is whether the increased performance is worth any increased cost. With T3 as proposed this is not only the cost of the ship (which is directly comparable to the cost of a T2 ship) but also the cost of the skill training. As you do, I certainly hope that the price of strategic cruisers stabilises at a sensible level; if the ships themselves cost around a billion ISK then regardless of how performant they are we are unlikely to see many of them in PvP. If the price settles at around 150-250m then we have a more interesting proposition whereby the skill loss cost becomes a contributing factor. As someone who apparently values my skillpoints less than most I am intrigued by this situation. Quote: I cannot understand any argument stating a skill point loss would increase losses or risk involved in tech 3 PVP. I think instead it could greatly discourage tech 3 PVP use and as many other have stated and history has suggested with previous classes of promising ships the rarity of use will result in no significant ill effect to those who could afford them. Well, put it this way - if an Arbitrator and a Curse cost the same amount, would you ever use the former (psychological effects, e.g. persuading an enemy to fight, aside)? One of the balancing factors between similar classes of ships is the increased risk/cost associated with the more high-tech versions. And judging by the responses to this proposed feature, people highly value their skillpoints and consequently consider that this would increase the cost of losing a T3 ship. Consequently it gives CCP the freedom to allow T3 prices to fall relatively low without obsoleting the lower tech levels of ship - something they cannot do with any other class of ship at the moment. (And while I appreciate that in a free market the price is set by supply and demand, CCP ultimately control the supply and thus can nudge prices in one direction or another by adjusting drop rates of Sleeper tech, etc.) Quote: The only caveat I see here is that IF the addition of a skill point loss could convince the devs that there is enough risk and cost involved in the ship to not nerf the ships into just another flavor of tech 2, then it may be worth the concerns others have mentioned regarding this development. This is how I'm seeing things in light of this at the moment. SP loss on death undoubtedly increases the "costs" of the ships beyond simply their market value; consequently, more interesting/powerful performance will be justified than we would otherwise have access to. I am definitely happy to make that tradeoff.
SecHaul	Posted - 2009.02.10 19:19:00 - [650] Originally by: Gartel Reiman The point you can start using T3 is the point at which you become comfortable with the possibility of losing your skillpoints in the subsystem skills. In fact, if you look at the actual requirements, they are surprisingly low to start flying the ships. It might be prudent to train e.g. Advanced Weapon Upgrades to 4 or so before training for T3, but by no means is it necessary. It's up to the individual to decide how much risk they want to accept in this area. What is currently on SISI with regards to required skills may not be the final requirements once it hits TQ. In other words, you have no idea what the skill requirements are, therefore they are not surprisingly low at the moment. Secondly, a T3 cruiser is currently a rank 10 ship (rank 5 base, with 5x rank 1 sub-components). In other words, to fly the ship at level 5 will be equivalent to training a rank 10 ship. Currently, that means it's more skill intensive than command ships and is equivalent to T2 battleships. Hardly 'low', and in addition, you lose sub-component ranks when you die, meaning it's higher than a rank 10 ship if you want to fly it well. As for prudence, MMOs, including EVE, are largely successful because people strive to improve their character. People min/max, people enjoy squeezing the most they can out of the system, be it skills or ISK or mining profits. The concept of regressing your character while flying an expensive ship that requires an immense amount of skill points to fly points with an unknown ISK cost (although it'll be high enough to dent the wallet) seems like a strange addition to content in an MMO where a large portion of the player base isn't in a position where they'll use the ships to a large degree. Will people use them? Sure, but I think after they have lost a few most will stop flying them. Originally by: Gartel Reiman In fact I come to the opposite conclusion to you - for a potentially very powerful ship, I am impressed that the prerequisites are relatively low, certainly lower than I think most people expected. Obviously by definition this is good for the younger players as they can amass the SP required to fly one, should they decide to fly one, in a shorter time. I also like how they have balanced this by increasing the volatility of SP placed into T3 training - changing the issue from simply waiting for the prereqs to train, to judging for yourself when you feel comfortable with taking the plunge and training for T3. Actually, CCP have continually said that T3 ships are not aimed to replace T2 ships, in other words, they are unlikely to be more powerful than T2. I do not believe these ships will be 'very powerful', that is not consistent with CCP's message to date. And refer to above - the pre-requisites are not low, they require five rank 5 skills, including base race cruiser V, for each race. All T2 ships are race neutral, T3 ships are race specific again, with 6 skills each (totalling of rank 10). Quite honestly this smells of CCP realising that as EVE ages, and as the gap increases between new players and the oldest players with tens of millions of SP, they feel they need to test a new concept of skill regression. I think after cruisers will come battleships, modules, all with the same mechanic. And I believe the mechanic is the start of CCP wanting to start placing caps on those players that have nothing left to train. And I think that it's a very dangerous mechanic because they are changing a very successful part of what makes EVE EVE.

Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 19:22:00 - [651] Originally by: Azuse If i wanted to risk my sp in pvp i'd get into my ishtar and not update my clone. Oh look, now i'm risking my ship and sp, makes pvp more fun doesn't it . Somehow i doubt ccp set out planning on spending thousands of man hours just to create a system that directly counteracts one they put in place at the beginning. Train a skill that i won't loose or train one i can have the pleasure of training again and again and again.. Tough choice. To those that to those that are happy with this; at what point does minor become major? After you've lost a weeks training? Two weeks? A month? In pvp you loose ships, in wars frequently, so how many weeks of sp do you have to loose before you stop flying t3 and go back too t2? what happens to the value of those extra 2499 systems when people finally realise they can't continually loose sp like they can isk? Is there any real point in using them at that point? Also, if sp matter so little why do you never undock without an updated clone? Why do we spend hundreds of millions (or billions) on implats each year just to gain those extra few weeks training time? What happens when you realise after loosing ship no. 2/5/9/22 that all that time gain, all that isk spent, was a waste because you have to keep training skills again and again? If you want to waste afew weeks training do hac v, or recon v, or any other lvl v...
SecHaul	Posted - 2009.02.10 19:23:00 - [652] Originally by: Gartel Reiman This is how I'm seeing things in light of this at the moment. SP loss on death undoubtedly increases the "costs" of the ships beyond simply their market value; consequently, more interesting/powerful performance will be justified than we would otherwise have access to. I am definitely happy to make that tradeoff. The loss of SP doesn't have a fixed value, until CCP introduces $ or ISK for SP. In other words, for different people it is worth different amounts. To you it sounds like the loss of SP isn't a big deal, however to others it's inconceivable. I believe that the majority of people in EVE are too risk adverse to make the flying of T3 common. To that respect, I believe CCP have developed an absolute chunk of content for little reason, all because of one single mechanic.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 19:37:00 - [653] Originally by: SecHaul What is currently on SISI with regards to required skills may not be the final requirements once it hits TQ. In other words, you have no idea what the skill requirements are, therefore they are not surprisingly low at the moment. Secondly, a T3 cruiser is currently a rank 10 ship (rank 5 base, with 5x rank 1 sub-components). In other words, to fly the ship at level 5 will be equivalent to training a rank 10 ship. Currently, that means it's more skill intensive than command ships and is equivalent to T2 battleships. Hardly 'low', and in addition, you lose sub-component ranks when you die, meaning it's higher than a rank 10 ship if you want to fly it well. I will give you that the skills may change ranks when they hit TQ. But that aside, I think your calculations are not stating things clearly. Yes, you need to max the racial cruiser skill to fly the ship, though in this context (talking about skill loss particularly) it's appropriate to overlook that, since it's not the equivalent of a "Strategic Cruisers" skill, and besides you'll never lose it. And while you need to train an equivalent of a rank 5 skill to max out the subsystems - you only ever lose a level from one skill on ship destruction, meaning that when considering retraining lost skills, it's a rank 1 skill you're retraining. Quote: As for prudence, MMOs, including EVE, are largely successful because people strive to improve their character. People min/max, people enjoy squeezing the most they can out of the system, be it skills or ISK or mining profits. I don't consider the loss of a ship "costing" SP any different from a ship loss costing ISK, when it comes to negative progress. Besides, as I've stated above and I hope is generally held among EVE players, I don't think that having loss associated with ships is a bad thing. In this particular case, I don't think that having a (limited) skillpoint loss when you lose these specialised ships to be a bad thing. One of the important things is that you can train any other skills and fly any other ships safe in the knowledge that all your SPs are safe as long as your clone is upgraded. Just as (being a little facetious) you can fly velators with civvie blasters (or more reasonably, T1 ships with T fittings) safe in the knowledge that all your ISK is safe. Because it's not being forced on everyone, and it's a conscious choice for a select subset of ships (that additionally never interferes with your ability to fly other ships), I have absolutely no problem with the skill loss mechanic. Quote: Actually, CCP have continually said that T3 ships are not aimed to replace T2 ships, in other words, they are unlikely to be more powerful than T2. I do not believe these ships will be 'very powerful', that is not consistent with CCP's message to date. And refer to above - the pre-requisites are not low, they require five rank 5 skills, including base race cruiser V, for each race. All T2 ships are race neutral, T3 ships are race specific again, with 6 skills each (totalling of rank 10). If you ignore cross-training though for the moment, you're looking at five rank 1 skills to get all the performance of the T3 cruisers. This is less in total than any of Heavy Assault Ships, Recon ships, Heavy Interdictors and Logistics, all of which are rank 6. Additionally, while we do not know exactly what will be available, it's feasible that you will be able to make a cruiser fulfil similar roles to several of the above; still with the total of five ranks of skills. If you want to train multiple races' T3 cruisers then it does become a big deal that the T3 skills themselves are race-specific. Whether this is a deliberate decision by CCP, or just a necessary consequence of the implementation of modules, remains to be seen.
Jenny' JoJo Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.02.10 19:40:00 - [654] I fly Amarr and since Amarr suck, I might die a lot. In that case, t3 is not for me because any skills I train end up as a buffer for me to lose when my ship blows up. Thats the problem. This is not 1 ship. This is more like 100 ships over a period of a couple of months. Sorry but thats full time training for lost SP here. As for the super carebear Minmatard players, they have no problems because they wont lose a ship often. So its a non issue the training time. Please dont screw the pvp players CCP. Refresh to see next real life CCP Sig(25 total)
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 19:45:00 - [655] Originally by: SecHaul Edited by: SecHaul on 10/02/2009 19:35:59 Originally by: Gartel Reiman This is how I'm seeing things in light of this at the moment. SP loss on death undoubtedly increases the "costs" of the ships beyond simply their market value; consequently, more interesting/powerful performance will be justified than we would otherwise have access to. I am definitely happy to make that tradeoff. The loss of SP doesn't have a fixed value, until CCP introduces $ or ISK for SP. In other words, for different people it is worth different amounts. Yes, in terms of ISK. However, the loss of a given number of skillpoints has a relatively similar cost in terms of time to essentially everyone, and that's what's the big deal about it. Or in other words, people value their training time differently when measured in ISK - but then that's mainly because they value ISK vastly differently. For a new player, 200k ISK is a massive amount of money; for me personally, it's usually not worth flying across a couple of systems to buy from a better offer to save that. I'm sure that there are many people who would feel the same about 5m ISK. So while I agree with you that there's no straight SP/ISK comparison, I believe this is down to varying perceptions of the value of 1 ISK much more than it is to the value of 1 SP. While I'm not accusing you of this personally, I do wonder whether some of the negative reactions are from people with vast sums of ISK who expect that they will be able to fly all the shiniest ships without really worrying about it; and consequently the concept of losing more than just ISK when a ship goes pop comes as a great shock.
