EVE Search - New Dev Blog: Strategic Cruisers

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: Strategic Cruisers

» 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 .. 12 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 16 post(s)
Leumas Kharzim Amarr Intaki Armaments	Posted - 2009.02.12 18:52:00 - [91] Originally by: CCP Lemur Originally by: Lubricious Cain Perhaps my brain isn't working correctly, but could someone clarify the skill point loss for me? It says a random skill point loss to one of the racial sub systems. But then it says its one level. Does it mean to say that you lose 1 level from a random subsystem skill? Or could this random loss of points actual lose more then 1 level? Thanks It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly. How does that work with partially trained skills? Let's say, for an unrealistic example, that all 5 skills are partially trained and stopped befor completing the next level (stupid, I know, but still a valid question). How does the system determine what to take away?
Rhys Onasi	Posted - 2009.02.12 18:54:00 - [92] Edited by: Rhys Onasi on 12/02/2009 18:55:10 Originally by: CCP Lemur It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly. 1. Is that the racially related subsystem skills? Or after losing your ASC (Amarr Strategic Cruiser- Look ma, I made an acronym!) could you lose some of your Caldari Racial Subsystem skills instead? 2. In previous statements on Tech 3 a while back, one of the Devs stated that dissasembling a SC would cause skill loss/ experience. Considering that was a couple months ago, a lot could have changed. Are we still going to lose SP from dissasembling? (I'm thinking no, that was a relic of an idea from back when you wanted to have the t3 ships themselves contain SP?) Can you confirm that the ONLY way to lose SP is to be sitting in the ship as it reaches <0 structure hitpoints? And that any other way of escaping that scenario will prevent loss of sp? and finally: 3. Who came up with the names? EDIT: And 4. Please answer the poster directly above me who has a question that I have wondered about myself for a while, and forgot to add.
Mikal Drey Minmatar Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.12 18:55:00 - [93] hey hey firstly the loki is a sexy little bugger. I went for the caldari style spikey front and the slender subsystem 2 frame. ofc i completly fitted for looks :) Although the real stats arent currently available its looking like a real fun ship to fly. Just a couple of Questions tbh.. 1. What are the plans for the availability and pricing for them ? from the production blog in game dev its looking to be a real expensive cruiser but we dont know how hard/easy/rare the parts will be to aquire or how much of a sink the "reverse engineering" process will be. is it CCP's intention that they are rare or commonplace. as someone said if anyone if flying one in fleet it will be primary for sure just fot he expensive loss to its pilot. 2. will there be an additional bonus if you fit all subsystems of the same type ? If you managed to get all subsystem 2's will there be a benefit to have them all working in unison ? atm ive described the Loki as a vagabond on steroids. but SISI stats are placeholders atm so its hard to tell :)
Dr Ming Mindworks	Posted - 2009.02.12 18:55:00 - [94] This is what I suspect is going on: -Too many variations to balance. -A need to at least pretend that the ships have some semblance of balance to keep forums from exploding in fire and having people ragequit because the game isn't balanced. -Solution: Balance the ships so they are generally garbage compared to T2 at level 3 and just accept that there will be grotesquely OP combos at rank 5, and implement skill loss on death. i.e. don't actually balance the the ships. This keeps the forums from exploding in fire because when people start a threadnaught about how these cruisers with max skills are solopwnmobiles, because the 'solution' is to kill the unbalanced ship because that nerfs the pilot for a little while. Obviously its a case of 'we'll see', but that is what I suspect the deal with these ships is going to be. I don't like the SP loss mechanic one bit. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think the ships are going to be popular in the long run. Players are really particular about their SP, and once the 'it won't happen to me' self delusion wears off, I don't imagine people are going to like these ships in the long run. I don't like that, because the worth of wormhole space seems to be tightly bound to the worth of T3.
Shadowsword Epsilon Lyr Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:00:00 - [95] Originally by: CCP Lemur Originally by: Shadowsword We'll be able to "save" our setups? Like, auto-fitting a ship if we have the modules alaivable? That would be so nice... That is the plan. Player can save their own fittings and corps can save fittings for their members too. And if you have all stuff available you can just click "fit". Nice nice nice. Will it do the same with ammos and drones? ------------------------------------------
Aeo IV Amarr Xomic OmniCorporation	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:01:00 - [96] :( I want to see Legion! Plz?
Ki Tarra Caldari Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:04:00 - [97] Originally by: CCP Lemur It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly. Just to clarify how the skill loss works: If you are unlucky enough to lose SP from a support skill that you are half an hour away from getting to level 5, it would knock you all the way back from >250K SP to 8K SP?
General Exception	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:09:00 - [98] Am I the only one who thinks the Loki looks like a Tengu with rust? Caldari is meant to look butt ugly, but minnie is supposed to be a flying scrapheap with sails mesmerising the pilot in how it even holds itself together, not a clean-lined box with prongs. Also, I really don't like the idea of going into a lagfest knowing I will lose SP. If Eve were faster and lagfree it'd be OK, but no, not even EVE64 is good enough. Also even though it's Rank 1, these skills will be trained to level 5 so often that in effect the training time spent on them would be equivalent to a Rank 32 skill - pants idea tbh.
Susan Fiona Fish.	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:09:00 - [99] Edited by: Susan Fiona on 12/02/2009 19:11:23 Originally by: CCP Lemur Originally by: Lubricious Cain Perhaps my brain isn't working correctly, but could someone clarify the skill point loss for me? It says a random skill point loss to one of the racial sub systems. But then it says its one level. Does it mean to say that you lose 1 level from a random subsystem skill? Or could this random loss of points actual lose more then 1 level? Thanks It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly. Wow, the force is strong with SP loss angst. I see the SP loss much like the overheating problem, in that if doing something risks your modules/ship/isk/SP, there must be a way for a savvy pilot to mitigate the risks of that behavior to some degree. Why not solve the problem in a somewhat more efficient way by having a "nanite paste" equivalent utility (and an associated high rank skill [> rank 8]) that modifies the likelihood of SP loss (never 100% guaranteed that you won't lose, but with the "SP paste" skill up to L5, you have an 80% chance of not losing SP or something)? That way there's still the pain of loss, which is key for EvE, and the ability to mitigate that loss through careful planning. Otherwise, I predict these ships will be used more by carebears for mission running than for PVP, as the loss can be very carefully controlled in missions, but not in PVP. Just a thought. edit for clarity of language

