Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zurin Arctus
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:03:00 -
[1]
For those of you that weren't watching the alliance tournament coverage, a CCP employee apparently thought we'd be excited to hear that, hey, whenever you lose a Tech 3 ship, you lose a tk3-related skill level!
I detect high levels of time-sink in this sector, Captain!
Please don't jerk us around, CCP. If you want to keep us in the game, do it by releasing engaging new content, and not by utilizing copout mechanics like this one to keep people perpetually training the same skills over and over.
Does anyone else take issue with this mechanic?
|
Thann Starlinbow
Slacker Industries The Boat Violencing Initiative
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:09:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Thann Starlinbow on 07/02/2009 19:08:42 If this is true, it's a TERRIBLE mechanic.
|
Pattern Clarc
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:11:00 -
[3]
i'm reserving judgement till some details (hint CCP, dev blog) is released. ____
My Blog Is Awesome
|
Ki Tarra
Caldari Ki Tech Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:12:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc i'm reserving judgement till some details (hint CCP, dev blog) is released.
This! |
FunzzeR
Counter Errorist Unit
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:13:00 -
[5]
Utill more details are released on T3, I will have to say the losing sp mechanice is lame and not needed. |
Efrim Black
Apellon
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:14:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Efrim Black on 07/02/2009 19:17:17
Originally by: Zurin Arctus For those of you that weren't watching the alliance tournament coverage, a CCP employee apparently thought we'd be excited to hear that, hey, whenever you lose a Tech 3 ship, you lose a tk3-related skill level!
I detect high levels of time-sink in this sector, Captain!
Please don't jerk us around, CCP. If you want to keep us in the game, do it by releasing engaging new content, and not by utilizing copout mechanics like this one to keep people perpetually training the same skills over and over.
Does anyone else take issue with this mechanic?
Provide a link to any proof that you didn't simply pull this out of your rear.
*Edit* Alright then - I totally disagree with the Mechanic. Supporting the tentative resistance to it. |
Zurin Arctus
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:14:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Zurin Arctus on 07/02/2009 19:15:00
Originally by: Pattern Clarc i'm reserving judgement till some details (hint CCP, dev blog) is released.
What's there to wait to hear? It's a cheesy timesink. |
Zurin Arctus
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:14:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Efrim Black
Originally by: Zurin Arctus For those of you that weren't watching the alliance tournament coverage, a CCP employee apparently thought we'd be excited to hear that, hey, whenever you lose a Tech 3 ship, you lose a tk3-related skill level!
I detect high levels of time-sink in this sector, Captain!
Please don't jerk us around, CCP. If you want to keep us in the game, do it by releasing engaging new content, and not by utilizing copout mechanics like this one to keep people perpetually training the same skills over and over.
Does anyone else take issue with this mechanic?
Provide a link to any proof that you didn't simply pull this out of your rear.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=992740 |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:15:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Destination SkillQueue on 07/02/2009 19:15:40
Originally by: Thann Starlinbow Edited by: Thann Starlinbow on 07/02/2009 19:08:42 If this is true, it's a TERRIBLE mechanic.
I highlighted the problem. We don't actually know anything other then, that you lose skillpoints from certain set of skills. What I would vote for is clarification on the mechanics, since I have a hard time seeing CCP adding skillsinks to a game, that already takes decades to max your skills in.
We need trustworthy info from CCP, not more speculation on the little info we have. |
Zurin Arctus
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:20:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue Edited by: Destination SkillQueue on 07/02/2009 19:15:40
Originally by: Thann Starlinbow Edited by: Thann Starlinbow on 07/02/2009 19:08:42 If this is true, it's a TERRIBLE mechanic.
I highlighted the problem. We don't actually know anything other then, that you lose skillpoints from certain set of skills. What I would vote for is clarification on the mechanics, since I have a hard time seeing CCP adding skillsinks to a game, that already takes decades to max your skills in.
We need trustworthy info from CCP, not more speculation on the little info we have.
Respectfully, you don't make any sense. You're questioning whether it's true? A CCP employee said it. He said you lose skill-levels from the tk3 related skills when you lose ships. Provided the ships don't spew isk out their exhaust ports or have sixteen high-slots and hardpoints, I'm not sure what will balance out this irritating mechanic. |
|
chemzys
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:26:00 -
[11]
At Fanfest iirc, they talked about a system of "Experience" for the TechIII ships, exp lost when ship destroyed/repackaged, perhaps this is it. The ship "train" a specific skill and you lose it along with the ship.
|
Efrim Black
Gallente Apellon
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:27:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Zurin Arctus
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue Edited by: Destination SkillQueue on 07/02/2009 19:15:40
Originally by: Thann Starlinbow Edited by: Thann Starlinbow on 07/02/2009 19:08:42 If this is true, it's a TERRIBLE mechanic.
I highlighted the problem. We don't actually know anything other then, that you lose skillpoints from certain set of skills. What I would vote for is clarification on the mechanics, since I have a hard time seeing CCP adding skillsinks to a game, that already takes decades to max your skills in.
We need trustworthy info from CCP, not more speculation on the little info we have.
