Player Features and Ideas Discussion

if ccp could be trusted to do this and not just make things worse


......

i don't trust they can

That's why I write guide last year. It's in Ships and Modules, glued on first page.

Ideas like this have been floating around for a fair time (including this exact idea).

In general, I'm in favour of teaching by example. Providing a few 'decent' fits to people. I would, however, not put them in as part of the starter corps. Some people spend very little time in them, and move onto their own corps quickly, before they would pick up all the hints about it.

(something to bear in mind about fittings, is that they add a constant drain on resources. might be a small one, but all fittings need to be relooked at, when there's a module rebalance)

An honest question for those who are saying it's a bad idea: How is it worse than what we currently have?

It's doubtful that there will ever be a single one-shot fix; any fixes to assisting new players in the long-run will be a multi-part solution, as opposed to a one-and-done fix. Looking at it from that perspective, is providing fittings that are functional, even if they aren't completely optimal, better than providing nothing at all? Right now, the solution is "let other players teach them," but there are plenty enough situations where that simply hasn't worked out. What's the harm in providing a basic fit to them, in addition to players continuing to teach them? Offering a few starter fittings doesn't prevent players from still assisting them.

Again, saved fittings have description tabs. These tabs get 400 characters to fill in. While that isn't a lot, it's enough to give some basic information.

For an AB blaster Incursus, for example: "A light-weight armor fit made for close-range combat, using a bonused armor repairer to recover from some of the incoming damage."

At 129 characters, there's still 271 characters available to get more detailed or to clarify things. They don't have to be encyclopedic entries (which would do more harm than good due to information overload), they just have to get the point across that it's a short-range armor ship that uses armor repairers.

If the "fits for PvP" part is a problem, since PvP is such an ever-changing landscape, then focus on fits for PvE against the primary rats in the starter territory. It still provides an additional bit of information, more than simply "ask another player."

As for concerns with CCP making the fits, ask for assistance from the many newbie-friendly corps out there, focusing on fits that can be flown by a starter-skills-only character. EVE Uni, Pandemic Horde, Karma Fleet, Brave Newbies, etc,

Agree in spirit. Teaching players to use cookie cutter fits = not good. I think a lot of larger corps have doctrines for a couple of reasons. They are lazy and 'do this' is a lot easier than teaching someone. It's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy from then on - giving doctrines for (reason here) enables newbros to not learn about fitting. The improved training tools that show you how many days to get to a fit also enables the lack of fitting know how. It's currently just too easy to get a link to a fit from any number of places, plop it or the ship/modules into a training program and it spits out a map and how long. (great tool, but it's also a great crutch to not learn proper fitting).

You can't link understanding, which is what new players need.

I think there's a balance. Telling people to fly passive armor cruisers, for example is reasonable for a roam, linking an exact fit that everyone has to fly gets a bit much, most of the time.

That being said, there are times when an FC definitely doesn't need to deal with crap fits and needs to know exactly what everyone is bringing.

Center for Advanced Studies already does this, in our "Ship Fitting" forum of our discussion board. We have basic Meta 0 combat fits for frigs, destroyers and cruisers of all races (which also are the fits of ships we hand out as replacements during our CAS Combat Day roams), as well as a wide variety of logi fits and PvE frig/destroyer fits.

The game doesn't need CCP handing out suggested fits, it needs players doing it. And they are. EVE Uni is another example.

Yours will probably be the best all inclusive fitting guide site. Good luck, and don't skimp on the whys and wherefores.

Thanx in advance!

I could bite, but I'll play it straight. I don't have a site, and doubt I ever will.

I know there are sites out there, though, and some that go into detail about the how and why. I understand why folks feel that simply providing fits would be bad, though I disagree with it (again, I don't feel it would be worse than it is now). However, if there are well-known and reputable sites with good information on them regarding it, perhaps those would be a better resource to link, instead.

It's a shame that CCP pulled down their wiki; with a bit of cleaning and effort, perhaps that would have been something to link if they didn't want to give special preference to a third-party site.

And before you (or anyone else) make a sarcastic remark about why I didn't do the work on their wiki myself, it's because I've only been in EVE for ~6 months. I barely knew it existed before it was pulled. If I had, and if I had a better understanding of fitting at the time, I would have happily contributed.

I made this suggestion originally based on my own experiences, and what I feel would have helped me with some of my original fits. I didn't start really grasping fits and what was going on with them until I saw others' fits, what mods they used, and was able to see a few more of the many, many modules on them. Playing with EFT and putting the pre-made fits in and putting things on and off them did more to help me than receiving literally no information at all beyond what the Career Agents said (which is largely useless beyond their individual missions and mission chains).

I'll tell you what, you pay me 5 billion per page and I write you a book. Sound good?