CCP Lemur	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:11:00 - [100] Originally by: Leumas Kharzim Originally by: CCP Lemur Originally by: Lubricious Cain Perhaps my brain isn't working correctly, but could someone clarify the skill point loss for me? It says a random skill point loss to one of the racial sub systems. But then it says its one level. Does it mean to say that you lose 1 level from a random subsystem skill? Or could this random loss of points actual lose more then 1 level? Thanks It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly. How does that work with partially trained skills? Let's say, for an unrealistic example, that all 5 skills are partially trained and stopped befor completing the next level (stupid, I know, but still a valid question). How does the system determine what to take away? It will take the amount of points you would lose from the last complete level to the one below. So if you are 250k almost lvl 5 and die, you will lose the 37kish SP you needed to get from level 3 to 4. I won't swear on it, but I will check with the guys and come back if I'm wrong.


Daelorn Perkone	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:14:00 - [101] Originally by: CCP TomB YYYYYYYYYUUUUUUUUOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

CCP Lemur	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:14:00 - [102] Edited by: CCP Lemur on 12/02/2009 19:14:35 Originally by: Rhys Onasi Edited by: Rhys Onasi on 12/02/2009 18:55:10 Originally by: CCP Lemur It is one level from the top of one of the related subsystem skills. Skill is chosen randomly. 1. Is that the racially related subsystem skills? Or after losing your ASC (Amarr Strategic Cruiser- Look ma, I made an acronym!) could you lose some of your Caldari Racial Subsystem skills instead? 2. In previous statements on Tech 3 a while back, one of the Devs stated that dissasembling a SC would cause skill loss/ experience. Considering that was a couple months ago, a lot could have changed. Are we still going to lose SP from dissasembling? (I'm thinking no, that was a relic of an idea from back when you wanted to have the t3 ships themselves contain SP?) Can you confirm that the ONLY way to lose SP is to be sitting in the ship as it reaches <0 structure hitpoints? And that any other way of escaping that scenario will prevent loss of sp? and finally: 3. Who came up with the names? EDIT: And 4. Please answer the poster directly above me who has a question that I have wondered about myself for a while, and forgot to add. 1. Only racially related. Dieing in an ASC will only choose from the 5 amarr subssytem skills to invoke the loss. 2. Disassembling will not make you lose points. Self destruct and ejecting will circumvent loss. Only getting really blown up in the ship will make you lose SP. 3. Mostly Nozh with some hints/sugesstion/rants from the rest of team. 4. see above


