These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Rebalancing EVE, one ship at a time

First post First post
Author
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#701 - 2012-03-06 22:32:34 UTC
Karles wrote:
Buzzmong wrote:
Syri Taneka wrote:
Put it this way. As of right now I can fly the Damnation, Absolution, Astarte, Eos, Vulture, Nighthawk, Claymore, and Sleipnir. I own 3 of those across 3 races. If, after this proposed change, I can no longer fly some of them without spending another 23d 17h 34m 53s (BC 5 based on my current attributes) PER RACE, then I will quit. No questions, end of story, done. And I won't be alone.


FFS. Can you people not read the the FIRST POST correctly?

If you can fly a ship now, you'll be able to fly it post patch.

Got it?

Good.



Ok stop replying the same stupid SHT every time. Able to fly does not mean able to fly PROPERLY or MAXED. Stop being flashed by all the shiny stuff they throw at you.

CCP should be able to give more content without screwing with the older toons.

I am able to fly all 4 command ship races at level 5 with all mindlinks. Is CCP granting that I could keep being the fleet commander with full bonus for my fleet? C'mon I'm not idiot.

You are really going to **** off a lot of vets, and you know what happened the last time you did this, so think twice before being a bunch of tards again.



What part of this do you not understand? If you can fly any of the BC's at level 5 now, you will be able to fly any of the BC's at level 5 after the release. Players will not be penalized any capabilities they have now due to the change.

I don't think you're an idiot, but I do think you believe this is too good to be true. Regardless, there it is.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Karles
UK Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#702 - 2012-03-06 22:33:16 UTC
Avena Feint wrote:
After reading all 35 pages of this, I decided I just had to chime in to support these changes. The only people who have any sort of valid argument are those who seem dead set against the BSV requirement for Capitols. Personally I don't have issues with it, but I can see where some might. Folks here should be making suggestions and having a nice discourse with the company who makes the game we all enjoy, not just splurting emorage all over the forums.

+1 for removal of tiers. +1 for making the ship progression make sense. +1 for the tears of bittervets who fail at reading comprehension.


-1 for noobs that did not trained any valuable skill besides the ones used to rat or plex. I have been training for combat for 5,5 years and I think I have the right to complain. So a lot of other vets have. This is nothing else than add game time to spend to the gamers without adding any extra content.
Cyprus Black
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#703 - 2012-03-06 22:34:15 UTC
There's several things I took away from this

The Good
1) Covetors no longer require Mining Barge 5 to fly. It didn't make any sense to have it the way it was because if you had the skills to fly a covetor, you're only a few hours away from flying a hulk instead. I'm glad to see this long overdue fix

2) Cutting needless requirements for T2 ships across classes is a good thing. Why do I have to skill up Assault Ships, then Heavy Assault ships just to train up Command ships? That's just silly

3) Electronic Attack Frigates may finally become viable for once.

The Bad (potentially)
1) I have both Battlecruiser and Destroyer skills to 5. Splitting them up into individual races would be very aggravating to say the least. It took quite a bit of time to train them both to 5, I don't want to repeat that long training 3 more times just to reach the point I was originally at pre-Inferno. That's a nerf and a big one

If the Inferno expansion took away the generic Battlecruiser and Destroyer skills that I trained and instead gave me level 5 of each race, I would consider that a fair trade. I wouldn't have gained anything but neither would I have lost anything. As it stands now it's a major no-no that CCP shouldn't do.

Summary of EvEs last four expansions: http://imgur.com/ZL5SM33

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#704 - 2012-03-06 22:34:53 UTC
Stanis Myunga wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Stanis Myunga wrote:
I'm concerned with the fact that this would screw those of us who've progressed directly from frigate to cruiser training. Up until 3-4 months ago I didn't have destroyers trained and I was already flying in battleship-class vessels.

These changes would mean an extremely huge nerf to nullsec PVP and severely disrupt fleet ops as major retraining would be needed, especially for toons under 2 years of age.

Cross-training at present point in time is relatively easy and not so much time consuming. However, with the changes, you're going to rickroll players' abilities to cross-train for other vessels.