SecHaul	Posted - 2009.02.10 19:53:00 - [656] Originally by: Gartel Reiman But that aside, I think your calculations are not stating things clearly. I am not misstating anything. To fly a "Strategic Cruiser" perfectly, you have to train (on SISI) 6 skills, which sum to a rank 10 ship. That makes training a "Strategic Cruiser" to level 5 more SP intensive than a Command Ship. In addition, once I have trained "Command Ship V", I can fly all Command Ships perfectly provided I have the racial cruiser. With T3, each ship is unique. In addition, each time I die I currently lose a rank in a sub-component skill (currently rank 1). Let's assume you die 10 times, that's 10 rank 1 skills you have to re-learn, what about 100 deaths?. If a "Strategic Cruiser" with perfect skills is not more effective than a command ship (and you expect prices to be similar), why would I ever fly T3? I can get more for my skillpoints flying a command ship. Originally by: Gartel Reiman I don't consider the loss of a ship "costing" SP any different from a ship loss costing ISK, when it comes to negative progress. I consider SP to be worth significantly more than ISK. ISK is easy to generate, you can buy it. A thread in the 'market' forum puts 315 ISK / SP per recent sales in the character bazaar, that means losing level 5 in a rank 1 skill at 66 million ISK each time you die. Since I cannot buy SP for my character, I place a higher value on SP, but there is at least a number per an active market. Originally by: Gartel Reiman Because it's not being forced on everyone, and it's a conscious choice for a select subset of ships (that additionally never interferes with your ability to fly other ships), I have absolutely no problem with the skill loss mechanic. I agree. All I am saying is that SP is worth a lot to many people. I believe that most PvP'ers who PvP a lot will see the risk as outweighing the benefit. In other words, I believe very few people will fly T3. I'm not saying no one will, I'm saying very few will making the cost of developing the content a waste compared to those that will use it. Originally by: Gartel Reiman If you ignore cross-training though for the moment, you're looking at five rank 1 skills to get all the performance of the T3 cruisers. This is less in total than any of Heavy Assault Ships, Recon ships, Heavy Interdictors and Logistics, all of which are rank 6. Additionally, while we do not know exactly what will be available, it's feasible that you will be able to make a cruiser fulfil similar roles to several of the above; still with the total of five ranks of skills. If you want to train multiple races' T3 cruisers then it does become a big deal that the T3 skills themselves are race-specific. Whether this is a deliberate decision by CCP, or just a necessary consequence of the implementation of modules, remains to be seen. Um. There are 5 rank 1 skills to train sub-components, and 1 rank 5 skill to fly the cruiser itself. That sums to a rank 10 skill, which is more than rank 6 of all other T2 cruisers. In addition, you can regress the sub-component SPs, where as with the other ships, you cannot. In other words, it's a total of FIVE rank 1 skills (5 sub-components) plus ONE rank 5 skill (Strategic Cruiser itself) PER RACE. You are excluding the "Strategic Cruiser" skill from your numbers above. In addition, the pre-requisites for each sub-component is a level 5 skill skill itself, usually a rank 2 / 3 skill. In other words, flying a perfect Strategic Cruiser costs more SP than training Command Ships (rank 8), and is equivalent to T2 battleships. And I doubt that Strategic Cruisers are planned to outperform these ships.
SecHaul	Posted - 2009.02.10 19:57:00 - [657] Originally by: Gartel Reiman Or in other words, people value their training time differently when measured in ISK - but then that's mainly because they value ISK vastly differently. For a new player, 200k ISK is a massive amount of money; for me personally, it's usually not worth flying across a couple of systems to buy from a better offer to save that. I'm sure that there are many people who would feel the same about 5m ISK. So while I agree with you that there's no straight SP/ISK comparison, I believe this is down to varying perceptions of the value of 1 ISK much more than it is to the value of 1 SP. While I'm not accusing you of this personally, I do wonder whether some of the negative reactions are from people with vast sums of ISK who expect that they will be able to fly all the shiniest ships without really worrying about it; and consequently the concept of losing more than just ISK when a ship goes pop comes as a great shock. You are looking at this incorrectly, because you are comparing the wallet size of new and older players. We are not talking about ISK, we are talking about SP's. In other words, SPs to newer players are much more valuable than they are to older players. As a result, newer players will seldom select content that will result in them losing SPs. In other words, you have generated a massive chunk of content purely for veteran players. I think that is a very bad business decision for a company that is seeking to expand it's player base. It's also why I see it as a mechanic that CCP is going to force into EVE to try stop the ever widening gap between veterans and new players. And I believe it's the first mechanic of many, which is a large reason why I dislike the mechanic.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 20:27:00 - [658] Originally by: SecHaul Originally by: Gartel Reiman But that aside, I think your calculations are not stating things clearly. I am not misstating anything. To fly a "Strategic Cruiser" perfectly, you have to train (on SISI) 6 skills, which sum to a rank 10 ship. That makes training a "Strategic Cruiser" to level 5 more SP intensive than a Command Ship. No it doesn't. Command ships require the rank 5 racial cruiser skill as well (just like any T2 cruiser or battlecruiser), which is why I've generally been excluding it from the discussion. To get full bonuses from a T3 cruiser, you have to train 10 ranks of skills to 5 (as you stated). To get full ship bonuses from (any) T2 cruiser, you need to train 11 ranks of skills. A command ship is 19 ranks (5 for Cruiser, 6 for Battlecruiser, 8 for Command Ships), ignoring the HAC/Logistics prereqs. Quote: In addition, once I have trained "Command Ship V", I can fly all Command Ships perfectly provided I have the racial cruiser. With T3, each ship is unique. I will give you that one - it does makes cross training harder. Again, I don't know if this is intended or not. Quote: Let's assume you die 10 times, that's 10 rank 1 skills you have to re-learn, what about 100 deaths?. Yeah, but comparing it to command ships, lets say you lose 100 command ships. How much ISK do you have to re-earn? Obviously the more you die the more it will cost you to recoup the loss, be that in ISK alone or ISK and SP. The fact that one can lose multiple ships doesn't really factor into whether SP loss on T3 ship destruction is a good mechanic or not. Besides, whether you lose 100 ships or 10,000 ships you can never drop below subsystems skill 0. That's a big deal to me, as I've noted in several threads. Asides from the opportunity cost, you will never lose any non-T3-specific skills. I consider SP to be worth significantly more than ISK. ISK is easy to generate, you can buy it. Bingo. That's exactly the point. For many people, ISK losses are easy/trivial. An SP loss is a more tangible loss for everyone, that is not offset by having large amounts of money, nor by having a large total SP pool. Quote: Originally by: Gartel Reiman Because it's not being forced on everyone, and it's a conscious choice for a select subset of ships (that additionally never interferes with your ability to fly other ships), I have absolutely no problem with the skill loss mechanic. I agree. All I am saying is that SP is worth a lot to many people. I believe that most PvP'ers who PvP a lot will see the risk as outweighing the benefit. In other words, I believe very few people will fly T3. I'm not saying no one will, I'm saying very few will making the cost of developing the content a waste compared to those that will use it. I guess we'll see. I certainly don't see it being the mainstay of a fleet, or the general-use PvP vessel; I've always expected it to be a very specialist ship. Perhaps you're right and it will become too specialist, or only used for very low-risk situations (T3 Falcon, as opposed to T3 Deimos ). Quote: Originally by: Gartel Reiman If you ignore cross-training though for the moment, you're looking at five rank 1 skills to get all the performance of the T3 cruisers. This is less in total than any of Heavy Assault Ships, Recon ships, Heavy Interdictors and Logistics, all of which are rank 6. Additionally, while we do not know exactly what will be available, it's feasible that you will be able to make a cruiser fulfil similar roles to several of the above; still with the total of five ranks of skills. Um. it's a total of FIVE rank 1 skills (5 sub-components) plus ONE rank 5 skill (Strategic Cruiser itself) PER RACE. Hmm, my bad, I thought it was just (T1) Cruiser 5 and then the five subsystem skills to fly the ship. I don't recall seeing a Strategic Cruiser skill itself in the screenshots, though that would make more sense.
Eldern Minderhost	Posted - 2009.02.10 20:43:00 - [659] If this goes through I will be greatly vexed with CCP. Not only will they have made T3 ships incredibly hard to acquire on an ISK/production basis but then will have removed any incentive to fly it into anything but the most care-bearish endeavors. Yeah, call me a wimp, I don't care. I work hard enough to get ahead ISK wise as a PvPer without needing to worry about losing SP due to some moronic and uninsurable mechanic. It is beyond stupid to cripple what you seemed to focus this expansion around with such an epic pre-nerf. Older characters won't use these because then they will start to flag behind skill-wise and newer players will never use them because they lack an incentive to suicidally lose their investment of time and SP. Again, if this goes through I will have lost a significant portion of my respect for CCP as a company that cares for it's existing players.
