These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Skill Discussions

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Training Command ships... bad time?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
GreenSeed
#1 - 2012-12-11 22:06:28 UTC
as the title says, is it a bad time to train them?

i have the bc skills, missing cruiser V, but since its a single use alt, i don't have any of the tertiary skills... will those remain after the bc skill changes? the whole thing is a good 60 days, of which i can see some future use on the cruiser V skills to get on a T3 ship (15days) ... but logi skills? eww...

i wont be flying logis anytime soon on that alt. actually, never.

i remember reading about changes on command ships prereqs, but i cant find the link to the blog.Sad

anyway, should i wait for the changes?
Cap James Tkirk
TEMPLAR.
The Initiative.
#2 - 2012-12-11 22:33:56 UTC
gonna be awhile before CCP gets to T2 ships thet are doing BC/BS next then they have to go through the T2 lines from frig up and rebalance

also look into deve post by CCP Falcon lots of info (at work and lazy to find the link)
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#3 - 2012-12-11 22:59:52 UTC
I've recently trained command ships on 3 characters. I don't see any drawbacks to training them, even with the proposed changes.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2012-12-11 23:25:01 UTC
Cap James Tkirk wrote:
gonna be awhile before CCP gets to T2 ships thet are doing BC/BS next then they have to go through the T2 lines from frig up and rebalance

also look into deve post by CCP Falcon lots of info (at work and lazy to find the link)



CCP Fozzie was pretty clear that they are breaking with tradition and doing command ships after they do BC/BS. The reason stated is that the boosting situation is important enough to take care of before they start up with T 2 frigs etc.
GreenSeed
#5 - 2012-12-11 23:34:46 UTC
k, found the devblog. as usual its not very clear, but if im reading it right its there.



Quote:
Cut needless requirements for tech 2 ships across classes. Tech 2 philosophy is all about specializing into a specific hull and role, thus, requiring players to train for Assault Ships, then Heavy Assault Ships when aiming for Field Command Ships, is quite redundant.


Quote:
To sum up, this means that tech 1 sub-capital vessels would take a bit longer to train for (from 9 to 17 days for Battleships for instance), capitals would be less time consuming (30 days faster) and tech 2 ships like Interdictors and Command Ships would require 14-20 less days to train for.


http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=9129
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#6 - 2012-12-12 00:45:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
GreenSeed wrote:
k, found the devblog. as usual its not very clear, but if im reading it right its there.

Ah, yes...

Fleet Command and Field Command currently have different prerequisites, and CCP wants to make them the same. In fact, they want to make all command ships function the same too, so no more booster-only and combat-only versions.

The major difference being Field Command ships requiring Weapon Upgrades 5 + Heavy Assault Ships 4. So if you didn't plan to ever train those, you might consider waiting to train command ships.

Everybody trains (or should) Weapon Upgrades 5 though (to get Advanced Weapon Upgrades), and HACs are worth the training time too. Hence, might as well as train command ships now.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#7 - 2012-12-13 20:51:43 UTC
I'll just refer to this post with a more visual break-down of the changes that they've proposed.

And no, if you plan on being a fleet booster, then training CS will not be a bad idea at any time, especially since they are going to do something about T3s being strictly better than CS.
GreenSeed
#8 - 2012-12-14 03:20:51 UTC
thanks, and yeah i was thinking on CS over t3 due to all the talk about t3 losing their 5% bonus.
RavenPaine
RaVeN Alliance
#9 - 2012-12-14 06:18:26 UTC
Command ships are great PvP platforms at half the cost (or even less) of T3's. I have 3 accounts and the booster alt is actually the last 1 to train CS to V. He is on it now though Cool
Zoltan Lazar
#10 - 2012-12-14 07:20:19 UTC
From what I know, the leadership skills will all stay the same, and those are the bulk of the training time for boosting command ships. For PvP command ships, you might as well have T2 frigs and cruisers trained a bit, so it can't hurt.

You DEFINITELY want to get BC V and all cruisers to III before late February. With some luck, they won't split BC until April, but who knows.
Kirkwood Ross
Golden Profession
#11 - 2012-12-16 17:38:28 UTC
Boosting pilots are always in demand. Off grid boosting is being reworked to put the boosting ship at risk. My opinion on the OGB rework is that they wont allow Warfare links to work while on grid with a POS or Station. That way the warfare boosting pilot can be probed down and killed at the very least.

Having the boosting pilot on the same grid as the fight is good in theory but unrealistic to apply. I doubt Mining Foreman links will be reworked as few people complain about them on the forums. If they were reworked the Rorqual would be less appealing compared to a perma aligned orca.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2012-12-16 19:26:26 UTC
Kirkwood Ross wrote:
Boosting pilots are always in demand. Off grid boosting is being reworked to put the boosting ship at risk. My opinion on the OGB rework is that they wont allow Warfare links to work while on grid with a POS or Station. That way the warfare boosting pilot can be probed down and killed at the very least.

Having the boosting pilot on the same grid as the fight is good in theory but unrealistic to apply. I doubt Mining Foreman links will be reworked as few people complain about them on the forums. If they were reworked the Rorqual would be less appealing compared to a perma aligned orca.


I don't see the changes to be anything like that. First off CCP has been clear that as partly the POS revamp forcefields are going away. That by default will stop the boosting from a pos. plenty of fights occur at a pos or station so restricting use while on grid with either would be bad
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#13 - 2012-12-17 07:53:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
Derath Ellecon wrote:
I don't see the changes to be anything like that. First off CCP has been clear that as partly the POS revamp forcefields are going away. That by default will stop the boosting from a pos. plenty of fights occur at a pos or station so restricting use while on grid with either would be bad

There was discussion of moored ships instead of a force field. How that would interact with boosting is anybody's guess at this point.

The Rorqual is probably the biggest challenge for moving to on-grid boosting. It was designed to be immobile when the industrial core is active, and it only has battleship-class DPS with a small-sized drone bay for a capital. I can think of ways to improve it (like increased resists and shield boosting with the core active, super-cap EWAR immunity, and a sub carrier-class drone bay), but not to solve the problem: a capital ship that will never earn a sub-cap escort.