In my instance, I can, at this moment in time... fly a Machariel, Vindi and Bhaalgorn. With the changes to the skill trees, I will be locked out most if not all pirate faction vessels that I can currently fly and do own. So will other members from my corp. Which is not making anyone happy.

Then there's those of us with negligible SP in destroyers and battlecruisers. Are we going to be reimbursed with full SP to match our current ship skills to keep continuity or will we be forced change gears and spend even MORE time training destroyers IV and then BC IV to fly battleships AGAIN?


Cruisers don't need the frigate skill to pilot. Just to inject the skill in the first place. replacing the frigate skill with the destroyer skill will make no difference here. Read the first post.


And I have edited my post at the bottom with a quoted passage. So yes, I know of it by now. Thanks anyway.

I'm still concerned with the separation of to individual racial skill trees, will we be given equivalent SP back for each race equal to the level of which we've trained dessi/BC at or will we be given just a general value of SP in compensation? This will be very important for those flying Command Ships which won't affect me as much as I don't fly Command Ships but it's something to ponder on. And yes, I do know CCP has stated it is examining how it will reimburse pilots.



I believe that reimbursement of skills comes into play for something trained unneccessarily, like perhaps BS 5 for some (if they wish).

The simple solution, to fulfil what we have been explicitly told, will simply be to give you the same level in all racial destroyer and BC skills as you currently have in the non race specific skill.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Taill
The Storm Runners
#705 - 2012-03-06 22:36:03 UTC
I'm not sure how this is going to work but I know if log on and not able to fly ships I have been flying already I would consider stop playing. I have worked to long to have to start over


Thanks
Vanessa Vansen
Vandeo
#706 - 2012-03-06 22:36:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Vanessa Vansen
First, I do like the idea behind the stuff presented in the dev blog.

So, training ship skills ...

CCP Point of view
- Spaceship Command ... (nearly) all you need to know about flying a spaceship
- Advanced Spaceship Command ... filling up the gaps
- Racial Ship skills (frigate, destroyer, cruiser, ...)

Real life:
- car driving licence ... one for valid for all kinds of cars, no matter which "country" tag they have
- lorry drifing licence ...

- left hand drive experience
- right hand drive experience

So, in real life cross training (licences) are not necessary but mostly you'll have more experience with either left or right hand driving.

From my point of view, the ship size skills correspond to the driving licences while racial handling skills could correspond to the experience (left or right hand drive).

This way the skills would be more "natural", cross-training would be easier, and you wouldn't have to introduce a **** load of new skills each time you come up with something new.

Strategic Cruisers and Subsystems skills were a good example, besides having the racial strategic cruisers skill.

However, you are the ones developing the game, we players will either contiune playing or leave, but I ask you to go the whole way, if you want to rework ship skills, not just half the way as you proposed in the dev blog.

edit: I like the **** Big smile
Karles
UK Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#707 - 2012-03-06 22:36:52 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Karles wrote:
Buzzmong wrote:
Syri Taneka wrote:
Put it this way. As of right now I can fly the Damnation, Absolution, Astarte, Eos, Vulture, Nighthawk, Claymore, and Sleipnir. I own 3 of those across 3 races. If, after this proposed change, I can no longer fly some of them without spending another 23d 17h 34m 53s (BC 5 based on my current attributes) PER RACE, then I will quit. No questions, end of story, done. And I won't be alone.


FFS. Can you people not read the the FIRST POST correctly?

If you can fly a ship now, you'll be able to fly it post patch.

Got it?

Good.



Ok stop replying the same stupid SHT every time. Able to fly does not mean able to fly PROPERLY or MAXED. Stop being flashed by all the shiny stuff they throw at you.

CCP should be able to give more content without screwing with the older toons.

I am able to fly all 4 command ship races at level 5 with all mindlinks. Is CCP granting that I could keep being the fleet commander with full bonus for my fleet? C'mon I'm not idiot.

You are really going to **** off a lot of vets, and you know what happened the last time you did this, so think twice before being a bunch of tards again.