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.02.10 21:06:00 - [660] Edited by: Kahega Amielden on 10/02/2009 21:06:47 For one, we can stop with the OMG IT'S FOR CAREBEARS bull**. Since when were CRUISERS epic carebear ships? Secondly, why do SP mean so much to you people? So you'll "Lag behind" very slightly. Whoopdeedoo? This character is technically 4 years old but, because it's just an incredibly old trial account ,it only has 16m SP. And guess what: I only use +3 implants. Higher SP is good, but it's far from everything. CCP is having you make a choice. Would you rather, a) A **ton of customization and versatility on your ships, or b) The old, static, more predictable ships that allow you to increase in SP slightly faster. The benefits you get from B aren't static. The benefits to choosing B are simply the skills you wouldn't have trained if you went with A. So it's basically a choice of whether or not you'd rather the benefits of training a few more skills, or the benefits of having an infinitely customizable ship. I for one will be greatly interested in t3 ships

Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 21:34:00 - [661] Originally by: SecHaul Originally by: Gartel Reiman Or in other words, people value their training time differently when measured in ISK - but then that's mainly because they value ISK vastly differently... You are looking at this incorrectly, because you are comparing the wallet size of new and older players. We are not talking about ISK, we are talking about SP's. I'm not necessarily looking at it wrong - whenever you talk about how much someone values something, or how much it's worth to them, it's usually quantified in units of currency. So I'm saying that even if two people value the actual skillpoints the same amount in the abstract, one might consider them to be worth more ISK than the other, simply because he has a different concept of the value of ISK. In other words, lets say that you could buy SP for ISK and it came in the form of a blind auction. Two players value consider skillpoints to be of equal importance - i.e. they value them the same - but one has 100m ISK and another has 10bn ISK. My point is that these players will place vastly different maximum bids, despite the fact they value the SP equally, simply because one is absolutely rolling in ISK and considers one ISK to be worth less. This might seem like a minor diversion, but I consider it relevent since what we're fundamentally talking about here is moving some of the "loss cost" of a ship from ISK to SP. Quote: In other words, SPs to newer players are much more valuable than they are to older players. I don't know if that's necessarily true, not to the same order of magnitude that ISK is. If you ask a new player whether he would rather lose a day's training or 50m ISK, I'm pretty sure he would choose the day's training (though I'm not sure exactly how him losing money he doesn't have would be implemented...). If you ask an old player the same question, there's no doubt about it, he'll choose the 50m. So while I agree that skillpoints are more valuable when you're young (since you can get so much more for them - no more 500 SP for 5% damage bonus for us vets ), they scale a lot more slowly than ISK does. It also doesn't strike me as outside the realms of possibility that a newer player isn't as attached to his SP as we are, partly because he hasn't got accustomed to having it for as long, and partly because he didn't work as hard to get a level of the skill (training 40 days for battleship 5 and then losing it is heartbreaking, training 4 hours for Offensive Subsystems 2 and then losing it is less so). Besides, at the end of the day that doesn't even matter that much, since the only skillpoints we can possibly lose are in the subsystems skills, and we all have zero SP in those to start with. Quote: It's also why I see it as a mechanic that CCP is going to force into EVE to try stop the ever widening gap between veterans and new players. And I believe it's the first mechanic of many, which is a large reason why I dislike the mechanic. I certainly wouldn't call this the first of many. EVE is entirely riddled with things that give decreasing returns; the skill system itself, right from day one; the very fact that training costs rise exponentially (five times more per level) and that they're capped, are deliberately there to allow new players to catch most of the way up to old players quickly while letting the latter retain some advantage for their trained time. The same can be said of ISK sinks such as faction/officer modules, they let the rich spend a lot more than the average person for a small advantage. Even if you're right - slippery slope arguments don't stand up to scrutiny. If this particular invocation is valid, let it be. If CCP try to use it as justification to introduce an invalid mechanic later, then let's reject that invalid mechanic at that time. Right now, we should judge this solely on its merits, not on what it may or may not be a precursor to.
Jenny' JoJo Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.02.10 21:49:00 - [662] So if I pirate someone and randsom their t3 ship after I blast it to hull, and then jump into their t3 ship, is it ME or the person I pirated that looses SP if someone takes advantage and shoots the almost dead ship? Because this is kinda silly that I lose SP for the pleasure of pirating somebody and stealing his ship if it dies 5 seconds later from someone wanting revenge.
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 21:53:00 - [663] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 10/02/2009 21:53:59 Originally by: Kahega Amielden CCP is having you make a choice. Would you rather, a) A **ton of customization and versatility on your ships, or b) The old, static, more predictable ships that allow you to increase in SP slightly faster. The benefits you get from B aren't static. The benefits to choosing B are simply the skills you wouldn't have trained if you went with A. Always B till i max everything (that includes drone specs 5 etc). And going B way will also benefit A ship types (engineering, tanking, weapon, drone skill etc). Wheras going A wont help you with anything except A (t3 skills only for t3 ships). Only exception in B is "specific ship skill" like HAC, Recon etc. Quote:** So if I pirate someone and randsom their t3 ship after I blast it to hull, and then jump into their t3 ship, is it ME or the person I pirated that looses SP if someone takes advantage and shoots the almost dead ship? You. ATM skill point loss is connected with your t3 ship (you sit in) being blown up.
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.02.10 22:17:00 - [664] Quote: Always B till i max everything (that includes drone specs 5 etc). And going B way will also benefit A ship types (engineering, tanking, weapon, drone skill etc). Wheras going A wont help you with anything except A (t3 skills only for t3 ships). Only exception in B is "specific ship skill" like HAC, Recon etc. So then clearly training specific ship skills is totally useless then, right? No one trains <racial> frig/cruiser/BS above I unless they need it as a prereq unless they have every single cap skill, fitting skill, and gunnery/support skill at V, right?
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 22:33:00 - [665] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 10/02/2009 22:34:20 Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: Always B till i max everything (that includes drone specs 5 etc). And going B way will also benefit A ship types (engineering, tanking, weapon, drone skill etc). Wheras going A wont help you with anything except A (t3 skills only for t3 ships). Only exception in B is "specific ship skill" like HAC, Recon etc. So then clearly training specific ship skills is totally useless then, right? No one trains <racial> frig/cruiser/BS above I unless they need it as a prereq unless they have every single cap skill, fitting skill, and gunnery/support skill at V, right? Can you read? I bolded out part which you probably missed (no idea how, my post was pretty short).
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.10 22:58:00 - [666] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 10/02/2009 22:34:20 Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: Always B till i max everything (that includes drone specs 5 etc). And going B way will also benefit A ship types (engineering, tanking, weapon, drone skill etc). Wheras going A wont help you with anything except A (t3 skills only for t3 ships). Only exception in B is "specific ship skill" like HAC, Recon etc. So then clearly training specific ship skills is totally useless then, right? No one trains <racial> frig/cruiser/BS above I unless they need it as a prereq unless they have every single cap skill, fitting skill, and gunnery/support skill at V, right? Can you read? I bolded out part which you probably missed (no idea how, my post was pretty short). I disagree, I only max out tech 2 ship skills as they re more expensive to fly. Battlecruisers 4 is just fine for me. as is medium guns 4 an shield skills to 4 and so on and so on.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.10 23:08:00 - [667] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 10/02/2009 22:34:20 Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: Always B till i max everything (that includes drone specs 5 etc). And going B way will also benefit A ship types (engineering, tanking, weapon, drone skill etc). Wheras going A wont help you with anything except A (t3 skills only for t3 ships). Only exception in B is "specific ship skill" like HAC, Recon etc. So then clearly training specific ship skills is totally useless then, right? No one trains <racial> frig/cruiser/BS above I unless they need it as a prereq unless they have every single cap skill, fitting skill, and gunnery/support skill at V, right? Can you read? I bolded out part which you probably missed (no idea how, my post was pretty short). I think Kahega's point was that your justification for group B (that you max out the generic skills) doesn't apply to the specific ship skills, of which there are quite a few. Besides, there's a sliding scale of usefulness. The really core skills, like fittings skills, speed/agility skills really will apply to all ships. Shield/Armour/Hull skills will apply to all combat ships (though to varying degrees, extra shields on an armour tank have a negligible effect). Turret/Missile/Drones support skills only affect combat ships using that weapons system. Racial turret skills only affect ships using that type of turrets. Turret specialisation skills only affect ships using those specific turrets. And of course the ship skills only affect one class of ship. I think Kahega's got the idea I was trying to put across, that you dismiss T3 skills for only helping with T3 ships, while HAC skills only help with HACs, and Large Energy Turret Specialisation skill only helps with Amarr battleships, etc. And the T3 skills appear to give more bang for your buck with the lower rank, at the price of losing a level with the ship.
Deva Blackfire coracao ardente	Posted - 2009.02.10 23:15:00 - [668] See thats lack of creative thinking. Why AC spec should only help minnie ships? There are plenty of setups using ACs on amarr and gallente ships. Same way i already used blasters on amarr ships. Also planning to use lazors on minnie ships (tho need to EFT-warrior it a bit before i fly them on TQ). Question is: what will t3 ships skills be needed for? Ship bonuses? Bigger/better components? And here we go back to start. If they give skills you might suddenly go from "tad better than t2 ship" to "tad worse than t2 ship" when you lose 2-3 ships. If they give ability to fit bigger components then as soon as you lose skill you need to wait hours/days to get back into fight with same ship.
THE R3APER No Slack	Posted - 2009.02.10 23:46:00 - [669] I didn't read all 23 pages of this post but I'll throw out my thoughts. I think this is a good idea if implemented with a separate training plan than your main one. This would create a delay before you could fly another T3 ship and make them more rare. If you had to retrain a skill to fly your carrier after you lost it and the skill took say a week to train then they would be much less common. I agree with the idea and hope it is implemented like this. What it does is keep the insanely rich from pulling out T3 ship after T3 ship but not causing loss of actual training time on your main skill tree.
Boby Cola	Posted - 2009.02.11 00:02:00 - [670] Edited by: Boby Cola on 11/02/2009 00:03:23 Edited by: Boby Cola on 11/02/2009 00:03:09 For those of you who do not know. T3 ships have a special set of skills know as subsystems. these subsystems are used to boost performance of the t3 ship. these subsystem skill and ONLY THESE SUBSYSTEM skills can be lost when your t3 ship gets destroyed. Seeing that they are only rank 1 skills meaning that lvl 5 only takes 5 days. you only will lose 1 lvl from these skills. at most losing 5 days to a few hours.

Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.02.11 01:08:00 - [671] Quote: Can you read? I bolded out part which you probably missed (no idea how, my post was pretty short). Can you? I don't give a **** if you listed it as an exception. If they're an exception, then t3 skills can be an exception too.
Antimony Noske	Posted - 2009.02.11 14:32:00 - [672] This gets even worse. If CCP goes through with this skillpoint loss idea, it's sticking around for good. Even if the whole thing is a terrible failure of a system, by the time it's proven to be bad, people will have already lost weeks worth of training and skillpoints. If the 'feature' is removed, all those people are up **** creek without a paddle. Leaving CCP with the option of screwing them over and losing subscriptions, or leaving the terrible system in place. And if it's successful, then we get to look forward to the joy of having MORE skill loss in the future for other things. This leaves such a bad taste in my mouth I can't even describe it.
Flinchey Amarr	Posted - 2009.02.11 14:59:00 - [673] Originally by: MotherMoon I disagree, I only max out tech 2 ship skills as they re more expensive to fly. enjoy your lack of flying ships to the best of their abilities. not to mention you need T1 ship skills to V to use the T2 counterpart?? Originally by: MotherMoon Battlecruisers 4 is just fine for me. enjoy not being able to use a command ship.. Originally by: MotherMoon as is medium guns 4 and not being able to use T2 medium guns. or T2 Large guns eventually if desired. (in effect, enjoy your shty DPS, tracking speed, and range.) Originally by:** MotherMoon an shield skills to 4 oh and your terrible tank. and lack of using t2 modules too probably Originally by: MotherMoon and so on and so on. and so on and so forth.
