Ships & Modules

There is no need for extra bonuses to ships from training other races' ship skills. The extra choice just from having more ship options is reward enough. It's not like training to level 4 takes a long time.
REPLY: Why is it "reward enough" when it is less rewarding than the alternative.

Plus, it would make it unbalanced for someone who is new and only has one race's skills even trained to run into someone who's been playing a long time who is flying the same ship, but because they've cross-trained they have a huge advantage in the form of extra bonuses.
REPLY: This is exactly the point. You are the first noob to come out and say it openly. This is the reaosn for all the hate in this thread. However it is a misconception. You see as TQ stands now thousands pf chars have 120 mill SP and can fly "all sub caps at 5". Following my suggestion it would take 300 mill SP to do the same thing. This means that for the next 15 odd years a ny newcomer can spend 6 months specialising in a class and then reasonably expect to fly that particular class BETTER than the average bittervet he comes accross daily. Shocking eh?

The suggestion of additional ships that require that much cross-training would only work if they were also quite expensive. Making a ship that can do Interceptor and Assault Frig performance for the price of a T1 Frig would instantly make all T1 Frigs obsolete. Totally unbalanced.
REPLY: Correct. Thus the initial proposal has been tempered to a vessel that requires a lot of training and stands between tech II and tech I and cosst as much as a tech I

I can fly almost anything under the sun and I don't want bonuses added for having all the races. Pointless and demented. Those of us with over a hundred million sp have enough of an advantage anyhow.

One thing to keep in mind about asking people if they decided to 5 all the races ships, one class after another... Most people started with their specialization first. When interceptors first came out, I already had caldari frigate 5 and amarr frigate 5. Had no reason to train gallente or minmatar until I saw how amazing the taranis could be. Of course, back then the crow was king...

I think what you missed in the persons post above me was that he was shown what a Gallente vessel could do. While yes, it took an example of that play style, harmonisation would simply lead to a broken economy. He's falling in line because within a class of vessel, different empires play in a versatile manner. Amarr vessels for example are completely different compared to the Minmatar, they are floating bricks screaming for cap and reps while blasting the enemy at 30km+. Minmater ships brawl with their opponents, delivering high alpha with faster more maneuverable.
REPLY: This sound slike quoting the ship descriptions. Actually all races can be flown in all alternatives. You cna make ammar brawlers and minmattar bricks no problems... the differences are 5% min max...

I shouldn't even have to high light this for you, while you have 2 years over me in EVE, it seems as if you've only flown doctrine fleets from the way you're speaking.
REPLY: Nope I have done say 20% fleet and 80% solo and small gang mainly because at my peak activity years my pc was not up to fleets so I d just warp to target and next frame wake up in station 0_0

Your harmonisation ideals would lead to even further isolation and redundancy of ships.
REPLY: I am not promoting a harmonisation ideal. I am compalining that tey have allready harminised the races so much that transracial training is less of reward than ever... Consider an ammar bloke of 2006. Reward for crosstraining gallente: Drones!!!. Reward for crosstrainign caldari: missles!!!! Same new char if strarting in 2010 .... uh what?

As you know, EVE is made up of the greatest min maxing people in the gaming community. They would instantly jump on board whatever harmonies are "over powered" combined with their ship for having trained multiple races. This would lead to an even worse version of what we are seeing with the WINMATAR craze that swept EVE as well as the NANO craze. Now we have seen it with the Drake craze that has lead to CCP stating that the ship does its role too well to the point of eclipsing other vessels in its class and cost range.
REPLY I am not sure what you mean by using the word harmonies there. As to whether the new suggested ship would become cookicutter: Perhaps it would... even though in general I have seen people goign for the best ability even if haxspensive but then looking at the proliferation of tier 3 BCs perhaps they would go for the new ship... Note however that
(a) This would be one vessel for each class which would still be an improvement perhaps over everyone flying the same class,
(b) This would mean all TQ crosstraining first and I am not sire if a slight advantage would be enough... perhaps it would
(c) more importantly I gave you an alternative int he thread. Instead of new vessels, bleeding small effects on the sam evessel we have now (i.e. caldati frig 5 gives 2% "racial frig increase" on tristans and rifters and whatnot) which completely negates this cookie cutter set up fear argument.


CCP has stated that a new vessel shape up is coming with ships of the line as well as role changes. Now stop trolling people who are genuinly replying. We haven't let it die as you wanted a discussion and we are providing that.
REPLY: Yes they have and perhaps this is why I am all the more interested now that with these changes they do somehting about the class v race balance. A discussion I have nothing against my last comment was to the guy in the porevious page asking why the thread has not died yet. I never troll.

Now take a step backwards. You ll find they all have the same SPs (in my argument) and that the one can fly:
- Set 1 Deimos, Ishtar, Vaga, Munnin, Zealot, Sacriledge, Hugin, Rapier, Arazu, Curse, Pilgrim and
the other can fly:
- Set 2 Deimos, Ishtar, Vaga, Munnin, Zealot, Sacriledge, Cerberus and Eagle.

This sound slike quoting the ship descriptions. Actually all races can be flown in all alternatives. You cna make ammar brawlers and minmattar bricks no problems... the differences are 5% min max...

They are different class vessels. Heavy Assault ships and Reckon cruisers. The fact that they are based on the cruiser hulls does not mean anything for balance purposes...

If for some reason that you think is important to look also at classes based on different size hulls for whatever reason (personally I do not find it is helpfull to the discussion) go to the same post you quote and look a wee bit further down there is an example involving HACs and BSs...

I do not see the relevance of the stated objection. EDIT: to clarify the comparison is what skillset you end up with if you take two chars both trained with 3 racial cruiser 5s and heavy assault cruiser 4 say and then the one spends the next 20 days training the fourth race cruiser level 5 ending up with "Set 2" and the other trains reckons 1 to 4 and support skills in the same 20 days and ends up with "Set 1"

In any event all these examples are by necessity technical and stylicized ... do not ge too hang up on technicalities.

Well Liang it's anyone's guess. Personally I do not like the idea of 4 faction ships because I do not like more isk sinks. However it is the one closest to CCP norms.

My proposal remains for a T1 vessel available, (let's start with frig, cruiser and BS) when you have all corresponding skills to 5. Let's say 1 mill isk cost (before market gains) at frig 10 at cruiser 150 at BS. Providing a small efficiency increase over the tech1 counterpart. Details TBD. OP numbers out of the question of course.

Alternative proposal naming a "transfer skill" for each race at each class. Affects correc race vessel at 5% per level, ally race vessel at 1% per level and enemy races levels at 0.5% per level.

As an example, flying an Omen you get 5% per level neut amount from ammar cruiser 5, 1% p/l optimal turret range / missile velocity from caldari cruiser 5 (obviously these skills would have to be of generic application), 0.5% per level web range from minm cruiser 5 and 0.5% per level web factor from gallente cruiser 5. All the above values and skills are simple, placeholders.

Such a widespread change of course should be first implemented for a few months in some more deserving classes only. Frigates-t1-, cruisers-t1-, then later HACs and AFs if all goes well... 6 months down the line it should be clear whether this should be extended to everyhingTM.