These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Force Auxilary skills being seeded - thoughts?

Author
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#21 - 2016-02-05 20:30:03 UTC
CCP developers are overworked and underpaid. Something has to give in that situation and it's communication to the player base. Blame the higher ups not the devs.

Not today spaghetti.

Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2016-02-05 20:35:01 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
Personally, I wish they do this:

- Carrier skill -> unallocated pool
- Triage skill -> unallocated pool
- Fighters skill -> unallocated pool
- maybe even Fighterbombers skill -> unallocated pool

Then seed the new skills on the market and let us decide whether to allocate back to carriers, or allocate to the "force" whatevers.

Also, if CCP really wants the "dark and gritty" universe, they shouldn't make it so easy for us to spam all the channels with "Use the force, Memphis!" "I need reps, Memphis, use the force!" "Mesa being using the force, yousa seein?" and so on.


That's what I'm talking about. That would be the most logical thing to do. However if the skills books cost an arm and a leg. If you paid a half billion sometime ago and have to do it again to apply those unallocated SP that's not right.

I agree with you, but those books aren't cheap and people spent sh!t tons of ISK on them. I think that the ISK cost needs addressing too.
Memphis Baas
#23 - 2016-02-05 20:35:29 UTC
ALL developers everywhere are overworked and underpaid.

And they don't typically communicate with the players; that's what they have Community Managers for.
TigerXtrm
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2016-02-05 20:35:59 UTC
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:
Anyone with carriers trained should get the corresponding force aux book free. Sounds fair.


Lol no. New class of ship, nothing is being replaced, deal with it.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

Memphis Baas
#25 - 2016-02-05 20:40:10 UTC
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:
However if the skills books cost an arm and a leg. I think that the ISK cost needs addressing too.


Well, they probably won't magically replace your fully-fitted carrier with a fully-fitted force, and I'm guessing that the cost of the skill is chump change compared to the cost of the ship. With everyone trying to sell their carrier to get a force, I'm guessing ships will be underpriced/overpriced for some time.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#26 - 2016-02-05 20:41:52 UTC
Gaiz... consider this reasonable line of thoght before you wave your pitchforks:

- the skillbook entry for the FAXs may be being entered into the markets... but that doesn't mean the skillbook itself will.
Remember, the DEVs have historically never relased a skillbook before a ship has been introduced.

- the DEVs have always promised "what you can fly before, you will be able to fly now."
They did this with "skill split" before with Destroyers and Battlecruisers. It will probably be no different this time (especially considering the time, ISK, and emotional investment that has been put into this size of ships).

- The DEVs have a history of poor wording... either in patch notes or DEV blogs. Frankly, it is not just CCP DEVs that have this issue. Work with DEVs in any company and you will see that "poor wording" is pretty much a quirk of engineers and programmers in general (they practially speak their own language).
So if you see some wording that is suspect... take it with a grain of salt and politely ask for clarification first.
Rain6637
NulzSec
#27 - 2016-02-05 21:16:56 UTC
It's a new ship, which means CCP will get their sub time out of you. It's not a simple split like the battlecruisers, where no new ships were added.
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2016-02-05 21:22:36 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:
Anyone with carriers trained should get the corresponding force aux book free. Sounds fair.


Lol no. New class of ship, nothing is being replaced, deal with it.


Uh yea, kinda is. One ship is being split into two roles. Therefore If you're not given a choice of which role you want and you aren't lucky enough to get that role, you wasted time and money. Some people may take that seriously since not everyone has mommy's credit card number to blow up shinny ships with.
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2016-02-05 21:23:27 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:
However if the skills books cost an arm and a leg. I think that the ISK cost needs addressing too.


Well, they probably won't magically replace your fully-fitted carrier with a fully-fitted force, and I'm guessing that the cost of the skill is chump change compared to the cost of the ship. With everyone trying to sell their carrier to get a force, I'm guessing ships will be underpriced/overpriced for some time.


Very likely. I may have to buy a second carrier just as a investment.
Rain6637
NulzSec
#30 - 2016-02-05 21:25:06 UTC
"Fair" would be reimbursing your carrier skills so you can reassign them, but I don't see that happening.
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2016-02-05 21:25:52 UTC
I'm sure CCP will come up with something, it's not like they want to screw anyone. They want to make it a smooth transition. I just wish details were more forth coming.
Rain6637
NulzSec
#32 - 2016-02-05 21:34:00 UTC
The only practical issue with this change is the skillbooks. With tactical destroyers, there was no lead-time on the skillbooks, and the skillbooks were seeded with each ship. That worked because tactical destroyers were arguably elective.

As for capital logistics, they're much more important and leaving everyone gimped by not releasing skillbooks would just be... bad on all kinds of levels.

By seeding force aux skillbooks ahead of time, they're removing the one practical limitation for the force aux change. They could allow skill reimbursement, skill split (giving free SP equal to current triage skill), or this option. This is the solution I predicted, because it is the one that involves more sub time.
Memphis Baas
#33 - 2016-02-05 21:37:33 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
FAXs


Faxes, heh. Cute.

Faux could also get popular. Pronounced "fox", cause we're not refined enough to pronounce it fo.

Guess a bunch of the ships will be named Pas.
Rain6637
NulzSec
#34 - 2016-02-05 21:46:39 UTC
Akrasjel Lanate
Lanate Industries
#35 - 2016-02-05 22:05:51 UTC
As it should be

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Memphis Baas
#36 - 2016-02-05 22:12:21 UTC
Quote:

faux (fō)

- made in imitation; artificial.
"a string of faux pearls"

- not genuine; fake or false.
"their faux concern for the well-being of the voters didn't fool many"
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2016-02-06 11:16:14 UTC
Stop Fauxing around, this is serious.
Camios
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2016-02-06 19:09:44 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Jackaryas wrote:
So with the release of the patch notes today it appears the racial Force auxilary skill books are being seeded on the market.

I am guessing this means those of us with carrier 5(s) have to spend another 35-50 days training the new racials to 5?

Seems pretty harsh for those who have spent 100 or so days training carrier 5 and t2 triage



How are you training 14m SP in 35 days?



With skill injectors :trollface:
Jus'not N'miFace
Sheep Teet Industries
#39 - 2016-02-06 21:10:59 UTC
yah I have caldari carrier 5 and amarr carrier 5 only for triage if I have to train each up to 5 again that is total bull ****. And it's disgusting if ccp makes us train that many more skills.
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2016-02-06 21:48:59 UTC
Jus'not N'miFace wrote:
yah I have caldari carrier 5 and amarr carrier 5 only for triage if I have to train each up to 5 again that is total bull ****. And it's disgusting if ccp makes us train that many more skills.


I'm in the same boat.
Previous page123Next page