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.02.11 15:04:00 - [674] Originally by: Jenny' JoJo So if I pirate someone and randsom their t3 ship after I blast it to hull, and then jump into their t3 ship, is it ME or the person I pirated that looses SP if someone takes advantage and shoots the almost dead ship? Because this is kinda silly that I lose SP for the pleasure of pirating somebody and stealing his ship if it dies 5 seconds later from someone wanting revenge. Of course it will be you losing SP, as you will be the pilot at the moment of ship destruction. Did you really for a slight second think otherwise? ---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.11 15:23:00 - [675] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Karii Ildarian CCP is just prepping all you guys for the next bold step: 10% Skill loss for being podded This will truly make EVE a harsh universe and I eagerly await the implementation. I'd support something like that I'd suicide your pod in high sec just for laughs if this were the case. Losing five million SP off of a 50m SP character? Ouch? Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Flinchey Amarr	Posted - 2009.02.11 15:38:00 - [676] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Karii Ildarian CCP is just prepping all you guys for the next bold step: 10% Skill loss for being podded This will truly make EVE a harsh universe and I eagerly await the implementation. I'd support something like that I'd suicide your pod in high sec just for laughs if this were the case. Losing five million SP off of a 50m SP character? Ouch? imagine the ransomming you could do i''d imagine everyone would go around to all the old players and pod them incessantly, hoping to take tens of millions of sp's off them hahaha.
Javius Rong Caldari Sigillum Militum Xpisti	Posted - 2009.02.11 16:18:00 - [677] I have given the loss of SP some more thought, here are my objections.... Eve is a very harsh game. You really are not safe any where in the game and losses that you incur for PvPing monetary and time wise are already very high. This creates a large barrier for players to enter PvP world. This was some what taken care off by offering the Faction Warfare mechanism, by which many new player could taste and experience PvP. Still only probably 30% or less of the player bases take part in PvP activities. The main reason being that the loss of ship is a loss of isk and all your equipment. This loss make most players second guess if they want to PvP AT ALL as this a very different mechanism than any other MMORPG and make Eve a very unique environment. The inclusion of a second penalty for PvPing (of which only 30% of your player base does), create another barrier for people to PvP. Does Eve really need another barrier other than monetary? Remember that in Eve skill points define your character and has been a scared thing to ALWAYS keep your clone upgrade. The loss of skill point is consider a terrible thing, much, much worse than a loss of isk which while time consuming can be made up. The loss of skill points sets your character back. So you are now introducing a mechanism that will hurt the 30% of the population that needs to grow in size? Where will this lead? Loss of skill points when you get podded even with a clone? To me this a slipper slow down which Eve could travel and never come back from. This is merely from the mechanism stand point. Now from the game play stand point can CCP grantee that there is no Lag or desycn? I want to know how many PvPers have lost ships do to this? I bet everyone who is at all active has lost ships due to this. Now you are going to tell me that I am going to loss my skill points due to this same issue? I will grantee you that I will be petitioning and tell everyone else to petition every single T3 ships loss that occurred with even a hit of lag or desync. Can your game support department handle the number of claims that will be flooding them? Think very carefully, because your game support department right now does not have the best reputation for timeliness nor quality resolution of issues with its player base. In all I think this is a very bad approach for the game and should be reconsidered as a mechanism to make PvP and ship loss hurt.... SMX Corporation
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.11 17:16:00 - [678] Originally by: Javius Rong Still only probably 30% or less of the player bases take part in PvP activities. The main reason being that the loss of ship is a loss of isk and all your equipment. This loss make most players second guess if they want to PvP AT ALL as this a very different mechanism than any other MMORPG and make Eve a very unique environment. The inclusion of a second penalty for PvPing (of which only 30% of your player base does), create another barrier for people to PvP. Not necessarily, it's in fact the same barrier - losing a ship costs you. It does mean that the loss now comes in several flavours, but it doesn't necessarily mean the loss is higher. What would count as more loss to you, 500m ISK or 100M isk and 50,000 SP? One of the points I've been trying to establish is that relatively speaking, older players will value SP more than they value ISK, and an SP penalty is more egalitarian in that it affect all pilots a lot more consistently than an ISK penalty. Consequently, a scheme like this would allow the loss cost to be relatively lower for a younger, PvP-inexperienced player (and relatively higher for an older player) than the straight ISK cost we have at present. Quote: Does Eve really need another barrier other than monetary? Alternatives are always good, where appropriate. And I think if we're answering that question in the abstract - then dear God yes, EVE needs another balancing factor beyond ISK. In fact this is an argument that came up again and again from CCP during the nano-nerf discussion, and I agree with the general principle. The skill system ensures that while older players have an advantage, it's not a massive advantage due to massively diminishing returns on training higher levels of a skill, and through skills being capped. ISK on the other hand is both completely linear in its functionality, and completely uncapped, so there exists the potential for massive disparity. Quote: Remember that in Eve skill points define your character and has been a scared thing to ALWAYS keep your clone upgrade. The loss of skill point is consider a terrible thing, much, much worse than a loss of isk which while time consuming can be made up. Part of this is based on expectations, too. People expect that once they've done the grind of training Battleship 5, they don't have to do it again. That's the main reason why it's such a tragedy, and such a sense of loss, when you get podded with a basic clone and need to retrain. With the T3 skills people will know from the start that they are "volatile", and that's a critical difference in how they approach the concept of needing to retrain them. Quote: Now from the game play stand point can CCP grantee that there is no Lag or desycn? I want to know how many PvPers have lost ships do to this? I bet everyone who is at all active has lost ships due to this. Now you are going to tell me that I am going to loss my skill points due to this same issue? I will grantee you that I will be petitioning and tell everyone else to petition every single T3 ships loss that occurred with even a hit of lag or desync. I don't quite get your argument here. Clearly if people have lost a ship (any ship) and feel there is a chance of getting it reimbursed due to lag/desync/whatever, they are likely to petition. In fact, the only reason they wouldn't petition in those circumstances would be if the loss was considered insubstantial and not worth their time even raising a petition about (e.g. losing a cheaply fitted T1 frigate and no pod). Are you really suggesting that losing a T3 ship should be trivial? Regardless of the loss mechanism, be it SP or ISK or any other metric whatsoever, losing a T3 ship will hurt and if there's a hint of software problems people will petition. (And if there was an issue, all SP/ISK should be refunded of course). Your argument is moot in debating whether SP loss is good or not.
Fiben Bolger	Posted - 2009.02.11 20:02:00 - [679] The tech III ship skill losses are a natural consequence of the relationship that the pilot has with the ship. It's science fiction. It's great science fiction. Don't you guys love great science fiction? The only conclusion I can draw is that some people think that their skill points in EVE make them cool. They don't. Let them go. If you feel down on yourself stare into your thumbnail like it's a mirror and pretend. It's about great science fiction in a great science fiction game. Don't ruin it to save a fragile ego.
Fire Ants The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple	Posted - 2009.02.11 20:16:00 - [680] Originally by: Fiben Bolger The tech III ship skill losses are a natural consequence of the relationship that the pilot has with the ship. It's science fiction. It's great science fiction. Don't you guys love great science fiction? The only conclusion I can draw is that some people think that their skill points in EVE make them cool. They don't. Let them go. If you feel down on yourself stare into your thumbnail like it's a mirror and pretend. It's about great science fiction in a great science fiction game. Don't ruin it to save a fragile ego. Pretty interesting spin, actually. Also, 23 pages? Don't some of you people have families? ----- Internet Spaceships perfectly strikes your Sense of Humor, wrecking for Serious Business. -----

Eldern Minderhost	Posted - 2009.02.11 20:23:00 - [681] Originally by: Fire Ants Also, 23 pages? Don't some of you people have families? Nah, I'm sick and barely able to move... not much better to do than whine about this.
Adapted Eye	Posted - 2009.02.11 20:58:00 - [682] I got my tech 3 ship killed on sisi and lost 250 sp on one of the subsystem skills, which were all at lvl 1. No biggie so far lost 7 minutes of training.
Gaulian Fidelis	Posted - 2009.02.11 21:52:00 - [683] I'm pretty much saying what's been said like 50 times on this thread already. If I lose SP when I lose one of these ships, I'm not using them. I'm not getting stuck into an infinite loop with training the skills and then losing them one day, especially lvl 5. There are TONS of other skills to train that I want to train, so unless you let us train more than 1 skill at a time, this is BS and worthless.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.11 22:04:00 - [684] Originally by: Adapted Eye I got my tech 3 ship killed on sisi and lost 250 sp on one of the subsystem skills, which were all at lvl 1. No biggie so far lost 7 minutes of training. With this in mind, I don't think the usage of T3 in pvp will be determined by the SP loss system at all. Far more relevant is how much these ships will cost. T3 manufacture is an extended process which will be determined by the rarity of W-Space, the resources within it and the comparative difficulty of extracting those resources. From what Ive read so far, the Sleeper's are extremely hard to defeat, W-Space perhaps not that common, the constant threat of attack whilst attempting to find said Sleepers and the issue of Low Sec construction. I dont think its unlikely that subsystems will be sold for 100mil or more. That makes each strategic cruiser likely to be on the market for the 500mil - 1bil range. That's an awful lot of ISK for a cruiser hull, no matter how sparkly its abilities... C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Tommy Blue	Posted - 2009.02.11 22:08:00 - [685] Originally by: Gaulian Fidelis I'm pretty much saying what's been said like 50 times on this thread already. If I lose SP when I lose one of these ships, I'm not using them. I'm not getting stuck into an infinite loop with training the skills and then losing them one day, especially lvl 5. There are TONS of other skills to train that I want to train, so unless you let us train more than 1 skill at a time, this is BS and worthless. Then you don't have to use them. Other people might see an advantage in using them (being superior) and they'll kill you with them. Its your choice to lose out :)
RedeyeAce Caldari Inspired Evolution	Posted - 2009.02.11 23:16:00 - [686] Edited by: RedeyeAce on 11/02/2009 23:24:08 Having sadly read most of this, I have come to some conclusions 1. We wanted more tech and better ships but some kind of more risk... we got this t3 mechanic. 2. CCP didnt make the skills rank 3 they made them rank 1 deliberately so the sp loss wouldnt hurt badly. 3. We have no idea what the final ships with subsystems are going to be like and is going to take probably a month maybe 2 before someone crunches all the variations and were left with probably 4-5 cookie cutter setups per ship. 4. there will be a few folks flying round in some obscure setups. 5. The first ones to be purchased may hang around in stations or on contracts after purchase as they didn't wait for the numbers to be crunched and theres better setups they should of bought. 6. They will be expensive 7a. The rich will get richer, The logistics have been setup so that you have to hold a low sec and or a 0.0 system. 7b. The rich will get richer, You will have to be in a decent setup gang to go and get the bits in the first place, if you are setup for this then you can already make decent money 8. This is a major amount of time invested for potentially a very small userbase to pilot( going on how many folks have suggested interest vs how many folks say theyre not gonna bother). 51k pcu how may folks do you reckon will actually use these l8r on 5k tops? so maybe at best 10% of the userbase? 9. 90% of the userbase still want things fixed (perhaps time should of been spent in this area, but hey their committed to updating). 10. Industralists will be up for this at first but after time will wain to a smaller group of folks namely larger powerblocks ( perhaps this should be 7c). 11. Theres too many folk saying that there would be a problem if CCP introduced pay for skills.. Thats ALREADY possible its called buy GTC's sell GTC's buy character from forum. 12. After Sleeper AI is settled it will be distributed to all NPC's :) 13. The IMPORTANT one.. Whats poor old Entity ( I'd love to hear from the man himself )going to do with these ships and all their variations. Ive always followed his progress and have wanted to find something he didnt have for him to add. So I think the only thing that everyone is happy with is NPC AI Nice Huge Expansion eh
Great Citlalicue	Posted - 2009.02.12 03:24:00 - [687] What I donÆt understand is how risk vs reword (RvR) applies to already learned skills? By definition, we have always referred to RvR in reference to ISK as this is the basis for the EVE economy. For example: High sec mining should be less profitable then 0.0 mining. Rats should be worth more in 0.0 space and should drop better items. The opposite is true for having large amount of skills, your pod insurance costs are higher. T2 ship are better then T1 but cost ten times more and have no insurance. Now we have T3 òThe ships are not insured. òManufacturing material is harder and longer to get then for T1 and T2 and is riskier. òThe ships require more skills to manufacture and fly then T1 and T2 ships. This is inline with what we consider RvR. Ware does permanent skill lose come into this? The argument that something will take 5 days to train is totally false. What could be 5 days for you could be 10 days for another player and vise versa. Another flaw with this design is that only old players cannot afford to loose 5 days of skill will fly T3. Personally I can afford it, but not my friends who have been paying the game for 1 year . Yes we have 50K+ players but do we need to start creating contents for only those who have been playing for over 2 years?