Respectfully, you don't make any sense. You're questioning whether it's true? A CCP employee said it. He said you lose skill-levels from the tk3 related skills when you lose ships. Provided the ships don't spew isk out their exhaust ports or have sixteen high-slots and hardpoints, I'm not sure what will balance out this irritating mechanic.
Well after this, I'm pretty sure I've had it with the entire notion of t3. They weren't even able to pump out ambulation in 2008 like they originally planned, Quantum rise was a joke, and honestly, considering the host of other fixes the game needs... Obscenely expensive t3 ships just seems silly.
I'd rather have the option to introduce basic color patterns and paint-jobs to ships before t3. x.x
|
Sniper Wolf18
A Pretty Pony Princess
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:32:00 -
[13]
DO
NOT
WANT! By the way, does it annoy you when you didnt realise that you were reading my sig? |
Apollyonn
Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:33:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Apollyonn on 07/02/2009 19:35:39 The problem I see here, is that it makes no sense for us to have to lose SP for losing one of these ships. They are going to be very difficult and time intensive to get or expensive because of the time people put into them. Isn't that enough of a loss when/if you get popped? I was excited for the T3, but if I'm going to be losing my SP, then I'm not interested. However, I'm still interested to hear CCPs discussion and comments on this issue. I impatiently ( ) await your dev blog on this Monday morning (hint hint...).
Edit:
Originally by: chemzys At Fanfest iirc, they talked about a system of "Experience" for the TechIII ships, exp lost when ship destroyed/repackaged, perhaps this is it. The ship "train" a specific skill and you lose it along with the ship.
If this is what we lose, then I can live with that. I would find it pretty neat if we gained extra Exp on our ship for each successful engagement but lose that when we lose that ship. As long as I don't lose my ability to use large guns/laucnhers/whatever module I trained a long time to train.
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:36:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc i'm reserving judgement till some details (hint CCP, dev blog) is released.
This. I just hope it wont be too late.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:38:00 -
[16]
Originally by: chemzys At Fanfest iirc, they talked about a system of "Experience" for the TechIII ships, exp lost when ship destroyed/repackaged, perhaps this is it. The ship "train" a specific skill and you lose it along with the ship.
I recall a old spaceship game from FASA where if you were using the same ship and you scored kills with it you would "learn" the individuals ship strength and weakness, becoming capable of better redlining it for maneuverability.
If it is something like this, getting extra SP tied to the ship you are using and losing them when the ship is destroyed or repackaged, it can be reasonable.
But I want to stress the extra part, something over and above what you get from regular training.
|
Zurin Arctus
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:43:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: chemzys At Fanfest iirc, they talked about a system of "Experience" for the TechIII ships, exp lost when ship destroyed/repackaged, perhaps this is it. The ship "train" a specific skill and you lose it along with the ship.
I recall a old spaceship game from FASA where if you were using the same ship and you scored kills with it you would "learn" the individuals ship strength and weakness, becoming capable of better redlining it for maneuverability.
If it is something like this, getting extra SP tied to the ship you are using and losing them when the ship is destroyed or repackaged, it can be reasonable.
But I want to stress the extra part, something over and above what you get from regular training.
Yes. And CCP Chronitis, or whatever the hell his name is, implied that we'll have to retrain our own skills when we lose a tk3 ship.
Lame. |
Shijima Nei
Annihilate.
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 19:50:00 -
[18]
if this is true then risk v reward is throughn out window example
a player in T3 ship enages a lets say mael mael calls backup they gank T3 ship you loose billoins of isk and SP gankers gain isk and gain the enjoyment of making someone loose SP without catchin there pod risk v reward broken as gankers will loose nothing yet gain alot
t3 ship enages a lone mael mael has no backup and looses
t3 ship pilot gains maybe 50-100 mill yet could loose sp + billions of isk
risk v rewards there for broken
CCP rethink what you are doing
o and another thing for risk v reward is missioners
they have isk to buy t3 ships they fit and buy they mission reward NO RISK!!! you carnt gank these in high sec since they will be to overpowered with concord on there side it would be like ganking a titan in high sec with concord on its side
this feature is very very bad thought through and who ever made it should be fired right now
signed for getting rid of it if it is true
|
Hesod Adee
KDS Navy
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 20:17:00 -
[19]
While I have seen nothing to suggest that this will happen, it is a stupid idea because it will just keep people from flying T3 ships.
I know I won't be flying them if this happens as I know they will be called primary whenever they show up in PvP because lost SP hurts more than lost ISK.
Even carebears won't fly them (assuming they can run level 4 missions) as they will be targeted for suicide ganks in high sec.
This had better be fake or a joking CCP employee. ---------------------------------------------- I support skill queues |
Thargat
Caldari North Star Networks Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 20:30:00 -
[20]
If there's like a profficency boost the longer I pilot a specific T3 ship without loosing it. Hell yeah, I'm all for it. If I need to train skills to pilot the ship, skills wich I lose when I get podded.... not that great but hey, it's eve.
