These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[February] Force Auxiliary Skills

First post First post
Author
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#221 - 2016-02-09 15:59:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Frostys Virpio
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Confirming triage carriers were #1 damage on kills regularly.

You appear to be conflating triage and slowcat.


No amount of refitting can make a basilisk turn into a dps platform.



That's neither here nor there. Cruiser V lets me jump from DPS to logi.

Carrier V used to too. Well, it would if I could use triage, but you take my point.

The lack of specialised carrier hulls creates a demand for a new hull and changes to old one certainly, it absolutely does not create a need for new skill as well.



Not in the same ship which is the core problem with carrier and the reason they are being split.

The reason why you think it does not deserve a new skill is because you are used to having both. If it all had been released like how it is supposed to end up being, people would of taken it and trained for whatever they wanted to fly.
Alex Harumichi
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#222 - 2016-02-09 16:00:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Alex Harumichi
Morrigan LeSante wrote:

Why the heck should I be able to do everything I can today with my carrier after the changes, but my logi bros need to pay out? That's bullshit and you know it.


That's not really horribly accurate. Your "logi bros" will need to pay out the cost of the new fax skill. That's it. In the general scope of things, on capship level, that's peanuts.

...and carrier pilots will need to get new skills, too (the new fighter squadrons).

So all in all, both "paths" look pretty equal to me.

This assumes that one can swap from carrier to fax in a somewhat 1:1 fashion isk-wise, which may not be the case in the beginning, of course What?
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#223 - 2016-02-09 16:05:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Alex Harumichi wrote:

In that case you'll have to invest in new ships and new skills (so isk + training time, yes). I get that it can suck (hell, I'm in for that haul myself).

But consider the options (from CCP point of view).

a) Use existing Carriers skill for both Carriers and FAXes. That seems clunky and doesn't make much sense... why do Dreads need their own skill in that case? Why do the other capships? Why should these two hulls (with very different roles) use same base skill? It doesn't really fit into existing game structure, imho.


Why does a bantam and a kestrel use the same skill? They perform 2 very different roles.

Alex Harumichi wrote:

b) Give everyone with existing Carrier skill the equivalent amount of Fax skill levels. While I'm sure players would love that, I'm not 100% sure that's reasonable -- it would magically generate a ton of new sp for players, and give existing carrier pilots a frankly unfair bonus compared to everyone else.


No one wants more gifted SP in game creating a greater divide between the older and newer players. Thats why option A is better and only as 'clunky' as it is in the frigate and cruiser class.

Alex Harumichi wrote:

I think CCP's current line (force people to choose between the new dps carriers and the new logi faxes) makes sense. You decide which carrier role is more important to you, and you get to keep that with minimal tweaking. The other one you need to invest in.

Just my opinion, of course.


Ive already trained both roles, it doesnt make sense to make me train the same role again. I dont fly phobos at all and never will do, but that doesnt mean i wouldnt care if they just inserted another skill for me to train to be able to fly it.

Your opinion is absurd (apart from the dreadnought observation which is fair).

The fact that its too complicated for your to see that this is a cash grab doesnt make it, not cash grab lol.

You would appear to be CCPs idea new demographic.
D3m0n sam
Mea Culpa.
#224 - 2016-02-09 16:08:45 UTC
Alex Harumichi wrote:
D3m0n sam wrote:
Alex Harumichi wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Confirming triage carriers were #1 damage on kills regularly.

You appear to be conflating triage and slowcat.


Your point is? If you fly triage carriers now and don't care about the dps, do the following:

- get the new fax skill
- when this goes live move all your carrier skills to fax
- swap carrier for a fax

Done. You're now able to fly triage again, and if you weren't using dps before, you won't need it now either.

Sure, you'll need to buy one more new skill, but that's pocket change for capship pilots. No extra training time required.



So what about people that want to do both. We now need to spend 30+ per race for FAX and then more for the drone skills.



In that case you'll have to invest in new ships and new skills (so isk + training time, yes). I get that it can suck (hell, I'm in for that haul myself).