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2009.02.12 04:45:00 - [688] Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Adapted Eye I got my tech 3 ship killed on sisi and lost 250 sp on one of the subsystem skills, which were all at lvl 1. No biggie so far lost 7 minutes of training. With this in mind, I don't think the usage of T3 in pvp will be determined by the SP loss system at all. Far more relevant is how much these ships will cost. T3 manufacture is an extended process which will be determined by the rarity of W-Space, the resources within it and the comparative difficulty of extracting those resources. From what Ive read so far, the Sleeper's are extremely hard to defeat, W-Space perhaps not that common, the constant threat of attack whilst attempting to find said Sleepers and the issue of Low Sec construction. I dont think its unlikely that subsystems will be sold for 100mil or more. That makes each strategic cruiser likely to be on the market for the 500mil - 1bil range. That's an awful lot of ISK for a cruiser hull, no matter how sparkly its abilities... C. exactly. so why the nerf to skill points? as i said in another post CCP is no longer capable of envisioning new niches in combat. they are just one upping themselves then placing some ridiculous level of prenerf upon the ship to limit it's use. t2 was supposed to not replace t1 by inherent cost alone. then they pass out bpos to everyone ... suprisingly the market and industries adapted making it cost effective, so they are afraid will happen to t3. so, while even the cost may balance out in a year or so you will ALWAYS have the threat of losing SP (keeping people from training any of those skills to 5 and making them fully effective once the isk deterrent is overcome) t3 will be black ops. i think it's completely unimaginative and indicative to where combat in this game is headed in general (no where fast)
ShadowGod56	Posted - 2009.02.12 05:47:00 - [689] Originally by: Gemmell Edited by: Gemmell on 07/02/2009 19:57:12 Edited by: Gemmell on 07/02/2009 19:57:02 Edited by: Gemmell on 07/02/2009 18:49:19 Lame :< Source: CCP Chronitis(sp?) on EVETV Clarification: Only skills relating to the modular ship you're flying. CCP Forum Reply; Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 3 ships and the subsystem skill loss mechanic will be detailed by Nozh in his blog which is due out soon. As with everything, things always change before release and when Apocrypha arrives on sisi next week, we can and will be making changes based on feedback there. If it turns out that this mechanic or any other is not working out based on that feedback then we will change it or remove it. just in case people forgot about what CCP will do if we freak the **** out which it looks like we already are....
eeeweeezeee Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.02.12 07:57:00 - [690] Ya, ok so i was on the test server today, and so far....... TECH 3 SHIPS SUCK. actually, all of singularity kinda sucks right now as APOCRYPHA has more bugs in it than the average ant farm. but anyway.... the Tengu, the caldari tech 3 cruiser, as far as I can tell its possible to get a variety of other tech 2 ships to do the same thing as it, and and for a lot of isk less. also, if it gets killed, you loose skill points related to using it regardless of your clone. this isn't risk/reward, this is undock and get owned. only way this would be remotely worth it is if these ships are dirt cheap, and something is done about this skill thing. these ships are nowhere near good enough to warrant this kind of penalty for ship loss. Eve has always prided itself on its PVP loss system in that you do not loose your skills, just your ship. the ship should be the limiting factor, not your skills like every other mmo in existence.

Surai Unn	Posted - 2009.02.12 08:03:00 - [691] Originally by: eeeweeezeee Ya, ok so i was on the test server today, and so far....... TECH 3 SHIPS SUCK. actually, all of singularity kinda sucks right now as APOCRYPHA has more bugs in it than the average ant farm. but anyway.... the Tengu, the caldari tech 3 cruiser, as far as I can tell its possible to get a variety of other tech 2 ships to do the same thing as it, and and for a lot of isk less. also, if it gets killed, you loose skill points related to using it regardless of your clone. this isn't risk/reward, this is undock and get owned. only way this would be remotely worth it is if these ships are dirt cheap, and something is done about this skill thing. these ships are nowhere near good enough to warrant this kind of penalty for ship loss. Eve has always prided itself on its PVP loss system in that you do not loose your skills, just your ship. the ship should be the limiting factor, not your skills like every other mmo in existence. You do know it's the test server right? It supposed to be buggy...
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.12 08:12:00 - [692] it's not skill loss, it's skill loss of one of 5 skills which are rank 1 it's not you lose random skills, you risk those skills, and you dont' have too. eve has always prided itself on choices. This is just another one of those.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.02.12 08:15:00 - [693] Originally by: Flinchey Originally by: MotherMoon I disagree, I only max out tech 2 ship skills as they re more expensive to fly. enjoy your lack of flying ships to the best of their abilities. not to mention you need T1 ship skills to V to use the T2 counterpart?? Originally by: MotherMoon Battlecruisers 4 is just fine for me. enjoy not being able to use a command ship.. Originally by: MotherMoon as is medium guns 4 and not being able to use T2 medium guns. or T2 Large guns eventually if desired. (in effect, enjoy your shty DPS, tracking speed, and range.) Originally by:** MotherMoon an shield skills to 4 oh and your terrible tank. and lack of using t2 modules too probably Originally by: MotherMoon and so on and so on. and so on and so forth. faction gear. outdoes Tech 2 in every situation.
Nyx STeeLGamers	Posted - 2009.02.12 08:49:00 - [694] Edited by: Nyx STeeLGamers on 12/02/2009 08:53:08 Even if it is the loss of sp from a rank 1 skill, it is loss of sp. Its weird. You guys think its acceptable because its a minor loss. But what is it in the fashion of a loss is a discouraging trick to not fly tech 3. Also, every time you lost an interceptor, would you like to trian frigate to level 5 again?! o yeah, its a rank 1 stand alone skill. well good luck training it over and over again till you come to your freaking senses. EDIT: Why get implants then? Why spend 5 days training rank 1 learning skills to lvl 5. Why spend 90 mil on a +5 implant when you want to lose sp instead of going the forward route. CCP dissappoints me yet again. I know there are alot of good things coming in the new expansion, but this is threatening to ruin alot of this excitement. Actually it already has. Great public promotion CCP.
Loligo	Posted - 2009.02.12 09:00:00 - [695] Originally by: Nyx STeeLGamers Edited by: Nyx STeeLGamers on 12/02/2009 08:53:08 Even if it is the loss of sp from a rank 1 skill, it is loss of sp. Its weird. You guys think its acceptable because its a minor loss. But what is it in the fashion of a loss is a discouraging trick to not fly tech 3. Also, every time you lost an interceptor, would you like to trian frigate to level 5 again?! o yeah, its a rank 1 stand alone skill. well good luck training it over and over again till you come to your freaking senses. EDIT: Why get implants then? Why spend 5 days training rank 1 learning skills to lvl 5. Why spend 90 mil on a +5 implant when you want to lose sp instead of going the forward route. CCP dissappoints me yet again. I know there are alot of good things coming in the new expansion, but this is threatening to ruin alot of this excitement. Actually it already has. Great public promotion CCP. Frigate is Rank 2 :P, you get all those things because you want to train faster, this doesen't change that. You can always eject, and even if you don't, I know how few ships I lose, and training one rank 5 every 4-5 weeks, I am totally fine with. It's just something that diffrentiates it, you are not forced to not fly T1 or T2 when they exist, just like people don't fly deadspace and offeicer even if they are ingame. I've had a Centii A-Type small armor repper for 6 months, I got it free through a pvp kill, but i haven't used it because I know that I can't get another one as easy as I would want. Getting back 1 rank of 1 skill I know exactly how fast I can, so I would rather fly t3, and even if I don't manage to eject, I know it's 3 days of passive training while I am at work, to get it back, and while I don't have that skill, I know my ship is diminished 1/25th (or 4% lesser). Not a HUGE loss. /Riv
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.12 09:11:00 - [696] Edited by: Gartel Reiman on 12/02/2009 09:12:51 Originally by: Nyx STeeLGamers Even if it is the loss of sp from a rank 1 skill, it is loss of sp. Its weird. You guys think its acceptable because its a minor loss. Actually, I think it's acceptable because we know from the start that those skills are always at risk of being lost, thus we take than into account when deciding to invest our training time in them. I would definitely not have trained Battleship to 5 if it were volatile in this fashion; I probably will be training the rank 1 subsystem skills. Quote: But what is it in the fashion of a loss is a discouraging trick to not fly tech 3. Exactly - and so it is meant to be. As stated a few posts above, ISK (and higher skill prereqs) was meant to be a discouraging trick not to fly T2 over T1 every time, but due to mass production of the market bringing prices to reasonable levels, and skills being easy enough to learn over time (besides most of them being useful for many ships), with lots of players having more ISK than sense - it's not a very good factor. Skill loss does the same thing but isn't invalidated by a massive stockpile of ISK. Quote: Also, every time you lost an interceptor, would you like to trian frigate to level 5 again?! o yeah, its a rank 1 stand alone skill. No, I wouldn't, for the following reasons: 1) The Frigate skill affects a lot more classes of ship than just interceptors. 2a) Frigate 5 is required to fly interceptors, so if you lose 1 level of your frigate skill you will always be losing level 5 and thus the ability to fly the ship at all until you retrain it. 2b) You don't get the choice of how high to train the skill balanced against the risk of loss (because it must be at 5). 3) When we trained it we were of the understanding that it would not be volatile (assuming updated clones), and invested time in this accordingly. 4) The frigate skill accounts for a greater portion of the ship's bonuses than a T3 subsystem skill is likely to. 5) It's actually a rank 2 skill. Quote: EDIT: Why get implants then? Why spend 5 days training rank 1 learning skills to lvl 5. Why spend 90 mil on a +5 implant when you want to lose sp instead of going the forward route. Why bother training at all, then? If you're going to be training skills, then training them faster is obviously good - no surprised there. Thus if you can comfortably afford implants (and especially if you live in empire) there's no surprises here. I don't think anyone is saying "I think losing skills is great and I intend to inflict it upon myself wherever possible". There's a major distinction between wanting a particular element of risk to be present in the game, and specifically wanting it to happen to you. The important thing about this proposition is not that I'm salivating at the prospect of me losing skills personally (because I have always been able to self-inflict in that manner if I choose), but rather that the mechanic will be universally applied, such that everyone is in the same situation, and I know that someone else risks the same thing when he flies Tech 3 ships that I do. (After all, I platinum insure my ships - that doesn't mean that I think you shouldn't lose any ISK when you lose a ship, rather that given the present loss mechanics I intend to guard myself against them as much as possible.) Quote: I know there are alot of good things coming in the new expansion, but this is threatening to ruin alot of this excitement. Actually it already has. I am sorry for your loss of excitement.