Just need to wait and see what CCP has in storage for us. Breathing 0.0 |
|
stadshage
Caldari Monkey Universe Corporation Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 20:57:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc i'm reserving judgement till some details (hint CCP, dev blog) is released.
yea im about the same thing though anny sp lose i wil not be happy with and i wont be flying t3 ships
what i can understand in crew sp lose say your t3 ship come's with a crew wel if/when ship goes pop crew dies so you need to get a new crew
now here is also a new market option depending on how imported crew is and what type of crew your wanting to use ( not sure of type's but hell) say a carebare trains a crew and is then able to sell the crew to a other player to use in his ship that player will then get a rank 5 crew and the seller wil start to train a new rank one crew
so what im hoping is that crews wil be the same ass mod ya can buy them sell then and the t3 mod/crews you can also train them |
Pattern Clarc
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 21:11:00 -
[22]
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 PS? Even though there off-line?
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? |
Kalia Masaer
Rosa Castellum
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 22:08:00 -
[23]
Really we have to wait for them to be put on singularity on monday, then we can make our decisions on whether it is a bad idea or not. It is possible ccp has made a ship that no one will fly but it is also entirely possible they have thought this out more than it may seem.
We do not know the training time on the tech 3 skills we do not even know if they are like regular skills.
I personally am going to wait until I have some solid facts before I decide if this is a bad mechanic or not.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 22:27:00 -
[24]
Remove it. Remove it NOW, fire the moron who proposed it, and forget this entire disaster ever happened.
SP loss on ship destruction is just an incredibly stupid decision. Congratulations, now you've just created a set of skills that nobody will ever train past level III (and rarely past level II) because ships die more frequently than you can replace the SP to level IV or V. -----------
|
Kytanos Termek
Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 22:42:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 07/02/2009 22:44:08 I think what was hinted at is ship specific SP.
take for example. And this is just wild speculation. But while you own the tech 3 ship. You are doing separate "skill training" that the ship itself does. That you do at the same time as your normal skill training. effectively your ship is "training" a different set of skills. Like tech 3 gun firing 1-2-3. And if you lose the ship. You lose these "extra" skills. You don't lose your gunnery skills or the skills required to use tech 3 ships or components or any of your normal skillset. But you do lose the extra "spiff" attached directly to the ship and have to retrain it once you get a new ship. This is my guess of what would happen. I personally find it interesting if this is the case. But it ads a new risk that get's progressivly bigger as you "train" your ship more. But then again it also gives an emotion attachment to the ship. It's Your ship. You made the components, You raised it, fed it noobs, watered it. You dont want to lose it. But whats the point of having it if you never use it?
TLDR Version It will almost certainly be a separate "set" of skills that you train at the exact same time as your normal skills. aka train 2 skills at the same time. 1 normal 1 ship specific. or something like that. Mrr? |
ToTheCore
Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 00:57:00 -
[26]
Supported until more information is revealed. |
Hesod Adee
KDS Navy
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 01:45:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Kytanos Termek TLDR Version It will almost certainly be a separate "set" of skills that you train at the exact same time as your normal skills. aka train 2 skills at the same time. 1 normal 1 ship specific. or something like that.
Then I'll clarify my position:
- If I have to chose between skills I should never lose or skills that I will lose when my T3 ship explodes, I will always chose the skills that I will never lose.
- If these T3 related skills are trained alongside the regular skills I will want to see the specifics before I decide. |
Thorin Quinn
Shut Up And Play
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 01:45:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Thorin Quinn on 08/02/2009 01:45:39 They are going to be expensive enough, without this, welcome suicide gankers dream. if T3 ships really do this, never owning one, release more engaging content rather than more time sinks.
As it stands, Mission running is arduous and boring, mining is just annoying, maybe focus on more dynamic stuff in these areas other then go here and kill 40 ships over and over. |
Asuri Kinnes
Caldari Adhocracy Incorporated
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 03:48:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Thann Starlinbow Edited by: Thann Starlinbow on 07/02/2009 19:08:42 If this is true, it's a TERRIBLE mechanic.
While I would like to see "official" confirmation of this, I'm not going to waste any time saying this game mechanic s u x - Bung! I don't care how you "justify it" within lore or whatever... LOOSING a trained skill level with the loss of a ship is as redolent as rotting cheese...
AK |
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 04:40:00 -
[30]
Blah blah blah - wait and see what it actually is before lighting the torches ya damn unruly mob! :) ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic |
|
Brick Hampton
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 06:36:00 -
[31]
I hope those ships are AMAZING if you lose SP for dieing in them. |
CrabClaw McGraw
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 12:13:00 -
[32]
More details are needed but it sounds like the crappiest idea ever. A ship with exp! |
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 12:33:00 -
[33]
I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT I'M WHINING ABOUT BUT I'M WHINING ANYWAYS !!!
-------- Ideas for: Mining
|
Fire Sweet
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 14:48:00 -
[34]
If losing SP's is true, I wont bother sitting on one, period. |
Jake Oman
Minmatar Star Frontiers FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 15:31:00 -
[35]
If you can save your SP by ejecting, then I won't have a problem with it. Still, I need to add that these ships had better be very powerful to justify such a risk. |
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Shadow Cadre Worlds End Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 17:50:00 -
[36]
I'm not going to condone supporting something that doesn't exist yet.
