EVE Information Portal

Yes.

I took the liberty of reducing the quote to the relevant information :)



We had worse in this threat.

Well they need to dumb the game down cause it is to hard to play now compared to ten years ago I guess--- So they need to follow the "trend"...

^

What if, vice versa, it would get a buff in raw DPS without changing damage application - making it even better in bashing AND supercap destroying?

How reliable is Alexa?

I've had the feeling that actual player numbers are not increasing as much as people claim for quite a while now, lacking reliable data tough.

It annoys me every time the EVE launcher reports active 'players' instead of 'pilots' for the same reason.

Well, i think it's more reliable than some counter of the small game company.

I would like to point out to CCP that their plan on leaving the Freighter requirement for Jumpfreighters at Level 4 is now obsolete, since they will not need to gift the players with the required skillspoints after they changed it so that only the injected Jumpfreighter skill is needed for... wait, what? This does not work for freighters?! Never mind then.

But I really want to see correctly streamlined skilltrees. So please also change that for the Jumpfreighters. I am sure you will find a very creative way to handle the "flying stuff before and after" problem. You did find one for t1 ships and every other T2 ship at least.

Edit: Spontaniously what comes to my mind is to require Lvl 4 to fly it, but Lvl5 to inject the Jumpfreighter skill... it is not a very clean way to do it by all means (and you would still only require one of the freighters to 5), but it's creative, soo... mission accomplished.

But seriously: Jumpfreighters have always been the only T2 ships which did not require the t1 (racial) ship class to 5. Sooner or later you either have to **** off some Jumpfreighter pilots anyway or reimburse skillspoints.

If you really never want to do one of the above... what you could do is to just change it and flag all accounts with jumpfreighter skillbooks injected on patchday with the ability to fly Jumpfreighters with level 4 freighters for a limited amount of time (e.g. 58 days per character with JF injected and per racial freighter skill, which is the longest possible time to have the skill from 4-5 running off-spec and without implants). The countdown should only run as long as the account is active. Also flagged accounts and characters must show a highlighted information message on login if they are not skilling freighter to 5 at any moment.
This would make for almost two years of an interim solution to give players time and skill what their character was set out to be.

The thing is: Players will still be pissed to be forced to maybe skill offspec or are forced to skill an altchar taking away skilltime from their main on the same account, while they planned to not ever touch that character again. So if you don't find a solution that pisses nobody off, do it rather sooner than later, because there will only be more players having a freighter char due to additional time before a change. Thus damage reduction means to shift a change to be done asap.

And please do not tell me you will never change the requirements for JF's because it could make players angry.

Sorry, I edited my post for too long. Please also refer to the new stuff...

The problem here is that the other T2 ships already required the T1 shipclass to 5 anyway, while the JF did not. So the fix was not needed. I was a bit off there.

I am against changing the prereq for T2 ships to Lvl 4 of the T1 ship. I do want to feel a sense of accomplishment after a long skill finished after all.

I do feel the same way about T2 module tree consistency and also think it should be next in line. Though I am not sure what I would want for this... there are modules that need Lvl 4 and there are modules that need Lvl 5. While it would be quite heavy on players to make all T2 modules require Lvl 5, I'd like the idea of shifting the additional bonus of being able to use a better module to be a reward for finishing a longer skill level.
A thorough look at all Meta, T2 and faction modules is needed anyway. Since meta still is often better in some way (e.g. fitting requirements or cap usage). They already buffed T2 plates, but now the pricey faction ones are worse but require the same pg as T2 (and a negligible bonus to CPU requirements).

I think meta items should have superior fitting capabilities, but less bonus. T2 should have superior bonus with a bit more fitting than T1 (non meta). Faction should have either even less fitting requirements then meta with a T2 bonus or a even more superior bonus than T2 with T2 fitting requirements, preferably I should be forced and able to choose between them. Deadspace should combine both superior fitting and bonus obviously with even more of a pricetag (that already is the case for most deadspace stuff.) And officer can do anything (e.g. I like that officer webs have a superior range bonus to everything else but require a huge amount of pg compared to the rest).
Then there is storyline, I don't really know what to do with this. E.g. before the T2 plates where buffed, the storyline plate had the same attributes as T2, but with an even more extreme fitting benefit than the meta plate. Looking at what I would wish for faction, this might be reduntant for storyline now. On the other hand, it could be made in a way (staying with the example of the plates here) that while the faction plates would require less CPU only - for ships that have plenty pg,but are tight on CPU like most Amarr ships - the storyline would have T2 bonuses with less pg requirement - for ships that were not really desinged to fit armor buffer tanks, but have plenty CPU like ewar ships that need plenty midslots to fill their role effectively. This sheme could be kept up for all other storyline modules also. The pricetags on most storyline modules (like the 'Bailey' plate) would definitely justify to be at least on par with faction modules.

Having such a defined sheme for all module types also makes it easier to add new modules to fill non-existing module types for a specific module (e.g. deadspace for armor plates etc.) should that be desired in the future (you know you want it :P).

I am not the least bit pleased with adding all 4 warfare skills as a prereq for command ships, no. Its silly. You don't need all 4 warfare skills to V to have yourself a functioning and effective booster alt. Jump drives are another matter.

Granted, even with this change the training time to sit a command ship will be even shorter than it is now. I think. So maybe that's a concern CCP had.

There's some confusion in your post and I'd love to clear it up, but I fear we'd be moving quite a bit away from this thread's topic. If you wish to open a new topic about T2 requirements in general somewhere (maybe features and ideas?) and drop me a note, I'd be happy to jump into the discussion :).