Pytria Le'Danness Placid Reborn	Posted - 2009.02.12 10:35:00 - [697] I'm not so much concerned whether you lose skills and how much but more about this additional deterrent to using these ships. Let's look at what will be needed done to build one of these ships on TQ in the ideal case: An explorer needs to locate a wormhole. A miner needs to enter that WH and mine gas in WH space. He also needs to mine some regular minerals, but that's easy. A combat pilot needs to enter WH space and blow several of the extremely deadly Sleeper ships up - quite possibly this needs a strong gang. Someone needs to salvage the wrecks. Someone has to get the BPCs and reactions from a yet unknown source, possibly Sleeper sites like the current exploration sites. With the Sleepers being as they are on SiSi right now, that's going to take a big gang. There was a mention of reverse engineering, so some part of getting the BPCs probably involves an invention-like activity and the necessary skills. Someone has to set up and maintain a POS reator in low sec to refine the gas into polymers. The POS also has to have a Component and a Subsystem Assembly array and a Ship Mainteneance array, so we can assume a large POS will be more or less mandatory (I haven't done the maths yet). If we use Exploration as a guideline supply of the base materials needed to build T3 hulls and subsystems will be very random, and it might not be possible to run a constant production chain for T3 ships due to lack of raw materials. Guess what all this effort means? T3 ships will be ridiculously expensive. Maintaining the POS alone costs a lot and these costs will be added to the sell price of T3 hulls. Now we have an item that is rare by lack of raw materials, it is hard to build and it requires an extremely wide range of skills to acquire the materials needed. These things WILL be expensive. Akita T guessed around a billion, I think that is a rather conservative guess and it would not surprise me to see them in the 1-4B range. Now in any fight killing a T3 ship will cause the biggest blow to the opponent's wallet, and thus anyone who's out to cause as much damage as possible will primary T3. Then there's kill-mail whoring and suiciding. These ships have a large bulls-eye painted on them the moment they undock. It's still a cruiser hull, and I doubt it will be that possible to built them to tank everything - even a DuraMaller goes down eventually. High price and high vulnerability = low demand. Now add a mechanism that forces you to constantly re-train the same skill. Demand goes down even more. Even IF some people fly the ships in PvP, enough will be not interested due to all the disadvantages, and thus demand will be very low and building them will not be profitable - if there's no market for something your asking price can be as high as you want, no buyers = no revenue. So would any sane industrialist bother to go through all the steps I listed above for the chance to see maybe a dozen of these ships over the course of a year? THAT's the big problem here. T3 is already pre-nerfed due to the difficulty in building the ships, it does not need additional disadvantages. No Demand => No production chain => No demand for the materials => No need to explore WH space for profit Sov-holding POSses might get some use out of it though as they need to be fueled anyway, so why not plug in a reactor. Yes, people will still flock to WH-Space for fun (I definitely will), but to make something really used in EVE you need to be able to generate a profit out of it. I fear that adding too many restrictions to these ships will ruin that. Corporation RP channel: "PlacidReborn"
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.12 12:51:00 - [698] Originally by: Pytria Le'Danness I'm not so much concerned whether you lose skills and how much but more about this additional deterrent to using these ships. Let's look at what will be needed done to build one of these ships on TQ in the ideal case: ... Guess what all this effort means? T3 ships will be ridiculously expensive. I don't think that's a fair conclusion to come to based on the steps you listed. CCP undoubtedly want the process to be farily complex so that there are lots of steps involved and more people can be part of that chain, but it doesn't necessarily mean that things will be expensive. For example, imagine if an hour's worth of gas mining yielded enough material to build 5 ships with subsystems; or a low-end rat spawn (a few frigates) gave enough salvage for the same number of ships, as well as a guaranteed item that could be reverse-engineered into some kind of multi-run BPC (either ship or subsystem). (Note as well that the Sleeper 10/10 spawns seen on SiSi will not be indicative of your everyday Sleeper spawn). What I'm trying to say is that while there are many steps in the process, it doesn't necessarily imply that the end product will be particularly expensive. Depending on how the drop rate of the various components is set, it could in fact be very cheap (i.e. you make a single 1-2 hour trip into W-space with a very small gang, and you have all the raw materials you need to build several T3 ships). Now I am in no way suggesting that CCP will set the values to this kind of level as that would be quite ridiculous, but I'm pointing out that they can position it anywhere they want depending on roughly how expensive they want the ships to be; and I expect 150-250m is a more likely price point than 1-4bn. Quote: Maintaining the POS alone costs a lot and these costs will be added to the sell price of T3 hulls. True - the POS step is the only part that has a fixed cost, but since these items will be tradeable on the market anyway, a group/individual doesn't have to have a POS in order to procure them (in the same way you don't need rig blueprints for salvaging to be profitable). If people with the POSes in place make a large markup, then the free market and the promise of profits will lead others to set up POSes and undercut them in the polymer production market. So even if every entity that gets raw materials from W-space doesn't run a POS, there is no monopoly on this step and profiteering will be limited; i.e. there won't be a great deal of markup between base materials and polymers. Besides, we don't know whether the large POS will be required, or how fast the reaction actually runs. It could be the case again that you can produce enough polymers for 2000 T3 ships in a single day (again deliberately taking things to extremes), such that the cost of running the POS to produce one ship's worth of materials is minimal (a few million, tops). It comes down to the same thing as above, that CCP have complete freedom to tweak the required input cost/effort required to produce one ship in order to roughly set its production cost (and thus market price). Quote: These things WILL be expensive. They needn't be. They might be, but that's by no means certain. Given the prospect of skill loss on death, then as I noted above this can be considered a balancing factor whereby the intended market price is lower than one might otherwise expect it to be (since ISK doesn't need to be the sole balancer any more). And as I pointed out above, the length of the supply chain in isolation, bears no direct correlation to the costs of production and thus the market price of the finished product.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.12 12:58:00 - [699] Originally by: Pytria Le'Danness High price and high vulnerability = low demand. And low demand => low price; but... Quote: Even IF some people fly the ships in PvP, enough will be not interested due to all the disadvantages, and thus demand will be very low and building them will not be profitable - if there's no market for something your asking price can be as high as you want, no buyers = no revenue. This is a valid point. If not enough people are flying the ships, then we won't get the economies of scale kicking in (who cares if you can produce enough polymers for 2000 ships in a day, if only 10 are sold every month), we won't get the free market providing competitive forces to reduce profiteering (who cares if some guy's POS makes 300m ISK profit per batch of polymers sold, when only 10 ships are built every month), and to a lesser extent we're less likely to see as many raw sleeper materials (lower production = lower demand = lower price = less incentive for people to explore W-space). The last point is cushioned somewhat as people will likely explore and rat in W-space for enjoyment as well as pure profit (especially while things are new and shiny), but yes, without a reasonably steady demand the supply chain will take longer and have more trouble settling down to a sensible price. The ships will still sell at a profit, of course, so we would see people selling them; but until demand reaches a critical point that price is likely to be quite high. Ideally the balancing of the ships themselves should take this into account, and make the ships attractive enough that a good number of players will consider flying them. The prerequisites to fly one seem relatively low (as they currently are on SiSi), so hopefully this will help open up the market to a lot more prospective owners.
Rip Striker	Posted - 2009.02.12 14:15:00 - [700] Losing a small amount of skill points for each T3 ship loss can seem rather insignificant. However, the "insignificance" is relative. For a veteran (older than 4 years), who already has maxed out all relevant skills and is now only training to get some odd skills to level 5, spending 1 day each week or every other week re-training a rank 1 skill is insignificant. For a non-veteran (less than 4 years), who still has alot planned out to train and is far from maxing out skills, spending 1 day each week or every other week re-training a rank skill 1 is significant. To me it is clear that the gap in skills between new and old players will increase even more with T3 ships. Can't say i'm surprised.

shai hallud Gallente KATH..	Posted - 2009.02.12 14:19:00 - [701] the idea that the sp loss is for older players is bs guys making it more expensive make it more expensive for the little guy as well i havent read this entire thread as it is epic also there a huge amount of repertition but heres my 2 cents ship sp is a great idea but why would u lose it if your ship dies ? maybe if your ship adapts to you i dont know why would your ship skill improve just sat in a hanger the sp should be earned with hit points taken and kills achived otherwise the t3 ships will be a great replacement for the navy raven i think it would be very cool that as your ship is reapeatedly exposed to thermal damage is resistance to that dame type slowly comes up and as you score more kills your experience with the ships weapons improve and you start hitting harder and doing more dps
Camuran Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.12 15:24:00 - [702] I've read a number of posts in this long thread, and I have to say it simply doesn't appeal to me. First of all it is a time-sink. One of the greatest things about eve is that you keep on training, and training things again and again is just foolish. It feels raw. I understand it is insignificant for older players. I also understand that if you max them out you lose only one rank of one skill, so five days... Five days is a lot. It is a lot for a starting player, it is a lot of a middle player like myself. That's half a decent skill, or a third of one. I can't be looking forward to waiting more and more, and then waiting for the same thing... Secondly, someone said it would be a precedent for similar setups. I agree with that as well. It takes away a fair deal of appeal of eve Perhaps I am repeating things, but if we don't speak up, it naturally goes unheard.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.12 15:28:00 - [703] Originally by: Rip Striker Losing a small amount of skill points for each T3 ship loss can seem rather insignificant. However, the "insignificance" is relative. For a veteran (older than 4 years), who already has maxed out all relevant skills and is now only training to get some odd skills to level 5, spending 1 day each week or every other week re-training a rank 1 skill is insignificant. For a non-veteran (less than 4 years), who still has alot planned out to train and is far from maxing out skills, spending 1 day each week or every other week re-training a rank skill 1 is significant. To me it is clear that the gap in skills between new and old players will increase even more with T3 ships. Can't say i'm surprised. The significance of losing ISK for each T2 ship loss is relative too. For an older player with a large wallet and plenty of ISK flow (plus the ability to quickly rat it up), someone who sells lots of GTCs, large organisations etc. losing 100-150m ISK for a fitted HAC is insignificant. For a younger player, it's much more than they could afford to buy the ship in the first place let alone sustain the loss. Disparities in ISK (and the valuing thereof) will always be greater than disparities in SP (and the valuing thereof). If you're arguing against the SP loss mechanic (without proposing anything else) you're implicitly suggesting loss should involve only ISK again, which has even more of a gap between old and new players. Besides, with the SP mechanic you get to choose how much you invest (more risk = more reward), by training the skills to level 3 or 4 instead of level 5 - plus as a bonus this is tied to the diminishing returns that all skill training gives. You can't do this with ISK; for example, I can't buy a Sacrilege that gets 4% bonuses/level instead of 5% for 15-20m (or one that gets 3% bonuses for 3-4m), but you can do the equivalent with the T3 skills. Both of these make things easier for younger players to compete, not harder.