I think we should wait before jumping the gun. |
Abulurd Boniface
Gallente Mercantile Exchange for Mining And Exploration
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 19:09:00 -
[37]
Quote: "There have been some rumours that the subsystems might be able to learn and improve through use", smiles Noah, suggesting that the sum of all knowledge might be lost if the ship is broken down. Could he be advocating that the ships themselves will be sentient? We rather think not, but it's not far from the realms of EVE possibility that there might exist somewhere a rare element (say, at the end of an unstable wormhole) that, when processed in some way, can be manufactured to react to a stimulus - a constantly active power core, for instance - that causes the material to seem to learn or adapt whenever it's shot at, or goes at a certain speed. When the powercore is shut down (when the ship is either destroyed or disassembled), the material reverts to an inert state and loses what 'knowledge' it has seemingly acquired. Look up 'smart materials' or 'programmable matter' in Wikipedia, add a small amount of imagination and you should be able to visualise how it might fit together. CCP is remaining vague about the whole idea, partly because the idea itself is pretty vague and because, even if it can easily fit into the science of EVE, it might be an impossible task to balance everything together in what little development time remains until Tech III becomes a live feature."
(Zapatero E-ON issue #014, page 54)
From that, it would seem that the 'skill' is lost with the ship but not with the capsuleer. It seems that when the same configuration would be reassembled and used, the new ship would 'learn' the same skills over time.
That would be acceptable.
Abulurd Boniface ME ME CEO |
Kaldoreign
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 19:19:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Abulurd Boniface
Quote: "There have been some rumours that the subsystems might be able to learn and improve through use", smiles Noah, suggesting that the sum of all knowledge might be lost if the ship is broken down. Could he be advocating that the ships themselves will be sentient? We rather think not, but it's not far from the realms of EVE possibility that there might exist somewhere a rare element (say, at the end of an unstable wormhole) that, when processed in some way, can be manufactured to react to a stimulus - a constantly active power core, for instance - that causes the material to seem to learn or adapt whenever it's shot at, or goes at a certain speed. When the powercore is shut down (when the ship is either destroyed or disassembled), the material reverts to an inert state and loses what 'knowledge' it has seemingly acquired. Look up 'smart materials' or 'programmable matter' in Wikipedia, add a small amount of imagination and you should be able to visualise how it might fit together. CCP is remaining vague about the whole idea, partly because the idea itself is pretty vague and because, even if it can easily fit into the science of EVE, it might be an impossible task to balance everything together in what little development time remains until Tech III becomes a live feature."
(Zapatero E-ON issue #014, page 54)
From that, it would seem that the 'skill' is lost with the ship but not with the capsuleer. It seems that when the same configuration would be reassembled and used, the new ship would 'learn' the same skills over time.
That would be acceptable.
Abulurd Boniface ME ME CEO
Does that mean that ships will be earning XP? That is great, I will just pimp my battleship in missions without any risk of losing SP, while it becomes more and more powerful. /sarcasm I don't think that we should lose SP, that will reject even more players from using that ships in low/null sec, and t3 ships will be still damn expensive, not to mention with t3 fitting. |
Abulurd Boniface
Gallente Mercantile Exchange for Mining And Exploration
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 22:17:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Kaldoreign
Does that mean that ships will be earning XP? That is great, I will just pimp my battleship in missions without any risk of losing SP, while it becomes more and more powerful. /sarcasm I don't think that we should lose SP, that will reject even more players from using that ships in low/null sec, and t3 ships will be still damn expensive, not to mention with t3 fitting.
Actually, this is a glimpse in the thought processes on T3 space frames. It is not actually a discussion of how the feature is supposed to work, it's something under consideration.
Now, from a user's perspective this would not bode well. If CCP are indeed [and we don't really know] still debating how the functionality is supposed to work then we're looking at a feature that is not yet fully developed. Inevitably this means that the implementation will suffer. Discussing how important new features have to work 2 months before roll-out does not inspire a lot of confidence. It may lead to some frowny faces in the short term. I don't doubt that when the developers know more about the impact of the new features in a live environment, they will be able to tune it more to turn it into a seamless experience. The trouble with that is that it will cause unnecessary angst and elevation of blood pressure in some part of the New Eden constituency.
For developers who have access to a fully-featured test environment where new designs can be tested live, that would actually a sub par performance. They have room for trial and error and to get things right the first time when it is released to the general population.
I'm giving CCP the benefit of the doubt here. Designing ships with interchangeable components is an exciting twist to the New Eden space frame inventory and there is no reason why it could not be a fabulous addition when done right.
On the other hand, there appears to be some speculation [in the article I quoted previously] about whether ships like that could have rigs since they can be disassembled. The workaround seems obvious: one or more components could be fitted with rigs and be shipped in an assembled state [one assembled component]. It would be full size, including the rig. It is only when the component was repackaged that the rig would be lost. Otherwise, it would be possible to swap out one component to make a different ship, only that component has a rig attached to it. Why that appears to be such a big leap of the imagination, I cannot fathom, but I would hazard to say that if I can figure out a better way to make their new functionality work than CCP does [and I doubt it], it does not inspire great confidence in their creative process. -Somebody- at CCP figured this one out by now. It's a natural progression. I would expect it to work like that and it would be consistent with the environment.
I can't wait for March to roll around.