What part of this do you not understand? If you can fly any of the BC's at level 5 now, you will be able to fly any of the BC's at level 5 after the release. Players will not be penalized any capabilities they have now due to the change.

I don't think you're an idiot, but I do think you believe this is too good to be true. Regardless, there it is.


You will see mate... You will see... they are not going to give everyone that has bc 5 and command ship 5 all 4 races of BC at 5 and all 4 races of command ship 5, no way.
Senarian Tyme
Serenity Rising LLC
#708 - 2012-03-06 22:38:16 UTC
I agree that the end of the curren Tier system is a good thing however CCP should really think twice about tweaking the skills as proposed. (Side note, are Cyclone, Ferox, Prophey, and Brutix going to have a spike in mineral costs to build?)



Suposedly CCP wants to encourage players for pew pew, but this change would only speed up capitals in that regard.
(Getting people into covetors a bit faster isn't a bad thing though either on the industrial front.)

Why would you take the Destroyers and the BCs, which are the most adaptive classes for testing out other races hardware and wreck it? If this is being done for the proposed purpose of skill standardization, why not take the revese approach and consolidate the rest of the racial ship skills instead? (Yes it would cheapen the game.)

The Destroyers and the BCs always made sense to be a generic skill since there weren't any true specialty roles. It was all combat, combat in different ways of course, but still all just combat. If CCP were to put in racial BC skills, it would be tolerable if they put in at the exact same time a new wave of BCs (and destroyers) that filled the gaps, ie a tech 1 BC ECM ship that fits between blackbird and scorpion.

However, this in turn really cheapens the purpose and the nature of the T2 ships, which have mostly been filling this role for the combat support side to date.

If CCP plans to simply put in additional combat ships, then I would say dont bother adjusting the skills at all. (Please do put the combat ships in though.) If the new ships provide other values besides direct damage in combat, then only at that point should racial skills realistically be considered, and even then only after careful weighing against impacts on T2 ships.
Stanis Myunga
Exiled Souls
#709 - 2012-03-06 22:38:38 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Karles wrote:
Buzzmong wrote:
Syri Taneka wrote:
Put it this way. As of right now I can fly the Damnation, Absolution, Astarte, Eos, Vulture, Nighthawk, Claymore, and Sleipnir. I own 3 of those across 3 races. If, after this proposed change, I can no longer fly some of them without spending another 23d 17h 34m 53s (BC 5 based on my current attributes) PER RACE, then I will quit. No questions, end of story, done. And I won't be alone.


FFS. Can you people not read the the FIRST POST correctly?

If you can fly a ship now, you'll be able to fly it post patch.

Got it?

Good.



Ok stop replying the same stupid SHT every time. Able to fly does not mean able to fly PROPERLY or MAXED. Stop being flashed by all the shiny stuff they throw at you.

CCP should be able to give more content without screwing with the older toons.

I am able to fly all 4 command ship races at level 5 with all mindlinks. Is CCP granting that I could keep being the fleet commander with full bonus for my fleet? C'mon I'm not idiot.

You are really going to **** off a lot of vets, and you know what happened the last time you did this, so think twice before being a bunch of tards again.



What part of this do you not understand? If you can fly any of the BC's at level 5 now, you will be able to fly any of the BC's at level 5 after the release. Players will not be penalized any capabilities they have now due to the change.

I don't think you're an idiot, but I do think you believe this is too good to be true. Regardless, there it is.


Just to point out quickly...

Quote:
If and when such changes occur, we would remove the generic Destroyer and Battlecruiser skills, reimburse the skill points (and possibly the cost) not to penalize players. Due to the way nested requirements work, it would also mean pilots would not need to re-train anything to fly Battleships or Cruisers. All of this is work in progress of course and subject to change, especially since we are still discussing skill reimbursement options.


"...work in progress and subject to change," So you can't say with any certainty that that will be the end-deal we'll get.
Bruno Bourque
#710 - 2012-03-06 22:38:42 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Karles wrote:
Buzzmong wrote:
Syri Taneka wrote:
Put it this way. As of right now I can fly the Damnation, Absolution, Astarte, Eos, Vulture, Nighthawk, Claymore, and Sleipnir. I own 3 of those across 3 races. If, after this proposed change, I can no longer fly some of them without spending another 23d 17h 34m 53s (BC 5 based on my current attributes) PER RACE, then I will quit. No questions, end of story, done. And I won't be alone.