Antimony Noske	Posted - 2009.02.12 16:28:00 - [704] Originally by: Camuran Perhaps I am repeating things, but if we don't speak up, it naturally goes unheard. Be sure to speak up when the devblog on this goes active. This thread is good practice for everyone to flesh out the reasoning to keep or abandon this idea. To add another thing I thought up: What impact does NOT having skillpoint loss have? It would mean Tech 3 ships would have the same risk/reward that Tech 2 ships currently have. Which is a 'problem' I didn't realize we needed to have addressed. It's not like people are going to quit eve or otherwise complain because they can't lose skillpoints when they get blown up. In my eyes, not having this feature is going to be the best course of action: you skip the bellyaching and possible subscription loss from players who don't want to put up with it, and you're not going to lose players because the feature wasn't included. What we have here is a solution in search of a problem that is going to cause more problems than it solves.
DeepBlue Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.12 16:32:00 - [705] DevBlog is here Quote: This is important: Due to the sudden rift in the symbiotic ship relationship that exists between a pilot and a Tech 3 ship, losing a Tech 3 ship will result in a random skillpoint loss from one of the racial subsystem skills. The penalty is one level off the top. Observe that whether that is a downgrade from, say, level 2 to 1 on your underdeveloped electronics or a painful fall from level 5 to 4 on the spit-polished offensive subsystem, is entirely dependent upon lady luck. Ejecting or self-destructing does prevent the penalty, giving players an incentive to abandon ship from time to time.
Nyx STeeLGamers	Posted - 2009.02.12 16:35:00 - [706] Loligo and Gartel Reiman , great replies guys. No pun intended. Appreciate the constructive and deductive insight into the issue at hand. Special thanks to Gartel for typing all that out.
Rivqua Caldari Omega Wing R.E.P.O.	Posted - 2009.02.12 16:43:00 - [707] Originally by: Rip Striker Losing a small amount of skill points for each T3 ship loss can seem rather insignificant. However, the "insignificance" is relative. For a veteran (older than 4 years), who already has maxed out all relevant skills and is now only training to get some odd skills to level 5, spending 1 day each week or every other week re-training a rank 1 skill is insignificant. For a non-veteran (less than 4 years), who still has alot planned out to train and is far from maxing out skills, spending 1 day each week or every other week re-training a rank skill 1 is significant. To me it is clear that the gap in skills between new and old players will increase even more with T3 ships. Can't say i'm surprised. By your own logic, the non-veteran still has his xx year skill plan, and hasn't acquired the T3 skills yet for the xx number of years, so he doesen't have to worry about it, right ? /Riv
Rivqua Caldari Omega Wing R.E.P.O.	Posted - 2009.02.12 16:46:00 - [708] Originally by: Nyx STeeLGamers Loligo and Gartel Reiman , great replies guys. No pun intended. Appreciate the constructive and deductive insight into the issue at hand. Special thanks to Gartel for typing all that out. And this post was in any way constructive? This whole discussion is a waste of time imho. I fly T1 and some T2, I can't afford every T2 and won't be able to afford all T3 variants. But when I go out soloing, I will use my T3 ships as they will give me a edge, and when I fly with my corp mates, I will use my T1 battleship fueled by my high grade slaveset. It's pretty easy, you bring the ship for the situation at hand. I doubt the T3 ships will be very good for missioning, for the same reason very few cruiser-class ships are used for soloing level 4s, barring Draeks, ofcourse. The main issue is that they don't have the functional range and stable tank to do it in a reasonable amount of time. So T3 demand won't be fueled by L4 missioners. It will be fueled by PvPers of the small pvp kind. /Riv
Stalina Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad	Posted - 2009.02.12 18:42:00 - [709] Edited by: Stalina on 12/02/2009 18:44:06 People think they will be flying and losing 10 or 20 t3 ships a day? yeh sure sounds like a bad idea if you think that way. Also you downgrade 1 ( read : one ) level from 1 ( read : one ) of the skills. If you have all 5 skills at least at level 4 means you can lose 20 t3 ships to lose all your t3 sp. _________________________________
Lucifers Advocate State War Academy	Posted - 2009.02.12 20:59:00 - [710] The SP loss honestly defeats all 0.0 PvP aspects, as a single titan fart will annihilate your ship - no questions asked. Unless T3 strategic cruisers can tank a Titan DD, and then they just need to be tee'd off with the nurf bat - 'cause that would be incredibly ridiculous. Therefore, the main uses of T3 cruisers is lvl 2 or lvl 3 mission runners (who does these anyways???) or low-sec pirates. It will be very interesting to see the supposed new regions that have the parts that make these subsystems. My only question is this: Can we apply these cruiser subsystems to ANY cruiser based ship? I.E. Put these subsystems on a heavy interdictor and make a 98% all-around resists shield tanked dictor with 8 mid slots, 8 high (8 turret or missile specific slots, and 4 low slots with enough grid & cpu to boot? Obviously a change in slot setups for Amarr & Gallente.

Barbara Nichole Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.12 21:45:00 - [711] It would be ok with me if the ship AI trained independantly of the player skills. Then losing a ship with it's AI would make sense.
Stalina Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad	Posted - 2009.02.12 23:22:00 - [712] Edited by: Stalina on 12/02/2009 23:24:29 Originally by: Lucifers Advocate The SP loss honestly defeats all 0.0 PvP aspects, as a single titan fart will annihilate your ship - no questions asked. Because everytime you enter 0.0, you face a titan on every gate. Edit : and never ever did anyone warp away from a loading ddd - never !!!!1111 And No, subsystems only fit on t3 cruisers, nothing else so far. _________________________________
Pytria Le'Danness Placid Reborn	Posted - 2009.02.13 09:32:00 - [713] Originally by: Gartel Reiman I don't think that's a fair conclusion to come to based on the steps you listed. CCP undoubtedly want the process to be farily complex so that there are lots of steps involved and more people can be part of that chain, but it doesn't necessarily mean that things will be expensive. For example, imagine if an hour's worth of gas mining yielded enough material to build 5 ships with subsystems; or a low-end rat spawn (a few frigates) gave enough salvage for the same number of ships, ... True. I guess I was subconciously assuming that this stuff will be rare, when it's up to CCP to decide a drop rate. If I assume a drop rate similar to salvage components (iow, you need to kill a few hundred Angel ships to gain enough materials to build a cargo or polycarb rig) however this would mean that you need to collect a lot of items. Also the random nature of the WH exits will mean that the items are probably scattered all over EVE and collecting them will be a major PITA - like the parts for augmented drones or T2 rigs currently. But yeah, it all depends on the drop rate. Corporation RP channel: "PlacidReborn"
Kopkiller	Posted - 2009.02.13 10:16:00 - [714] Seeing that much people complaining is so laughable... I'm nearly sure it's the same people that claims "don't fly what you can not afford to loose"...so lame. I don't want to see a new type of over ship overspammed like T2, because just a money difference is not enough: T2 is overused in spite of really bad prices, which means money is not problem for people. Then in this case another parameter than money is needed to loose; in order to limit the overspam of the new ship.
Cadde Gallente Gene Works AKA-AHN KINGDOM	Posted - 2009.02.13 12:13:00 - [715] Eject from the ship before it explodes and you don't lose any SP! PERIOD!
achoura	Posted - 2009.02.13 12:41:00 - [716] Ejecting is the quickest way to get your pod scrambled by a frig (even before you take the current session change/client freezing bug into account) and wont do jack in a bubble. Ccp seem to be developing a disturbing trend of investing thousands of development hours into their new content but simultaneously creating new prohibitive barriers to their pvp use. check and large kill board and you'll be lucky to find one in ten-thousand kills actually involving a black ops, overly priced and under performed. Now we get skill loss ontop of higer cost, new player lack both isk and sp, older players are rather attached to their sp so what's the incentive to pvp now? What reason does anyone have of tanking them into 0.0 and pvping? Not much.. Oh and since they can only be assembled/subsystems refitted in station there's another prohibiting factor. *The EVE servers and their patches*
Cadde Gallente Gene Works AKA-AHN KINGDOM	Posted - 2009.02.13 12:53:00 - [717] Edited by: Cadde on 13/02/2009 12:55:26 Originally by: achoura Ejecting is the quickest way to get your pod scrambled by a frig (even before you take the current session change/client freezing bug into account) and wont do jack in a bubble. Ccp seem to be developing a disturbing trend of investing thousands of development hours into their new content but simultaneously creating new prohibitive barriers to their pvp use. check and large kill board and you'll be lucky to find one in ten-thousand kills actually involving a black ops, overly priced and under performed. Now we get skill loss ontop of higer cost, new player lack both isk and sp, older players are rather attached to their sp so what's the incentive to pvp now? What reason does anyone have of tanking them into 0.0 and pvping? Not much.. Oh and since they can only be assembled/subsystems refitted in station there's another prohibiting factor. If you can't eject and save your pod, how do you expect to see yourself survive the load of a ship explosion on top of the freeze/lag? And what do you mean with "won't do jack in a bubble"? If you blow up you are still stuck in the bubble with your pod. Good thing is you.... DIDN'T LOSE ANY SP'S WHEN YOU EJECTED I'm sorry if i keep repeating myself but it seems most people are stuck of the SP loss thing and doesn't notice that one important factor of this mechanic. DAMMIT! EDIT: The black ops is nerfed, we all know that. But the reason it doesn't show up on killboards could also be because... IT ISN'T A COMBAT SHIP! --------------- Opinions? Yes they belong to me, not my corp!
