EVE Information Portal

Yes. Why is that ridiculous? How is that any more ridiculous than being able to fly all the Cruisers of a given race if I train Cruisers I?

Once you put the time into training for a Freighter, given that it's Advanced Spaceship Command V, then you've already done the "leg work" for piloting any Freighter. Besides, its not going to hurt anything to give people the choice to fly the one (or ones) they choose without having to grind 15d each time for Indy V.

Imagine this scenario: I only have a few things to carry, but I only have trained Caldari Freighter. Well, guess what! I can train Minmatar Freighter and in 30 mins be flying the fastest one!

Those are the basic leadership skills, not the ones for command links. The devs probably want to compensate for the longish training skills going away (cruiser V, prereqs for logistics/HAC)

:POPCORN:

This thread really delivers in every aspect !

The only thing that seems a bit strange is the training time required for the orca. But lets wait and see what tiericide will do to it.

As per CCP, if you currently have Amarr Carrier skill injected and trained for ( if can fly it now), after the expansion hits you are all set to fly it because it will still be there for you ( fly afterwards)....BUT..if you decide to train for one of the other race carriers, THEN you would need to meet the skill prerequisites to become able to inject and train the carrier skill. in Another words, at that time you will need to play catchup.

CCP, mind in confirming it?

Can we give some free SP to people who read the whole devblog or at least one or two comments before posting?

The level of RTFDB (read the dev blog) fail in this comment thread is epic.

A few points:

Changes are mostly fine, except 1, the industrial changes, there's going to be absolutely no reason what so ever to use anything but an itty V for anything post expansion, unless your rebalancing the industrials then.

Having to train all warfare skills to V is bloody stupid to be able to fly the field command ships, since many people who fly them will never ever use links, but nearly all of them will use hacs/t2 cruisers, so the old system was far better.

3rdly, not upgrading peoples clones is absolute bullshit, it's your change, your problem. If people don't read dev blogs it's not their fault. Aside from clones being too expensive as is (yay pay ccp for 5 yrs running get changed 100mill isk/pod), it's just not fair to make it our responsibility to upgrade our clone.

Lastly, your actually decreasing the time required to USE a capitol by a hell of a lot, since everyone had to train JDC IV to be in a fleet anyway, since all midpoints etc are done for that, now you can just cross train races into other capitols quick as you like and I thought quick cross training was something you wanted to avoid?

What the hell is with making people train Jump fuel conservation IV to fly it, but Jump calibration III? Did you get those the other way around, or like all ccp decisions, reads like you never play your own game.

I'm curious, as I've never played through a period of skill-changing relevant to my current trained skills before.

How is reimbursement handled, mechanically speaking? Will I wake up after Patch day maintenance with Destroyers X & Battlecruisers Y gone and, replaced with the appropriate new racial skills to fly all those I could fly before hand. Or are we reimbursed in the form of redistributable skill points? If it is the former then I'm not sure reimbursement is quite the correct verb, but fair nuff.

I think I'd prefer the latter on the basis that if this change is to enable specialisation then receiving SP to distribute back into my skill tree would allow me further specify by only injecting back into my chosen race, and use the excess SP to push me further along that race's progression.

* III -> III -> III chaining.

At first I found this odd, but then remembered that this is the same chaining used for missiles and guns between size classes. I think a case can be made for IV -> IV -> IV.


* Command ships and Leadership, 'dictors and bubbles

These dependencies make sense if the primary purpose of these ships is to command / interdict. However, many of the command ships, and the Sabre, were often used simply as assault BC (thus the HAC pre-req) or assault DD. Are there plans for T2 "combat" versions of these ships to be introduced?


* Carriers

It always struck me as odd that the only training difference between a carrier and a super-carrier was Racial Carrier III vs I. With the new changes, there seems to be no skill requirement difference between a carrier and a super-carrier.

And while the jump drive requirements might be perfectly sensible in low- and null-sec, they aren't relevant for WH carriers. There are carriers that spend their entire life in WH space, and never use their jump drive. Others use their jump drive to get to WH space, and thereafter do not. As such, the high jump drive skill reqs seem somewhat arbitrary, especially when compared to the proposed dreadnaught pre-reqs.

(Similar question arises with dreads: is a dread without siege a sensible dread? If it is, then the pre-req is somewhat arbitrary. Less of a problem in this case, since siege mode is useful for any dread, while it's entirely possible for a carrier to fully function as a carrier without using the jump drive)


* Recons and cloaking

Fully half the recon ship hulls don't actually care about cloaks. Force recons are a cruiser version of EAFs plus CovOps. Combat recons are a cruiser version of EAFs, despite the (existing) CovOps pre-req.


* In-class progression

IMO, some of the T2 frig -> T2 cruiser progressions made sense. AS -> HAC. CovOps -> Force Recon. EAF -> Combat Recon (oops!). Dictor -> heavy dictor (oops again). HAC -> Combat Command Ship. Especially since you didn't actually need the frigate racial hull to V to fly the cruiser version, and usually only needed the lower skill to IV (not V) to upgrade. I'm not against removing the chaining, but some of the replacements feel like time-stuffing the progressions to make up for the removal of more logical pre-reqs.


* Indys

One thing I really liked about industrials was that they had different progressions through the different races. Not simply "this is the Amarr / Caldari / Minmatar / Gallente X" - each progression was quite different. It would be a disappointing to see this fail in favour of uniform homogenisation.


* Training times in general

I understand the concern that there can be a big gulf between being able to undock in a ship and being able to fly it. Except for abilities locked to the hull itself (eg titan jump bridges), I'm not sure that this is a problem worth solving by stuffing the tech trees. If I want to fly a dread without a siege module and fitted with medium lasers and meta-1 armour, bully for me. Setting arbitrary "bar is this high to even undock" restrictions doesn't actually do much - other than be annoying - unless they are genuinely preventing the player doing something that would be game-breaking. A two-week old Titan Bridger disposable alt might conceivably be a problem. A two week old player undocking in a critically underpowered dreadnaught isn't.

Coming back the other way, I've always wondered why racial dread isn't a pre-req for racial titan.

But then, I'm of the opinion that the primary skill bar to flying a ship should be effectiveness, not an arbitrary quantity of training time. Give the player the choice what is a "sufficient" quantity of SP - especially in support skills - before they undock a ship, and let their wallet learn the hard way if they are wrong.

I currently have Command Ships trained but I don't have all the various Warefare skills trained to V. I understand I'll still be able to fly my Command Ships but will I not be able to train the Command Ship skill any higher until I have all the requisite Warfare skills to 5? Or how does it work exactly?

"Removal and refund of all Destroyers and Battlecruisers skill books at the NPC order price."

Massive headaches = 990,000 ISK refund.

New increased medical clone costs = Priceless.



CCP, stop the pretense of doing us favors.