FFS. Can you people not read the the FIRST POST correctly?

If you can fly a ship now, you'll be able to fly it post patch.

Got it?

Good.



Ok stop replying the same stupid SHT every time. Able to fly does not mean able to fly PROPERLY or MAXED. Stop being flashed by all the shiny stuff they throw at you.

CCP should be able to give more content without screwing with the older toons.

I am able to fly all 4 command ship races at level 5 with all mindlinks. Is CCP granting that I could keep being the fleet commander with full bonus for my fleet? C'mon I'm not idiot.

You are really going to **** off a lot of vets, and you know what happened the last time you did this, so think twice before being a bunch of tards again.



What part of this do you not understand? If you can fly any of the BC's at level 5 now, you will be able to fly any of the BC's at level 5 after the release. Players will not be penalized any capabilities they have now due to the change.

I don't think you're an idiot, but I do think you believe this is too good to be true. Regardless, there it is.

I havnt seen any mention that you will get all races BC to 5 if you have BC 5 already.
Cailais
Tao Expeditionary
#711 - 2012-03-06 22:39:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Cailais
Whilst this looks a noble goal (providing a purpose to under utilised ships) Im not 100% its the right means.

In the past players took ships, and created roles from them. As I read this I get the impression that ships will now be assigned roles, which players should then accept. For example a Megathron as an "attack vessel" having "great damage and mobility, but average defense" , and thus it always shall be.

At the deepest layer of design: is this what we actually want?

Regardless of how skill points are assigned or reimbursed, I am yet to be convinced by the underlying argument that ships need to be nested into defined roles in order to achieve wider balance.

Hopefully this can be expanded upon.

C.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#712 - 2012-03-06 22:39:40 UTC
Cyprus Black wrote:
There's several things I took away from this

The Good
1) Covetors no longer require Mining Barge 5 to fly. It didn't make any sense to have it the way it was because if you had the skills to fly a covetor, you're only a few hours away from flying a hulk instead. I'm glad to see this long overdue fix

2) Cutting needless requirements for T2 ships across classes is a good thing. Why do I have to skill up Assault Ships, then Heavy Assault ships just to train up Command ships? That's just silly

3) Electronic Attack Frigates may finally become viable for once.

The Bad (potentially)
1) I have both Battlecruiser and Destroyer skills to 5. Splitting them up into individual races would be very aggravating to say the least. It took quite a bit of time to train them both to 5, I don't want to repeat that long training 3 more times just to reach the point I was originally at pre-Inferno. That's a nerf and a big one

If the Inferno expansion took away the generic Battlecruiser and Destroyer skills that I trained and instead gave me level 5 of each race, I would consider that a fair trade. I wouldn't have gained anything but neither would I have lost anything. As it stands now it's a major no-no that CCP shouldn't do.


Cyprus, that appears to be exactly what they are proposing, giving you level 5 in all the racial variants (if you already have level 5 in Destroyers or BC).

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#713 - 2012-03-06 22:42:09 UTC
Bruno Bourque wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Karles wrote:
Buzzmong wrote:
Syri Taneka wrote:
Put it this way. As of right now I can fly the Damnation, Absolution, Astarte, Eos, Vulture, Nighthawk, Claymore, and Sleipnir. I own 3 of those across 3 races. If, after this proposed change, I can no longer fly some of them without spending another 23d 17h 34m 53s (BC 5 based on my current attributes) PER RACE, then I will quit. No questions, end of story, done. And I won't be alone.


FFS. Can you people not read the the FIRST POST correctly?

If you can fly a ship now, you'll be able to fly it post patch.

Got it?

Good.



Ok stop replying the same stupid SHT every time. Able to fly does not mean able to fly PROPERLY or MAXED. Stop being flashed by all the shiny stuff they throw at you.