But consider the options (from CCP point of view).

a) Use existing Carriers skill for both Carriers and FAXes. That seems clunky and doesn't make much sense... why do Dreads need their own skill in that case? Why do the other capships? Why should these two hulls (with very different roles) use same base skill? It doesn't really fit into existing game structure, imho.

b) Give everyone with existing Carrier skill the equivalent amount of Fax skill levels. While I'm sure players would love that, I'm not 100% sure that's reasonable -- it would magically generate a ton of new sp for players, and give existing carrier pilots a frankly unfair bonus compared to everyone else.

I think CCP's current line (force people to choose between the new dps carriers and the new logi faxes) makes sense. You decide which carrier role is more important to you, and you get to keep that with minimal tweaking. The other one you need to invest in.

Just my opinion, of course.



A - It doesn't fit the current structure but ripping a role from a ship and then saying **** you, You now have to train a new x14 skills as well as drones skills to be able to exactly what you could do prior the patch. And worst of all to even reset your SP can will be spending 500 per racial skill book so you don't get arse ****** if they decide to not release the information for the FAX & Carriers until spring.

B - They have done that with Battlecruisers & Destroyers so what's different now... Extractors..

They rushed this in one day before the patch, because even if people complained they couldn't take it out the build. And they can't change it now as refunding the FAX & Drone SB would be a nightmare for them.



Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#225 - 2016-02-09 16:08:50 UTC
I understand the reason for this change is because people who trained into carriers are having what they trained into completely changed. And the new ship that did a carrier's work is now the force aux.

Since you are completely changing what carrier skill points are good for it makes sense you are allowing people to respec. But why do I need Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration in order to respec my carrier skillpoints? Those skill points are still wasted for what I wanted to use them for.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#226 - 2016-02-09 16:13:45 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
" you don't get to do tomorrow what you can do today".


Which amount to **** all since CCP's rule was always if you can fly ship X today, you will be able to fly it tomorrow. If you can fly an Caldari carrier today, you will be able to fly it come citadel unless YOU CHOOSE to use the option provided to spec out of it.

If your gonna cry about the "wasted" and "useless" skill for a dedicated X pilot, then remember this is the exact same way they handled to Orca skill shuffle where people were "stuck" with barge skill for example. CCP is following their usual rules quite to the letter in this case but people expect them to deviate from the usual procedure.

It's not unheard of for people to be left with non optimal skills. As was told to Orca pilots back then, your skill are not useless. You just decide not to use them.


but the ship i can fly now will not be here when the citadel release hits its getting cut in half. one half is just keeping the same name and model


Yes it will be. If you had an Archon, you will still be able to fly an archon. If you could fly a chimera, you will still be able to fly a chimera. People could still fly their geddons after the change to a neut platform even if the way they used to use it was no longer functionnal.



Don't be obtuse. Just because to Chimera name is following the Fighter role doesn't mean the the triage/rep role wasn't an equally valid and important reason to train the hulls in the first place. Stop being a **** and try and engage with the actual issue.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#227 - 2016-02-09 16:15:52 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Confirming triage carriers were #1 damage on kills regularly.

You appear to be conflating triage and slowcat.


No amount of refitting can make a basilisk turn into a dps platform.



That's neither here nor there. Cruiser V lets me jump from DPS to logi.

Carrier V used to too. Well, it would if I could use triage, but you take my point.

The lack of specialised carrier hulls creates a demand for a new hull and changes to old one certainly, it absolutely does not create a need for new skill as well.



Not in the same ship which is the core problem with carrier and the reason they are being split.

The reason why you think it does not deserve a new skill is because you are used to having both. If it all had been released like how it is supposed to end up being, people would of taken it and trained for whatever they wanted to fly.


Then why do both skills needed to be rank 14?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#228 - 2016-02-09 16:16:01 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Confirming triage carriers were #1 damage on kills regularly.

You appear to be conflating triage and slowcat.


No amount of refitting can make a basilisk turn into a dps platform.



That's neither here nor there. Cruiser V lets me jump from DPS to logi.

Carrier V used to too. Well, it would if I could use triage, but you take my point.

The lack of specialised carrier hulls creates a demand for a new hull and changes to old one certainly, it absolutely does not create a need for new skill as well.



Not in the same ship which is the core problem with carrier and the reason they are being split.

The reason why you think it does not deserve a new skill is because you are used to having both. If it all had been released like how it is supposed to end up being, people would of taken it and trained for whatever they wanted to fly.