Abulurd Boniface ME ME CEO
For good to survive it suffices for evil to acquire a deadly, incapacitating disease. |
Karentaki
Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 22:19:00 -
[40]
This seems like a really good way for CCP to pre-nerf T3 ships to the point of nobody flying them. I don't mind paying a few hundred mill every time I die, because I can keep an ISK buffer and be back in another ship reasonably fast, and during that time I can still be training skills. I don't like the idea of being set back a week in both skills and ISK every time I die.
On of the main things that keeps people playing the game is the almost endless skill tree, but if you can be set back weeks or months on that tree with a single loss, people will certainly stop flying T3 ships in any form of risky situation, and a small minority (not me) may even just give up.
So yeah, signed!
Quote:
EVE is like a sandbox with landmines. Deal with it.
|
|
Ancy Denaries
Caldari Solaris Operations
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 08:45:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc i'm reserving judgement till some details (hint CCP, dev blog) is released.
This.
Balance is important, but you will always adapt to changing circumstances and you don't whine about stuff you can't change. |
Awox
Advanced Logistics
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 11:47:00 -
[42]
Confirmed on EVE TV by lead game designer that if you lose a tech III ship you will lose one of the skills required to fit the upgrades. Similar to if you lost a shield rigged drake and lost shield rigging..
The skills are going to be only rank 1, but still. I think it is a stupid idea.
They claim the reason being is that ISK is no longer an issue so they need to add more penalties to dieing, well, you know what.. that's stupid because not everyone has bottomless wallets like they say.. and if they did the better solution would be to make it harder to make ISK.
Signed. CCP you ruin a good thing.
|
Ancy Denaries
Caldari Solaris Operations
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 12:15:00 -
[43]
Again, devs stated in the forums that this functions is subject to change or removal depending on feedback. And until we've seen it in it's entirety, how can we really judge if it's a good or bad mechanic? -----
EVE is a PvP game. Adaptation is your survival. |
Ruri Dant
Onorata Societa
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 12:55:00 -
[44]
no way i'm going to risk losing skills even if the battle advantages are better, i'm already quite angry as it is when i lose a ship because of DC/desync!!! |
Saralle Zhukov
Win Tech
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 14:25:00 -
[45]
Skills already take to long to train. There isn't eveN a way to grind it out and catch up with older players. DO NOT WANT LOSS OF SKILLPOINTS/SKILL LEVELS.
----------------------------------- Kill them all God will know his own. |
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 14:34:00 -
[46]
I'm not willing to pass judement on this until I see it.
Some pilots are willing to PVP wearing expensive implants while using faction-fitted ships.
Some pilots are unwilling to enter .4 or lower space at all.
There's a huge variation in the amount of risk people are willing to take in this galaxy. On the surface, I don't see a problem with adding a new "high-risk" level for those who like to push the envelope.
~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic |
Saralle Zhukov
Minmatar Win Tech
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 14:38:00 -
[47]
We need to object now loudly and vociferously while it still can be changed!!!! Or CCP will just get stubborn and dig their heels in and start their techno whine about how difficult it is to change.
----------------------------------- Kill them all God will know his own. |
Kandarus
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 15:39:00 -
[48]
Loud Noises!
PS: I love lamp.
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 15:49:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 09/02/2009 15:49:14
Originally by: Pattern Clarc 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 PS? Even though there off-line?
On EVE-TV the dev said that if you eject from your ship then you side-step the skillpoint loss (as it currently stands so if you know your ship is going down bail out and you'll be fine SP-wise).
For those who did not see the interview some things are worth pointing out:
1) You will not lose skillpoints out of your current list of skills. You will only lose skillpoints in the new and relevant skills to piloting a T3 ship.
2) You will step back one level in your highest skill from the above list.
3) He said these skills would be Rank-1 so train fast and at worst you lose maybe 5 days of training.
4) CCP's reason for this was to give you another reason to really care about your ship beyond its monetary value.
Make of all that what you will. I am not supporting the OP since we just do not know and have to wait and see how it works in practice.
-------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
TU144 TEPPOPNCT'CMEPTHNK
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 20:43:00 -
[50]
OMG! that sisi patch is 1GB in size... ho-hum long download........................
CCP made little baby jesus cry by nerfing ghost training
|
|
Abulurd Boniface
Gallente Mercantile Exchange for Mining And Exploration
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 20:59:00 -
[51]
Quote:
3) He said these skills would be Rank-1 so train fast and at worst you lose maybe 5 days of training.
4) CCP's reason for this was to give you another reason to really care about your ship beyond its monetary value.
On 3: that is 5 days of training maximum, -per- time a ship is lost. I cannot afford that.
On 4: that is an insane idea. Of course I -care- about my ships. A ship that has these consequences to a loss [and, indeed, we have to reserve judgement until we have more hard information] is not one I'm going to buy [unless the advantages vastly outweighed the cost].
"Caring about losing a ship", if that is truly how CCP thinks about it, bespeaks a material weakness in how the EVE universe is built. It lacks good ideas and comes up with nebulous concepts to fill a philosophical goal. Never a good sign.
New Eden is a real, harsh universe [I have a rich history of ships that have been reduced to their component parts to prove it]. It must be possible to devise a coherent and internally consistent rationale for how things work and why things are done a certain way. If we go beyond that we're in the magic realm of fairy tales and mushrooms. Ships with interchangeable components: great, awesome idea. A vague notion of why skills should be lost or why it is important to care more about the loss of one ship over another is pure nonsense.