CCP should be able to give more content without screwing with the older toons.

I am able to fly all 4 command ship races at level 5 with all mindlinks. Is CCP granting that I could keep being the fleet commander with full bonus for my fleet? C'mon I'm not idiot.

You are really going to **** off a lot of vets, and you know what happened the last time you did this, so think twice before being a bunch of tards again.



What part of this do you not understand? If you can fly any of the BC's at level 5 now, you will be able to fly any of the BC's at level 5 after the release. Players will not be penalized any capabilities they have now due to the change.

I don't think you're an idiot, but I do think you believe this is too good to be true. Regardless, there it is.

I havnt seen any mention that you will get all races BC to 5 if you have BC 5 already.


Read Soundwaves post, where he explicitly states you will not lose the ability to fly any ship as you currently do because of these changes. The mechanic to achieve this could go a couple of routes, but the fact remains that you will lose NONE of your current capabilities... which in this case means flying them all at level 5.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

islador
Antigen.
#714 - 2012-03-06 22:42:40 UTC
Now that the issue of skillpoint reimbursement has been resolved with CCP promising not to screw us out of our ships, I am not as opposed to this change as I was before, but I still think it is going the wrong way. As a small to med (10 to 50 pilot) gang FC, I feel obligated to say that CCP's listed examples are horrible. If CCP changes the ship stats to allow for them to function properly in the roles they're saying, we're going to end up with MASSIVE changes being necessary to certain ships, and those changes will result in a whole new breed of pwn mobile. The best example I have is the megathron, if it becomes mobile enough to be a main battleship, it will be incredibly powerful.

If CCP wants to change ships and create new roles, they need to abolish the tier system, but they don't need to replace it with a bunch of new pseudo titles that require entire reworks of dozens of ships. They need to tap the minds of some of our best FCs, DBRB, Shadoo, Lucian James, are names that come to mind and see what they have to say about the current state of things and then go from there. I say this because the ideas CCP is presenting today are crap.
Bruno Bourque
#715 - 2012-03-06 22:42:42 UTC
Cailais wrote:
Whilst this look a noble goal (providing a purpose to under utilised ships) Im not 100% its the right means.

In the past players took ships, and created roles from them. As I read this I get the impression that ships will now be assigned roles, which players should then accept. For example a Megathron as an "attack vessel" having "great damage and mobility, but average defense" , and thus it always shall be.

At the deepest layer of design: is this what we actually want?

Regardless of how skill points are assigned or reimbursed, I am yet to be convinced by the underlying argument that ships need to be nested into defined roles in order to achieve wider balance.

Hopefully this can be expanded upon.

C.

Good point, considering Eve is sold as a "sandbox"
Skye Aurorae
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#716 - 2012-03-06 22:42:48 UTC
I personally have no problem with the notion of racial Destroyer/Battlecruiser skills, however, any transition is going to cause pain for one group or the other.

Take a pilot with level 5 in all subcap skills,
Option 1 gives him all the skills needed to keep flying his ships at the same level, which means he'll get a huge bump in skillpoints. However, the younger pilots without highly trained Dessy/BC skills will get less of a bonus and thus they will be negatively impacted by this scheme.

Option 2 simply reimbursing SP would leave him/her unable to fly ships, it will however be fairer to the younger pilots.

So, putting on my CSM hat I offer a Counter Proposal to the Skill Changes:
1 Keep Destroyers and Battlecruisers as a non-racial skill, so CCP doesn't need to poke at character skills
2 Make Destroyers 4 a pre-req for injecting racial cruiser skillbooks (not for flying ships)
3 Make Battlecruiser 4 a pre-req for injecting racial battleships skills (again, not necessarily for flying BS)
4 Modify all destroyers and battlecruisers to take bonuses from the two relevant skills:
Coercer 10% Bonus to Small Energy Turret Tracking Per Level Of Destroyer Skill, -10% reduction in energy turret capacitor usage per level of Amarr frigate
Brutix 5% Bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage per level of Gallente Cruiser, 7.5% bonus per level of Battlecruiser.