You can actually fit guns to a T2 logistics. And while not effective ive seen guardian pairs do reasonably well in roams.

But you are comparing apples to oranges. Carriers are a T1 ship. Compare them to other T1 ships like frigates and cruisers that have both combat and rep roles under one skill.
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
#229 - 2016-02-09 16:18:03 UTC
Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration should split to be racial and be a 14x skill that is renamed to race force auxiliary.

ApolloF117 HUN
Puritans
We want your ISK
#230 - 2016-02-09 16:24:11 UTC
now i would like to switch back the old forum where i could see if devs are even reading the topic, now its looks like they made a decision in the last minute and screw you all, since 2015 i have the strange feeling that CCP Games are cooparating with WG business managers

Alex Harumichi
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#231 - 2016-02-09 16:24:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Alex Harumichi
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


You would appear to be CCPs idea new demographic.


That would be "very old" demographic, actually. When I started this game Kestrels could use cruise missiles. Just saying. Cool

I've seen pretty much all things in the game change, then change again, then change again. I've usually (though not always) agreed with CCP's reasons for doing the changes. I don't see anything different this time around, either, tbh. Things change, and balancing is sometimes a bit painful.

Sure, some things here could (and maybe should) be tweaked.

For example, why require fax skill of the same race as carrier? In fact, why not just offer reimbursement option for all carrier skill, period? That way people could pick what fax they want to go for (if any). Now, since you need to have same-skill fax skill, you risk that one being inferior and potentially needing to buy another 500mil skill to get the one you want. That sort of sucks.

Also, offering reimbursement of fighter / fighter bomber skills might make sense, since pure-triage pilots won't now have any use for that.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#232 - 2016-02-09 16:25:42 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Confirming triage carriers were #1 damage on kills regularly.

You appear to be conflating triage and slowcat.


No amount of refitting can make a basilisk turn into a dps platform.



That's neither here nor there. Cruiser V lets me jump from DPS to logi.

Carrier V used to too. Well, it would if I could use triage, but you take my point.

The lack of specialised carrier hulls creates a demand for a new hull and changes to old one certainly, it absolutely does not create a need for new skill as well.



Not in the same ship which is the core problem with carrier and the reason they are being split.

The reason why you think it does not deserve a new skill is because you are used to having both. If it all had been released like how it is supposed to end up being, people would of taken it and trained for whatever they wanted to fly.



You appear to be being willfully obtuse.

Explain why a new hull and rebalance of texting old is insufficient to correct them.
Alex Harumichi
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#233 - 2016-02-09 16:28:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Alex Harumichi
Lady Rift wrote:
Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration should split to be racial and be a 14x skill that is renamed to race force auxiliary.



Not a bad idea as such, but then we have the imbalance with dreads again. They need different skills for ship hull and for siege module... so those should probably be changed the same way. But that opens up another skill reimbursement can of worms, since dread skill and siege skill are of different ranks and people have them trained to different levels. It could become messy.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#234 - 2016-02-09 16:31:23 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Confirming triage carriers were #1 damage on kills regularly.

You appear to be conflating triage and slowcat.


No amount of refitting can make a basilisk turn into a dps platform.



That's neither here nor there. Cruiser V lets me jump from DPS to logi.

Carrier V used to too. Well, it would if I could use triage, but you take my point.

The lack of specialised carrier hulls creates a demand for a new hull and changes to old one certainly, it absolutely does not create a need for new skill as well.



Not in the same ship which is the core problem with carrier and the reason they are being split.

The reason why you think it does not deserve a new skill is because you are used to having both. If it all had been released like how it is supposed to end up being, people would of taken it and trained for whatever they wanted to fly.


Then why do both skills needed to be rank 14?


I don't know why they make it stay a rank 14 and why the new one is a rank 14. All I know is that they followed their very own rules to the letter and people are asking for them to stray away from those rules. Many of those people asking CCP to change the ususal rules are also the type to post stuff like HTFU or shitting on proposal to make the game less of a clusterfuck because "EVE is suppsoed to be hard" and other similar reasons.

I have no issue with people being mad about the rank of the skill being 14 while the ship is losing some major options but carrier will still be driven by the carrier skill and CCP basicaly decided FAX would not be a carrier class vessel which mean they need a skill.