Nef'Ayr Moons of Pluto	Posted - 2009.02.13 13:43:00 - [718] From looking around SiSi, doesn't look like skilling up the subsystem skills provides any benefits beyond a buffer to losing the ability to use the ships -- am I wrong on that? So you should be able to level them all up to 3, which wouldn't take long, and lose several ships (not counting ejects) before really needing to take the time to get the skills back. I'm sure everyone has ships they are flying right now, right? So you could (and will) be flying other ships apart from the tech III ones... giving you more time to train the subsystem skills back up if needed. If spending a couple of hours to regain a buffer of skills to use the tech III ships, that you might only need to do once a week or less, is really too much to handle -- don't use tech III ships?
Stitcher Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.02.13 14:06:00 - [719] Originally by: Nef'Ayr From looking around SiSi, doesn't look like skilling up the subsystem skills provides any benefits beyond a buffer to losing the ability to use the ships -- am I wrong on that? I suspect there'll be bonuses applied to them in future. The SiSi build is still early, super-buggy alpha level at the moment. also yes, ejecting will be the key to tech 3 piloting, I suspect. Getting away from an eject is no more nor less difficult than getting away from an exploding ship - select a celestial object, hit "eject", spam "warp to". so long as you aren't in a bubble (so, as long as you're in lowsec basically) you're fine. Tech 3's going to be all about fighting smart. Just like the rest of EVE. If you don't like how it works, don't fly it. others of us will actually have the testicular fortitude to fly these things, and will enjoy it. - Verin "Stitcher" Hakatain.
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.02.13 14:15:00 - [720] Read these posts. Then fill out out the following sentence: "Do NOT fly ____ ___ ___ ___ ______ __ ____" ---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute

achoura	Posted - 2009.02.13 14:50:00 - [721] Originally by: Cadde Edited by: Cadde on 13/02/2009 12:55:26 If you can't eject and save your pod, how do you expect to see yourself survive the load of a ship explosion on top of the freeze/lag? And what do you mean with "won't do jack in a bubble"? If you blow up you are still stuck in the bubble with your pod. Good thing is you.... DIDN'T LOSE ANY SP'S WHEN YOU EJECTED I'm sorry if i keep repeating myself but it seems most people are stuck of the SP loss thing and doesn't notice that one important factor of this mechanic. DAMMIT! EDIT: The black ops is nerfed, we all know that. But the reason it doesn't show up on killboards could also be because... IT ISN'T A COMBAT SHIP! I'm going to assume you know you answered your own questions here which is the point, either it's a pvp game ship built to fit gnus are for pvp and sp loose from loosing a ship which is the whole point of pvp is hardly any incentive for more pvp. It also completely nullifies 0.0 combat. Now if people wanted to risk sp in pvp they wouldn't update their clones and i'm sure it's not difficult for ccp to check the db and see just how few are in that position, mostly ppl who forgot to update their clones im willing to bet. I'd repeat the question echoed through this thread, i.e. what does the loss of sp by loosing a ship add to pvp in Eve, a game where it's so easy to die, half of the time being unable to prevent/do anything about it, but like anyone whos been with ccp for any amount of time i already know that the answer is nothing. It adds even less incentive/reason to risk the ship i.e. encourages flying in larger groups, safer systems, alt scouts etc. It's pushing ever further away from non-consensual pvp, providing less incentive to venture into 0.0/lowsec (isn't that what cpp have been telling everyone they want?) and basically providing new toys for the high sec dwellers who don't want the risk which conveniently makes up 70% of their user base. Appeal to the masses not the long-term customers who populate the harsh dpeths of space eve was always designed to be. Gj ccp, try to ignore lowsec more and we might just forget it exists or better let us put even more titans in the same place so everyone dies wihtout even seeing the bang. *The EVE servers and their patches*
Woo Mi	Posted - 2009.02.13 15:02:00 - [722] I agree with the time sink comment. As a character (barring cloning snafus) we should be able to keep advancing, which has been a long time important part of Eve. If you want to make these ships to be more valuable with time, give them an AI(or whatever you want to call it) that becomes better/smarter the longer you fly in the ship. This way you still risk a lot when the ship has become really skilled, while not risking SP. NOTE: flying the ship, not having it sitting in dock. In other words, people still have to invest time in flying the ship, but they don't have to make hard choices about whether or not to advance in SPs. The self-destruct/eject argument doesn't fly with me. Often you don't have that much control in the game.
Lunewrath	Posted - 2009.02.13 21:00:00 - [723] Edited by: Lunewrath on 13/02/2009 21:05:08 Originally by: Woo Mi I agree with the time sink comment. As a character (barring cloning snafus) we should be able to keep advancing, which has been a long time important part of Eve. If you want to make these ships to be more valuable with time, give them an AI(or whatever you want to call it) that becomes better/smarter the longer you fly in the ship. This way you still risk a lot when the ship has become really skilled, while not risking SP. NOTE: flying the ship, not having it sitting in dock. In other words, people still have to invest time in flying the ship, but they don't have to make hard choices about whether or not to advance in SPs. The self-destruct/eject argument doesn't fly with me. Often you don't have that much control in the game. Damn, this is how the mechanic should have been implemented. You get risk vs. reward (lose your ship, lose the associated AI and skill ups) along with its ISK cost as opposed to fuxxing around with fundamental game mechanics (SP loss). This is a great idea which will likely get lost in this threadnaught :( Woo, this really would have been fun. Would you consider tabling it as an issue for the CSM to look at? I'd hate for it to be swept aside, and though its too late for T3 ships, it might get community support for future generations of ships and developer consideration.
Tanhar Gallente Tides of Silence	Posted - 2009.02.14 00:47:00 - [724] Originally by: Woo Mi If you want to make these ships to be more valuable with time, give them an AI(or whatever you want to call it) that becomes better/smarter the longer you fly in the ship. This way you still risk a lot when the ship has become really skilled, while not risking SP. NOTE: flying the ship, not having it sitting in dock. In other words, people still have to invest time in flying the ship, but they don't have to make hard choices about whether or not to advance in SPs. Then nothing will beat sitting in a POS shield with your ship and going for work (or wherever) for all day. Seriously, mechanics like this not only needs some new code, database entries, etc. More important, it literally screams for mindless exploit, in a most tedious and boring way.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.02.14 01:49:00 - [725] Originally by: Woo Mi I agree with the time sink comment. As a character (barring cloning snafus) we should be able to keep advancing, which has been a long time important part of Eve. You can keep advancing, but if you: 10: Fly Tech III 20: Get killed in your Tech III ship 30: Goto 10 You wont advance quite as swiftly. If the SP loss really starts to bite, then you can switch out to the still viable T2 or T1 ships. EVE is always about hard choices - that's part of its charm C.
PC5 Pink Bunnies C0VEN	Posted - 2009.02.14 02:00:00 - [726] PLEASE, DONT LISTEN TO THE CAREBEARS! MAKE IT DONE! Ps.Carebears go play wow, tibia or some other s***! This is EVE and it should be dark and harsh place.
Cadde Gallente Gene Works AKA-AHN KINGDOM	Posted - 2009.02.14 02:15:00 - [727] Originally by: achoura I'm going to assume you know you answered your own questions here which is the point, either it's a pvp game ship built to fit gnus are for pvp and sp loose from loosing a ship which is the whole point of pvp is hardly any incentive for more pvp. It also completely nullifies 0.0 combat. Now if people wanted to risk sp in pvp they wouldn't update their clones and i'm sure it's not difficult for ccp to check the db and see just how few are in that position, mostly ppl who forgot to update their clones im willing to bet. I'd repeat the question echoed through this thread, i.e. what does the loss of sp by loosing a ship add to pvp in Eve, a game where it's so easy to die, half of the time being unable to prevent/do anything about it, but like anyone whos been with ccp for any amount of time i already know that the answer is nothing. It adds even less incentive/reason to risk the ship i.e. encourages flying in larger groups, safer systems, alt scouts etc. It's pushing ever further away from non-consensual pvp, providing less incentive to venture into 0.0/lowsec (isn't that what cpp have been telling everyone they want?) and basically providing new toys for the high sec dwellers who don't want the risk which conveniently makes up 70% of their user base. Appeal to the masses not the long-term customers who populate the harsh dpeths of space eve was always designed to be. Gj ccp, try to ignore lowsec more and we might just forget it exists or better let us put even more titans in the same place so everyone dies wihtout even seeing the bang. Answer this then... How much time do you normally have to eject from a situation where you can't win? HOW MANY SECONDS WILL YOU HAVE TO DECIDE IF YOU WANNA LOSE SP OR JUST THE SHIP? --------------- Opinions? Yes they belong to me, not my corp!
Adamant Stehl Point of No Return B.L.A.C.K.	Posted - 2009.02.14 04:37:00 - [728] Love the idea. Hopefully increased risk for increased reward.
Ezekiel Sulastin Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.02.14 05:11:00 - [729] So what you lot are saying is that going through hell and back to build a rare ship then praying that the INEVITABLE EveBlob or gank squad doesn't show up to kill it costing you SP on a cruiser hull is a viable risk/reward ratio? Unless this ship is literally the Fist of an Angry God, it's incompatible with the current Eve mindset ._. ----
Cadde Gallente Gene Works AKA-AHN KINGDOM	Posted - 2009.02.14 06:02:00 - [730] Edited by: Cadde on 14/02/2009 06:02:18 Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin Unless this ship is literally the Fist of an Angry God, it's incompatible with the current Eve mindset ._. You hit it right on the nail with that one... Especially the last part. "it's incompatible with the current Eve mindset" Adapt, overcome and PROFIT. For the first part of your post, don't take it into blob space... You are ultimately responsible for gathering the intel before you undock/jump/fight. EDIT: Tired, chose the wrong word

Woo Mi	Posted - 2009.02.14 11:21:00 - [731] Hmmm, on further thought: Losing SP (which WILL happen) might be a good tradeoff for having some really good advantages. However, retraining those skills over and over again (and not advancing quite as quickly as normally) will get tiresome. So, my conclusion is that this will be a toy for people that either don't care anymore about advancing, or they have so many ISKies that they can afford an extra account just to play with T3 toys. Or the advantages will be really worth it, but I haven't seen anything insightfull on this part yet.
Eldern Minderhost	Posted - 2009.02.16 23:45:00 - [732] bump hate
AngryMax Gallente Executable Inc	Posted - 2009.02.17 01:48:00 - [733] The SP loss dynamic discourages me from getting into one of these in the first place. Unless its a damn near Jove in its pwnage qualities. Or has some insane bonuses - like bringing back nano or the former might of the EOS. But i am looking forward to ransoming T3 pilots - as the sense of loss is no longer just financial. *eyes his T1 gank-brutix.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.

Eject from the ship before it explodes and you don't lose any SP!PERIOD!

PLEASE, DONT LISTEN TO THE CAREBEARS! MAKE IT DONE!

Eject from the ship before it explodes and you don't lose any SP!

PERIOD!