And again: until we see it with our own eyes and get a real appreciation for how things work in the harsh light between the stars, we can't make a final conclusion [but I certainly love to speculate].
Abulurd Boniface ME ME CEO For good to survive it suffices for evil to acquire a deadly, incapacitating disease. |
Das Ende
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 21:03:00 -
[52]
Originally by: FunzzeR I will have to say the losing sp mechanice is lame and not needed.
/agree
they turn an awesome idea (modular t3 ships) into crap.
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 21:26:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 09/02/2009 21:32:31
Originally by: Abulurd Boniface On 3: that is 5 days of training maximum, -per- time a ship is lost. I cannot afford that.
Well...5 days if you have it trained to L5.
I admit I do not relish the thought of re-training a skill. That said it might be interesting. L4 is *almost* as good as L5 and L4 can be trained in a day or so on this. It could be interesting that the pilots you face are not simply *done* with leet skills no matter how many SP they have. Maybe they got popped a day before and have lost a bit of that edge.
Just thinking out loud but it does seem to make the playing field a bit more flexible or at least interesting.
Quote: On 4: that is an insane idea. Of course I -care- about my ships. A ship that has these consequences to a loss [and, indeed, we have to reserve judgement until we have more hard information] is not one I'm going to buy [unless the advantages vastly outweighed the cost].
"Caring about losing a ship", if that is truly how CCP thinks about it, bespeaks a material weakness in how the EVE universe is built. It lacks good ideas and comes up with nebulous concepts to fill a philosophical goal. Never a good sign.
Could be. I think in this age of PvP ships are being largely viewed as disposable due to the massive income earning potential. Consider how many cap ships BoB and Goons go through not to mention sub-cap ships. Even with BoB (err...the Allilance formerly known as BoB) having the rug yanked from under it and having 20+ cap ships stolen they seem to be hanging in there fine. Yeah for some people self-financing or buying fancy faction ships and mods things get pricey but on the whole losing ships is more an inconvenience than anything else.
CCP (I think) is looking for something else besides your pocketbook to make you care. If you think about it this is functionally no different than, say, ships having a crew which perform better with experience so if your ship pops you lose that experienced crew and the next ship is staffed by a noob crew. Lots of games have something like that as a mechanic and you care more about your units (or whatever) that have "levelled up".
Again, just thinking out loud and playing Devil's Advocate as food for thought. I do not all know what is in CCP's mind of course and I have no clue how this will really play out. As you say we kind of have to wait and see. I am with you that on the face of it this seems like a bad idea but who knows?
-------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
Neesa Corrinne
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 21:42:00 -
[54]
If EVE were a game where losing a ship simply meant respawning and getting a new one for free, then losing a bit of skill every time you die wouldn't be an issue.
However, this is not the case. Currently we all lose ISK, and if previous new ship releases are any indication, these ships will be horrendously expensive. The loss of SP's on top of losing a horribly pricey ship is a bit much for me. At least in my trusty ole Deimos and updated clone I won't have to lose precious training time. |
Stalina
Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 22:47:00 -
[55]
Well I hope these new ships will be better bang for the buck than lolblackops or pve-marauders. Especially when losing skill points. I dont mind losing some SP, it's not like you gonna fly them everyday and lose sp everyday. just dont screw the ships before they are in the game
_________________________________
|
Saralle Zhukov
Minmatar Win Tech
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 17:47:00 -
[56]
The thing that prolly bugs me the most is, ideas grow and not all programmers are gamers, does this skill loss thing stop here? Does it creep down the line in a few expansions into regular skills also? CCP needs to understand that the player base as a whole does not want to lose skills.
----------------------------------- Kill them all God will know his own. |
Karc Thule
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 17:56:00 -
[57]
How do you think war would change if CCP made this skill-loss mechanic global across all tech levels and ships?
I'm imagining a system where losing a ship costs you 1 skill level for that ship and partial levels for at least some of the fitted equipment.
What are the practical consequences? How does this change your tactics if you are winning/losing? Think about being able to drive down a rival corp's spending power by limiting what they can fly and fit. Imagine being able to blow them into a lesser incarnation.
Does this increase or decrease the value of skill in relation to skill points?
|
SencneS
Amarr Rebellion Against big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 19:47:00 -
[58]
I guess we'll see T3 in empire only huh :)
The way I understood it was the skill is in the ship not the person. So the longer you pilot the ship etc the better you will become.
There is only ONE WAY CCP could fix this if it is still training... Dual Skill training for T3.
Allow us to still keep training our skills like we normally would, but while we're sitting in the ship it trains up the t3 Skill as well.
Do that and I can see people using them more often. |
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 21:11:00 -
[59]
We won't see T3 in empire only.
There will be pilots who choose to take the extra risk in order to take advantage of the extra "edge" these ships will almost certainly provide.
|
SencneS
Amarr Rebellion Against big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 22:06:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri We won't see T3 in empire only.
There will be pilots who choose to take the extra risk in order to take advantage of the extra "edge" these ships will almost certainly provide.
At the sticker price these things are probably going to come to the market at, it might be better just to use a carrier for that "edge".