They obvioulsy don't want to give it out for free in term of SP so any change in the rank of the skill would probably be faced with SP deletion or sunk in new pre-req for example.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#235 - 2016-02-09 16:32:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Alex Harumichi wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


You would appear to be CCPs idea new demographic.


That would be "very old" demographic, having played this game (with same character) since 2004 Cool

I've seen pretty much all things in the game change, then change again, then change again. I've usually (though not always) agreed with CCP's reasons for doing the changes. I don't see anything different this time around, either, tbh. Things change, and balancing is sometimes a bit painful.

Sure, some things here could (and maybe should) be tweaked.

For example, why require fax skill of the same race as carrier? In fact, why not just offer reimbursement option for all carrier skill, period? That way people could pick what fax they want to go for (if any). Now, since you need to have same-skill fax skill, you risk that one being inferior and potentially needing to buy another 500mil skill to get the one you want. That sort of sucks.

Also, offering reimbursement of fighter / fighter bomber skills might make sense, since pure-triage pilots won't now have any use for that.


Very old demographic with 57 all time kills. That really does shed some light on your perspective here.

Why not just base the FAX and DPS carrier on the same skill, since they both roles came from ships under that skill?

As i have said, the only reason they dont follow the same rules as frigs and cruisers is that CCP needs a new SP sink to drive sales of SP injectors.
D3m0n sam
Mea Culpa.
#236 - 2016-02-09 16:32:43 UTC
Alex Harumichi wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration should split to be racial and be a 14x skill that is renamed to race force auxiliary.



Not a bad idea as such, but then we have the imbalance with dreads again. They need different skills for ship hull and for siege module... so those should probably be changed the same way. But that opens up another skill reimbursement can of worms, since dread skill and siege skill and of different ranks and people have them trained to different levels. It could become messy.



Why not just use a module for putting carrier into a damage mode like dreads but amplifies drone damage.

Doesn't require a new ship just a new skill which can be calculated from TLC.
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
#237 - 2016-02-09 16:33:42 UTC
Alex Harumichi wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration should split to be racial and be a 14x skill that is renamed to race force auxiliary.



Not a bad idea as such, but then we have the imbalance with dreads again. They need different skills for ship hull and for siege module... so those should probably be changed the same way. But that opens up another skill reimbursement can of worms, since dread skill and siege skill and of different ranks and people have them trained to different levels. It could become messy.




dreads siege can be changed when they add a new dread that doesn't have to siege.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#238 - 2016-02-09 16:33:54 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:



You appear to be being willfully obtuse.

Explain why a new hull and rebalance of texting old is insufficient to correct them.


I don't know the real answer but if I have to make a guess on why they did it, I'd say it's because they want each capital hull your train for to be a meaningful choice with the associated time sink.
Alex Harumichi
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#239 - 2016-02-09 16:35:15 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Why not just base the FAX and DPS carrier on the same skill, since they both came from ships under that skill?

As i have said, the only reason they dont follow the same rules as frigs and cruisers is that CCP needs a new SP sink to drive sales of SP injectors.


Well, I'd argue that the reason is that currently, all existing different capital ship types have their own separate skills. Suddenly having carrier and fax share the same skill would, to me, be weird. And it would not follow the convention the other capships have.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#240 - 2016-02-09 16:39:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Alex Harumichi wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Why not just base the FAX and DPS carrier on the same skill, since they both came from ships under that skill?

As i have said, the only reason they dont follow the same rules as frigs and cruisers is that CCP needs a new SP sink to drive sales of SP injectors.


Well, I'd argue that the reason is that currently, all existing different capital ship types have their own separate skills. Suddenly having carrier and fax share the same skill would, to me, be weird. And it would not follow the convention the other capships have.


You are wrong though, mothers and carriers run on essentially the same skills despite being different classes.

And why would it be weird having dps carriers and logi carriers on the same skill? Its weird to me that it would be weird to you, since thats how its been since they were introduced. Perhaps we have different understandings of the word 'weird' ?

Also, we suddenly had frig logi and frig DPS sharing the same skill. We suddenly had cruiser logi and cruiser DPS sharing the same skill. Doesnt seem to have ever presented a problem to anyone, ever. And no one has ever said its 'weird'.