CCP Lemur	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:16:00 - [103] Originally by: Mikal Drey hey hey firstly the loki is a sexy little bugger. I went for the caldari style spikey front and the slender subsystem 2 frame. ofc i completly fitted for looks :) Although the real stats arent currently available its looking like a real fun ship to fly. Just a couple of Questions tbh.. 1. What are the plans for the availability and pricing for them ? from the production blog in game dev its looking to be a real expensive cruiser but we dont know how hard/easy/rare the parts will be to aquire or how much of a sink the "reverse engineering" process will be. is it CCP's intention that they are rare or commonplace. as someone said if anyone if flying one in fleet it will be primary for sure just fot he expensive loss to its pilot. 2. will there be an additional bonus if you fit all subsystems of the same type ? If you managed to get all subsystem 2's will there be a benefit to have them all working in unison ? atm ive described the Loki as a vagabond on steroids. but SISI stats are placeholders atm so its hard to tell :) 1. That is still under balancing, but we do want you guys to fly those things of course 2. There will be no set bonus.

Isac Hands	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:16:00 - [104] Edited by: Isac Hands on 12/02/2009 19:17:50 Let us assume i have a subsytem skill at lev 4 and has traind it 3 days towards lev 5 when i fly out and loose my T3 ship. The ramdom skill loss choose just this skill to take the loss. How would this be done?
Sovereign533 Caldari The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:18:00 - [105] Quote: Oh. One last thing: Import and export overview settings. <3... all i have to say about the entire dev blog =D *Your signature file has been removed for the inclusion of inappropriate language. -- Fallout 3
Daelin Blackleaf	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:20:00 - [106] Originally by: Armoured C opeople might moan about loosing SP at what not but they are off only specific skill and those skills are rank 1 so come on >_> It's the perception of it not the reality. If balanced to make them worth the loss I'll happily fly them, but a lot of people will go "omg my precious SP" and refuse to. More will probably try them and then give up after a few losses and retrainings. There needs to be a market for these ships otherwise all the related content isn't going to be worth engaging in. Of course if the worst happens I benefit massively from a powerful ship few are willing to fly that I can lose over and over due to low price, relatively low value of SP to those of us who have been here for years, and the fact that I already meet the hull requirements for all four races t3 cruisers allowing me to lose a few hours and use another races ship while the loss is retrained. I just don't think it's good for those without dozens of millions of SP, those who value their character development more highly than I do, and the new contents usefulness to the community.

CCP Lemur	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:21:00 - [107] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: CCP Lemur Originally by: Shadowsword We'll be able to "save" our setups? Like, auto-fitting a ship if we have the modules alaivable? That would be so nice... That is the plan. Player can save their own fittings and corps can save fittings for their members too. And if you have all stuff available you can just click "fit". Nice nice nice. Will it do the same with ammos and drones? Drones and Ammo fitted to the ship will be saved too.

SirFett Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:22:00 - [108] so thats umm a fancy way of saying nothing at all the ppl rushing to the incredibly broken release on sisi havent already figured out of disected and later confirmed by various dev statements p.s. why not implement a mechanic where the ship itself gains in strength per kill or something (ya know like other mmo's gain sp's) that way if you get blown up you start from the base + skills and have to work you way up ... unless you get blown up probably wayyy to hard to program thou
Gal'drea	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:23:00 - [109] tl;dr CCP thought it would be too hard to code in the ships having "experience" and getting better the longer you fly them (a really cool idea). So instead, they decided to gimp the actual pilot (losing SP, a very bad idea). And stop giving me the argument, "you can eject or self destruct" ... 1) lag prevents this most of the time 2) if you really want to boost piracy, give us an auto eject feature... pirate gets ship AND we keep SP (what I assume is the preferred alternative to losing hard earned SP). 3) what was so wrong with the ship gaining SP? Obviously that is where you were headed with "dimantling the ship causes a loss"
Haradgrim Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:29:00 - [110] Edited by: Haradgrim on 12/02/2009 19:29:48 1) are the hulls themselves associated with a race and if so are there seperate requisites and bonuses associated with them. 2) if the hulls are racial in nature; can you fit another races subsystems on it if you use only the subsystems of one other race. 3) I love the self-destruct/eject doesn't make you lose SP aspect, thats pretty cool and could mitigate the downside (if say you actually lose SP once for every two or three losses, I can see that being reasonable) -- Originally by: CCP Oveur Just donæt forget the reach-around.