The first few of these are going to be in the billions because they will be rare, as more and more come into play they will drop down in price, however unless the drop rate is incredible like say salvage, then these things will be pricey at best. Considering they are targeted to be the "Middle Ground" between T1's "ok at a lot master of none" and T2 "Master of this but useless everywhere else" I doubt the average PVP or fleet ops will have these in running.
Imagen taking a Bugattie to the local biker bar, sure you'll see some pricey bikes at in the parking lot but you'll stick out like fat man at an anorexic bikini conversion!
Amarr for Life |
|
Zel Nughat
Nughat Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 01:06:00 -
[61]
|
Gartel Reiman
Civis Romanus Sum
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 01:27:00 -
[62]
Disagree. If things are implemented the way they are currently believed to work, and you lose one level of a rank 1 skill that is guaranteed to be T3 subsystem-specific, then this is a really good idea. |
Myrhial Arkenath
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 14:13:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Myrhial Arkenath on 11/02/2009 14:13:18 If these skills were on a seperate training timer I would have supported it. But training skills for something I won't lose, or training skills for something I will lose...nice for bored veterans perhaps, and even then, I'm sure even they got something left to train they can keep.
CEO | Diary of a pod pilot |
Marlona Sky
Caldari Astroglide X
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 08:43:00 -
[64]
Edited by: Marlona Sky on 12/02/2009 08:43:17 You don't want to take the chance on losing SP related to the T3 ship then don't fly one. Problem solved.
Did you even get on SiSi to test them out or did you just hear from the tourney and run straight to the forums to complain??
|
Stalina
Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 14:31:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Myrhial Arkenath But training skills for something I won't lose, or training skills for something I will lose...
Eject - TADAAA no SP lost.
_________________________________
|
Lee Dalton
Privateers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 18:51:00 -
[66]
Agreed.
SP should not be a commodity like ISK.
|
Bahs Deep
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 19:48:00 -
[67]
...
Level 1 ranked skills....wah...oh noes, I blew up my ship and lost just a few days worth of training. oh boo hoos. whatever will I do?
You guys need to take a look at this from outside your tiny box that you seem so stuck in.
And no, I'm not going to humor you into WHY I'm saying this. If you can't figure it out for yourself then maybe you should go try Hello Kitty online. Or better yet...go check out Neopets. That might be more to your liking.
|
Triest
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 20:03:00 -
[68]
I really hate this idea, a lot. All it serves to do is encourage use in PVE and discourage it for PVP, which is utterly not something EVE needs right now. On the off chance people do decide to risk SP while PVPing, it actually discourages skill training, since you risk more SP when you're better with the ship. Either way, it's not making the ships any more precious, and in fact, makes them less desirable to fly. Especially when large scale combat in EVE already makes losses essentially up to a coin toss of whether the game responds to your commands before you die.
|
Georgina Eldridge
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 20:26:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Georgina Eldridge on 13/02/2009 20:26:24
Originally by: Bahs Deep ...
Level 1 ranked skills....wah...oh noes, I blew up my ship and lost just a few days worth of training. oh boo hoos. whatever will I do?
You guys need to take a look at this from outside your tiny box that you seem so stuck in.
And no, I'm not going to humor you into WHY I'm saying this. If you can't figure it out for yourself then maybe you should go try Hello Kitty online. Or better yet...go check out Neopets. That might be more to your liking.
No, it's bad. |
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 20:43:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Santiago Fahahrri on 13/02/2009 20:43:01 Those who don't want to risk the loss shouldn't use the ships... I don't understand the problem.
People who don't like to lose implants don't use them in combat. People who are unwilling to lose expensive rigs don't use them in combat. People who are unwilling to lose faction mods don't use them in combat.
Don't use them if you don't like the risk vs. reward ratio.
I plan to try one (at least) out. Probably with expensive rigs and faction mods - risk is fun. |
|
Karrade Krise
Galatic P0RN Starz
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 21:02:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Edited by: Santiago Fahahrri on 13/02/2009 20:43:01 Those who don't want to risk the loss shouldn't use the ships... I don't understand the problem.
People who don't like to lose implants don't use them in combat. People who are unwilling to lose expensive rigs don't use them in combat. People who are unwilling to lose faction mods don't use them in combat.
Don't use them if you don't like the risk vs. reward ratio.
I plan to try one (at least) out. Probably with expensive rigs and faction mods - risk is fun.
This. Pay close attention to this one, Class.
Apoctasy > unfortunately, Concord does not reimburse citizens for their own stupidity
|
Lunewrath
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 22:10:00 -
[72]
Edited by: Lunewrath on 13/02/2009 22:10:52 Ejecting is fail. Just complete fail as a solution for preventing SP loss imo. T3 as it is implemented is going to be for Epeen wars in Empire, and maybe to FOTM for the next Alliance Tournament. Not a regular line ship for most pvper's.