I do like the idea of the racial versions, but adding it at this stage will negatively impact the younger players more than the older players, CCP needs to keep the new blood in the game.


Skye Aurora is a 7 year old Girl Who Wants to be on the CSM! Unfortunately, the Lawyers say you have to be 21 - oh well.

Bruno Bourque
#717 - 2012-03-06 22:43:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Bruno Bourque
Ranger 1 wrote:


Read Soundwaves post, where he explicitly states you will not lose the ability to fly any ship as you currently do because of these changes. The mechanic to achieve this could go a couple of routes, but the fact remains that you will lose NONE of your current capabilities... which in this case means flying them all at level 5.


No he siad that you will be able to FLY them... you can fly them with BC 3
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#718 - 2012-03-06 22:44:43 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Ok this thread needs some love now.


SKILLS:


  • Destroyer and Battlecruiser reimbursement: it has been said before, but allow us to repeat again, that we do not want to cut ships you can already fly. Thus, having BC skill at 5 would mean you get all four variations at 5.

  • BS skill at IV for capitals: alright, there is good feedback on that. Point is to make the progression consistent by requiring a skill at 4 to train for the next, higher size class, and 5 for tech 2 ships. If we feel it becomes suddenly too easy to train for capitals, we can always compensate by adding that time back on one of the other, support skill prerequisites for them. Same reasoning applies for freighters. The point of this blog is to specifically discuss such matters before moving forward with them, and for this, you are welcome.



CONFUSING BLOG PICTURES:


  • Confusion between the skill tree change and the ship tree charts: the skill change displays where we want to bring you in the long term future with the overhaul, while the ship tree chart display the current, in-game TQ ship tree. We will show the updated, long term ship trees in the next blogs when they have been fleshed out a bit.



CSM NOT INCLUDED?!:


  • I will be honest by saying this is due to my own failure here, please do not blame CCP, or any other employee on that matter. I just plainly and simply forgot to include them in the feedback process; I know that sounds incredibly stupid, unbelievable or even naive, but you have to realize that between various work duties, procedures that have to be followed, internal meetings and reviews, random design emergencies, questions that pop-up from your team, plus being split into different projects that have to be finished in time, you are bound to forget things in the heat of the moment for being tremendously busy.

  • I will not attempt to justify myself however, this was a professional blunder on top of showing a serious lack of courtesy toward them as individuals, but also as elected representatives of the player base.

    Yes, I do fully acknowledge the value they could have brought to this blog before it was released. Trust me, had I remembered about it, this would have been done as it would have saved a lot of confusion here Oops.

    That is why, not only as a CCP employee, but also as an individual, I would sincerely like to apologize to every and each member of the CSM I forgot to include here. CSM, feel free to smack me in the back of my head during Fanfest to remind me that being absent-minded has life threatening, rage inducing consequences that should be avoided at all costs.



We will keep monitoring this thread and post updates in the next days if there are more issues coming up.
theelusiveyoda
Death Troopers
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#719 - 2012-03-06 22:45:28 UTC
I personally believe the multiple race battlecruiser skill is fine the way it is, from what i can see all you will be doing is creating more headaches for new players and older players who are looking to cross train into other races.

If the skill requirment for carriers is reduced i can for see alot of new players jumping into carriers and dying because they dont have the support skills to fly a carrier and go oooh shiny ship, buy it when they have no idea what the ship's meant to be used for and think its a bigger battleship without fully realising capital ship mechanics. The idea that a 5 month old character can get into a carrier is going to be a major "annoyance" for older players who spent 30+ days training battleship 5 skill alone when that skill would be redundant for capital ship only characters.

Personally regarding ship balancing i would like to see electronic attack frigates recieve some love, in terms of ehp and slot layout as i believe they are some of the most over looked ships in the game as most people go straight for recons because of there better bonuses and ehp and general fleet usefullness, also electronic attack ships skill is not any use to any other ship and is not required in any other ship except the 4 frigates it unlocks.

Also boost the ferox \o/.
Bruno Bourque
#720 - 2012-03-06 22:47:44 UTC
Thank you CCP Ytterbium for clarifiing once and for all.