Manfred Rickenbocker The Elliance	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:34:00 - [111] Edited by: Manfred Rickenbocker on 12/02/2009 19:35:17 It seems that everyone is getting burned by the skill level loss mechanic. How about a simpler idea: 10% loss (therabouts) of total SP in that skill for the randomly chosen skill? This would: Reduce hatred for the loss of an ENTIRE level of SP Simplifies the confusion over partially trained levels Stay in line with the beating CCP wants to give for training it longer, but less harsh Allow you to introduce (if so desired) a skill that can reduce the percentage Edit: spelling ------------------------ Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times.
Daelin Blackleaf	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:35:00 - [112] Originally by: Gal'drea CCP thought it would be too hard to code in the ships having "experience" and getting better the longer you fly them (a really cool idea). XP... in EVE... either you have to grind NPC's or grind your alts/corp mates either way I don't see it being a workable idea. Originally by: Gal'drea 2) if you really want to boost piracy, give us an auto eject feature... pirate gets ship AND we keep SP (what I assume is the preferred alternative to losing hard earned SP). That's actually a nice idea, though it benefits the wealthy a lot as they're not too bothered by ship loses making it very similar to t2 with it's nigh uninsurability. Originally by: Gal'drea 3) what was so wrong with the ship gaining SP? Obviously that is where you were headed with "dimantling the ship causes a loss" Because I'd buy a hangar full of ships and set them training, only using those with very high or even level V skills with enough in stock to keep me from running out. Still the best answer I can see, if SP loss is CCP's preferred mechanic for increasing risk, is parallel training of subsystem skills alongside the merging of all races subsystems. Losing (f.ex.) offensive subsystems IV is then going to be just as much a kick in the balls to a vet as a regular player as the vet can't just switch race and the regular can carry on training his other much needed skills.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:38:00 - [113] Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf <stuff> TBH, skillpoint loss won't even put a dent in their use. It's a shock right now. We're not used to the idea. But that will change. Further more, people like myself who's main interest in the game is pushing the performance envelope of their ships won't bat an eye at bringing every skill to 5, regardless of the risk. These are the same people that fly multibillion ISK ships in PVP. Just because it's the best. This is what Eve needs. Advanced content. Something for people to work towards. If you look at the skill requirements for T3, you'll see that it isn't that much really. Not any longer than it would take to skill up T2 large guns for a BS, to be sure. You could be flying a max skilled T3 ship for the time cost it would take to fly a max skilled T2 fit BS. Pretty reasonable barrier to entry IMO. Very light skill requirements. Cost? Supply and demand. Right now T2 is SUPER cheap. It's INSANE. Why? Because there is ISK to be made, no matter how small, and people are producing whatever the market can handle. T3 will be the exact same. At first it'll be expensive, but in time the prices will drop. Maybe not to the levels of T2, but they'll be reasonable, given the time cost required to gather the materials. Rigs are a good example of this mechanic. At first rigs were 150m+ per rig for T1 stuff, now they're down to 15-20m each for most of the popular ones. T3 required to compete? No way. T3 won't provide more peak performance IMO. You won't see more DPS than a BS, or more tank than a T2 command ship, or faster top speeds than an interceptor, or better EW performance than a Recon. What I think you will see is the ability to do many of the above, with obvious limits and restrictions, from a basic platform that lends unpredictability to combat that hasn't been in Eve for a long time. I'm already able to fly all four T3 ships on SISI, with all subsystem skills at 3 and climbing. I LOVE THE SKILL QUEUE!!! (when it works, lol) Nuances like ejecting or self destructing to save your SP will add more depth to PVP as well. It's more choices to be made, more levels of skill to be added to combat. More ways to set apart the really good players from everyone else. I can't wait. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:38:00 - [114] Originally by: Dakisha This is an unnessasary and unwanted (by the ppl it's going to affect the most; i.e pvp'ers) change. D. I'm a PvPer and I welcome this move. I also don't accept the validity of the points in the other thread, which is why I've been quite active in there recently, to try to get to the bottom of why the people who don't want the change are against it.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:50:00 - [115] Originally by: SirFett so thats umm a fancy way of saying nothing at all the ppl rushing to the incredibly broken release on sisi havent already figured out of disected and later confirmed by various dev statements p.s. why not implement a mechanic where the ship itself gains in strength per kill or something (ya know like other mmo's gain sp's) that way if you get blown up you start from the base + skills and have to work you way up ... unless you get blown up probably wayyy to hard to program thou Easy to code and implement. But why use that mechanic? It's easily cheated. Get an alt in a ship, insure it, explode it. Rinse, repeat until you have the requested level of 'skilling' for that ship, continue for other ships as backups and/or sell them off as 'pre-skilled' on contract etc. Do not want. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Susan Fiona Fish.	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:50:00 - [116] Originally by: Haradgrim Edited by: Haradgrim on 12/02/2009 19:29:48 stuff 3) I love the self-destruct/eject doesn't make you lose SP aspect, thats pretty cool and could mitigate the downside (if say you actually lose SP once for every two or three losses, I can see that being reasonable) Actually, thinking through this, it is a great mechanic. If those with lots of isk to burn are carebearing in lowsec/0.0, and gankers come along, it makes it more likely the carebear will eject and give the gank squad a shiny, if somewhat dented, T3 ship to board. Will make ransoms much more interesting, I think.
Gal'drea	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:51:00 - [117] Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf XP... in EVE... either you have to grind NPC's or grind your alts/corp mates either way I don't see it being a workable idea. I'll admit this isn't completely clear how it could best be implemented. However, with a little imagination a lot of options can be conceived (# jumps traversed in low/null sec, for example...) Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf That's actually a nice idea, though it benefits the wealthy a lot as they're not too bothered by ship loses making it very similar to t2 with it's nigh uninsurability. We already know these won't be insured, and while I don't like the idea of SP loss (as many don't) ... I think it would be nice to have a "lag proof" method of abandoning ship. This would make pirates happy (ooh! T3 loot!) and players (ooh! no gimped SP!). Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf Because I'd buy a hangar full of ships and set them training, only using those with very high or even level V skills with enough in stock to keep me from running out. /me is confused. Are you talking about the ship experience idea here? Because I didn't mean that experience should be gained for no reason. Granted, it can't really be done on the basis of kills (and is truly a difficult problem). I think the best solution with minimal change at this point would be to NOT fix the Sisi bug, and allow the support skills for T3 to train parallel to previous skills. This would in essence decrease a pilots T3 skill temporarilly, while not hindering his attempt to fly a carrier next, for example. So after we bashed heads a little on the earlier points... I think most of what I said agrees with what you've said here. Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf Still the best answer I can see, if SP loss is CCP's preferred mechanic for increasing risk, is parallel training of subsystem skills alongside the merging of all races subsystems. Losing (f.ex.) offensive subsystems IV is then going to be just as much a kick in the balls to a vet as a regular player as the vet can't just switch race and the regular can carry on training his other much needed skills.
silken mouth	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:57:00 - [118] Originally by: Missiles Jesus Originally by: CCP Lemur Originally by: silken mouth will it be possible to combine subsystems of different races? also will each race have its own skillset? You can only combine the subsystems form one race with each other. You can't assemble a ship with subsystems from different races. Why that?If i can fly all 4 races ships, would it been not fun to get the power of 4 in one shipOld players would love that,noobs not such much. Aye! i was hoping it would be possible to build your own phantasm like ship... maybe with one additional skill and the risk to lose one random skill of each races subsystem...
Dari Anoh Amarr Anoh Shavar	Posted - 2009.02.12 19:57:00 - [119] does the happy dance I love it! Very much looking forward to seeing the possibilities of this in the future. I hope the balancing will be as good in-game as it sounds on paper, and I even like the concept of losing random subsystem skillpoints. Very, very cool. meek mumble Now can I see some concept art of the Ammarian Strategic Cruiser pretty please with an Empress on top?
Red 7	Posted - 2009.02.12 20:02:00 - [120] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: SirFett so thats umm a fancy way of saying nothing at all the ppl rushing to the incredibly broken release on sisi havent already figured out of disected and later confirmed by various dev statements p.s. why not implement a mechanic where the ship itself gains in strength per kill or something (ya know like other mmo's gain sp's) that way if you get blown up you start from the base + skills and have to work you way up ... unless you get blown up probably wayyy to hard to program thou Easy to code and implement. But why use that mechanic? It's easily cheated. Get an alt in a ship, insure it, explode it. Rinse, repeat until you have the requested level of 'skilling' for that ship, continue for other ships as backups and/or sell them off as 'pre-skilled' on contract etc. Do not want. That's simple to counter - just make the Ship SP linked to the pilot - like insurance.



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.