Risk vs. reward could have been handled much better tbh, see here for an idea which could have been fun, non-disruptive to skill training and yet maintain consequences for flying and losing T3 ships.
|
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 22:19:00 -
[73]
Your tears: delicious
|
Lunewrath
Amarr Celestial Ascension Tenth Legion
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 22:30:00 -
[74]
No tears here, just trashing a stupid game idea that could have been implemented in a better way. |
Karrade Krise
Galatic P0RN Starz
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 22:41:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Lunewrath No tears here, just trashing a stupid game idea that could have been implemented in a better way.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. |
Apolluon
Gallente No Limit Productions Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 00:25:00 -
[76]
This is a bad idea, that will lead to more bad ideas, letting this get into the door will lead to more of this crap mechanic being added to the game. Its a bad idea, its bad for the game, its bad for CCP to even let this go anywhere, they need to reverse course and get this mechanic out of T3 ships right now.
I will not even consider flying a T3 ship until this mechanic is gone. |
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 09:16:00 -
[77]
If you dont want to lose sp if you die. EJECT or dont fly it. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
van Uber
Swedish Aerospace Inc Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 09:31:00 -
[78]
I could not care less if I lost a days training over a T3 ship. If anything it is the financial loss that will keep me from them (as I imagine they will be extremely expensive in the beginning). |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 10:50:00 -
[79]
While the loss of Sp for a level 1 skill is nothing staggering, it will make training the subsystem skills at more than 3 not worth it unless the effect of training them is very large.
There are several other factors that can make the T3 ships very rare, in particular the time required to gather the materials to build one against the possible sell price.
|
Astria Tiphareth
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 11:41:00 -
[80]
Supporting only because I think it's the wrong approach per se. The usual suspects are busy arrogantly whining about both sides of the risk vs reward equation, like this is some mathematical principle that they personally laid down, but I think they're missing the point.
The T3 manufacturing process will be: Find wormhole. Enter with enough ships to... Kill very tough Sleeper NPCs. Mine the new gas forms in W-space. Hope you get out of wormhole again with loot & gas intact and not jumped by some other hunting group, and don't end up in the middle of Delve. Reverse engineer the components to create a BPC/reaction. Find enough BPCs and reactions to actually make a T3 ship part. Run said reactions in a POS in low-sec. Build T3 ship part - again, can only be done in a POS, though that can be done high-sec. Hope that enough other people are selling the other parts that someone can actually build a ship.
I'd say the above already covers a fair old risk and time-sink. T3 ships are still being balanced so it's hard to predict how much more capable they will be at release, but the above process alone may discourage large scale manufacturing except by those large groups who really don't need more power handed to them.
Sure, it's only a rank 1 skill, and sure, you can fly a T3 ship with them at 0 if you want, but this is directly interfering with the training system of skills in a way never done before in EVE.
If, as is alleged, CCP fear that some groups in EVE have too much money, and that ISK isn't a barrier, perhaps they should consider how those groups got too much money in EVE, and fix that problem, rather than a quick hack to introduce an alternative penalty? |
|
Diamaht Nevain
Gallente Subnet Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 09:03:00 -
[81]
Edited by: Diamaht Nevain on 16/02/2009 09:04:52 It was the lead developer at CCP that was talking during the tournament, so i'm guessing it's reliable info.
He was asked about ejecting and hinted that yes you would eliminate the skill loss but the other pilot would of course be able to take the ship if he could fly it. He stated that the skills lost would be rank 1 skills and would take 4 days or so to retrain.
A four day wait in my opinion is not that big of a deal. If the skill loss is not wanted then you can always eject. If the other pilot can't fly the ship you may have a chance to get it back. I like the new risk element and we would still have options. There are so many billionaires out there now that money really doesn't matter.
Any pirates who are reading this and don't like it are crazy. You've wanted to steal ships for years, and now you can!
Not signed (please see signature)
=============================== Two words: Internet Spaceships |
Stick Cult
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 10:24:00 -
[82]
Edited by: Stick Cult on 16/02/2009 10:24:46 Losing 1 level of a rank 1 skill, get over it. That's a few days training at most. And if that's really so upsetting, just eject before you die. You'll be much more distracted by the huge amount of ISK you just lost.
not supported
|
Camilo Cienfuegos
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 10:42:00 -
[83]
Not supported, but quoting an important point:
Quote: Congratulations, now you've just created a set of skills that nobody will ever train past level III (and rarely past level II) because ships die more frequently than you can replace the SP to level IV or V.
One client: Three Screens! |
Ryuga VonRhaiden
Caldari Insurgent New Eden Tribe Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 12:04:00 -
[84]
disagree.
isk is almost no more an issue to many, a little more risk brings eve closer to its origins.
Do not try and find the signature... that's impossible. Instead only try to realize the truth... There is no signature. |
Lee Dalton
Privateers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 12:48:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Ryuga VonRhaiden
disagree.
isk is almost no more an issue to many, a little more risk brings eve closer to its origins.
This might surprise you, but ISK is an issue to the majority of players.
Obviously I am not saying that everyone should be able to fly everything as they please, but I believe this is the wrong solution.
If the problem is caused by a group of players having so much ISK the loss of a T2 ship with fittings and rigs is insignificant, we need to look at *why* they are so rich and if there is a genuine issue there.
The biggest concern I have is power creep in EVE - until recently T2 fittings were the exception, not the norm. Now they are cheap enough to almost obsolete T1 modules for established characters.
|
sir gankalot
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 19:51:00 -
[86]
Disagree. I don't think EVE needs another time sink after the learning skills. Maybe at some point in the future.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |