Player Features and Ideas Discussion

With the stated purpose of making the new player experience easier/better with certificates, I am not sure what the thought process for the Science and Industry certs was. All 4 of them are overly broad and not useful. Combat weapons systems get 12 certs (4 weapon types x 3 size groups), but S&I gets a combined 4? I know S&I is the red headed stepchild of Eve, but wow. We make the ships that keep your combat pilots flying and racking up killboard stats.

A little background on myself, I have 3 toons doing full time T2 invention and 1 doing component building/BPO research. I have done both T1 and T2 manufacturing in NPC and POS. I have my own POS that I manage. I have worked as an inventor for another corp, and now run my own alt corp full of industrialists.

Having stated all of the above, all 4 of my S&I focused toons would not qualify for L1 of any S&I cert. Grouping all of the types of manufacturing into a single cert is worthless.

The Manufacturing L5 cert would take a fresh toon ~716d 18h 3 s to train, and still could only make a small portion of T2 products. Granted, they could make most/all T1 and T3 products, but who does that? Things like Graviton Physics V do nothing for the manufacturer. I would like to see this cert broken into at least 4 different certs, 1 for T1/2/3 manufacturing each, +1 for component building. Maybe some other highly specialized certs for things like outpost construction.

The Datacore cert is kinda silly too. Most inventors only train those skills that relate to what they are trying to invent, and this will just lead newbies way down the wrong path. Not only is this list horribly expensive for a newbie, but at 230.3 M isk in skill books, its a high wall to climb, not to mention the 710d 12h 32m 50 s training time. There should be a datacore skill directed at each of the product groups for invention. i.e. Shields, lasers, etc. This points newbies toward something specific and useful. It will also let corps use these certs to find out quickly if someone is qualified for making a specific product.

The research cert should be broken up by tech level as well.

Below I have linked a google doc with some suggested changes that would better fit the training on a new industrialist. Please don’t think this is a complete list by far. I only listed 2 example datacore certs, for example.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0As3YY_c6nAa8dFRGVlhlZmNwR1hfdmhjOXV0RldIcGc&output=html

More food for thought on how Industrialists should be trained linked below.
http://eve-prosper.blogspot.com/2013/07/industry-for-newbros.html
http://eve-prosper.blogspot.com/2013/01/everything-you-never-wanted-to-know_24.html
http://www.evemanufacturing.co.uk/

Will there be player-defined certificates? I think of corporate or alliance ship doctrines who could be planned for and followed using such certificates, which might be useful to determine how many pilots could fly a ship with a defined setup...

Shirolayyn

Me thinks that Master certs should reflect roles at various levels.

Meaning that lower Master levels should help beginning pilots to steamroll into the kind of careers they are after (http://www.eveonline.com/sandbox/) and/or become self sufficient enough (solo PvE level 4?).

At higher levels Master levels should reflect the various roles pilots/corps/alliances are after.
Think: ganker, POS boss, hauler, sniper, logi, scout, face melter, fleet booster, PI guy, sov guy, ice miner, ship hull T2 researcher, null sec roid refiner, etc, etc.
Meaning, in fleets and such you're not so much interested in skills but far more in how well a pilot can fulfill a certain role, a certain position, in what you're trying to achieve as a whole.

So, per example, someone in the role of bait is expected to have much higher tank capabilities then DPS. And vice versa, a ganker has not so much use for tanking capabilities as raw DPS power. Likewise, you don't need to be a high skilled tackler if your role is to alpha the primary from a far. Since other skills come to mind then.

In short, we want to have a taste how well someone can fulfill a certain role. When the FC calls for, say, tacklers, it would be nice to be able to couple that with a Master level that actually says something about that specific role.
The "be all and everything" rolled up in one Master level is just wishthinking (especially with unrealistic Rigging skills; because what SRP is going to compensate for full T2 rigs? And skill training time spend they would rather see put to other use?). We rather see someone capable of fulfilling many many roles. And call that Master Of All.
Flexibility is Master Of All, not wasted SP.

Yes, there are many roles. But at least that will help pilots to train to excel in certain roles if certs would be more role based.
With certs like that pilots could steamroll into the roles they're after. And help pilots/corps/alliences alike not to come with their own certs. The very fact that corps/alliences want their own certs means that you're doing it wrong.
Per example, a Tackler Cert at Master level 4 should mean: this pilot can defo do tackling.
Combine it to km stats for all I care. No Tackler Master level 4 until you get on at least 10 km's as tackler (=you are on the km with scram on).

Not just for alliance oriented players. Also for solo (or low online play time) players. What level of Master would almost ensure that someone is capable to sole PvE level 4, or be an efficient ninja , low sec mission runner, be an effective logi in Incursions, etc, etc? Make certs help pilots to excel in the career/role they're after. At their level.

You want certs to be meaningful, then make them role based.

Still no certificates to show off the fleet commander 5 skill?

Hi, just checked the last changes in sisi. I found a couple of things, if you could check and give feedback on them I would thank you since some I'm not sure if they are bugs or you want them to be like that.

1 - JFs need a certificate that groups all the passive capacitor related skills because they need cap to jump and recharge rate is an important thing when we are jumping around

2 - In all dreads the tactical weapon reconfiguration skill is missing from any weapon related certificates

3 - sensor compensation skills in supers and titans is wrong since they are invul to eletronic warfare, I think this two ships need a special capital targeting certificate without any sensor compensation skills

4 - Dread with sensor compensation skills also doesn't make sense since when in siege, they are also invul, but this is open for discussion since there are always idiots that can use a dread without a siege module and/or not use it if equiped... :-)

5 - battleship navigation missing the MJD skill

6 - Marauders are missing the new bastion skill in one of the "weapons" certificates

---- Final problem is open for discussion and if possible I would like for you to explain in more details what is CCP position about this issue and why did you choose to configure the certificated like that ----

I'm talking about the strategic cruiser masteries and the certificates each one needs. I was surprised to not have level 1 for this ships, when I have 100k skill points and IV in any other ship other than command ships. Then I notice that there is a warfare link certificate at mastery 1 that requires me to have all 5.

I understand that this ship is a jack of all trades due to the different subsystems. Question is and if I only want to use this ship for combat or only for electronic warfare, and never for command ?

Its my opinion that this ship in the ship view should have 5 children subsystem lines coming from it representing the main 5 subsystems groups with 4 entries each, one for each subsystem and it should be the subsystems that contains masteries and certificates and the strategic cruiser only should contain basic certificates related with the hull itself.

what is ccp position about this issue?

Like the new system, i hope the skill sets will make somewhat more sense (as the current) as well.

On a side note when looking on the DEV-Blog linked in the OP, i cant help to notice that all t2 energy turrets seem to have a primary required skill of lvl 5 for the respective gun (Small/Medium/Large). While Hybrid and Projectile only need lvl 4 of the respective gun as Primary requirement. Why does this not make any sense to me ?

Even though i know you need it anyways for the second requirement, you simply cant train the spec skill without having the respective gun skill to 5, still for some reason it seems out of place and tends to confuse me.

Sorry if that wasn't totally about the topic at hand, but i noticed that and though i should mention it.

PS: I'm a big hybrid/missile user so i never really looked at T2 laser gun needs, so if im saying something totally stupid plz forgive me :P

Once more ... mastery ...

Are jump freighters affected by "Capital Ships" skill?
According to the description, I don't think so.
Hence, I'm surprised to see the "Capital Ships" skill within the mastery group "Capital Navigation" starting from mastery III on.

Same goes for Black Ops!

Warfare Links
Please split it into each type, like you separated the foreman links.
Then you can apply the racial (i.e. bonused ones) to the according ships.

For the battlecruiser mastery level V, consider using the corresponding link certificate at level III (or IV).
To compensate that you could at the certificate level I at mastery level IV.
(Similar to the Rorqual)

**** edit ****

Very big THUMBS UP for the plenty of adjustments that you did!
The masteries and certificates are more useful now!

**** edit ****

I'm more impressed the longer I look at the things you've done: GOOD WORK!

**** edit ****

Just a little flaw: Resource Harvesting
Mining frigates can't mine ice ... so including Ice Harvesting is a bit wrong for them.

Similar for Capital Remote Shield Booster
Logistics and Tactiacal Logcistics Reconfiguration are useless on the Rorqual (mastery level IV)

Looking at a ship info, in the Mastery tab. Would it be possible to only show skills I'm lacking to get a level of mastery? Some ships require many different certificates and clicking on all of them and going through the list of a few dozen skills only to find the one I'm missing is kinda tedious.

Am impressed with the changes that have been made since this thread first started, but...

I still don't see any recognition for spaceship command skills. Mastery V should include the t1/t2 hull skills at V. For most of us, our biggest sp sink is SSC and it would be nice to see that on there.

I've said it before, but is worth repeating - the idea that you could be showing Mastery V for a ship you only have the ship skill at 1 for is just... plain silly, misleading and wrong.

Ship skills very definitely affect the performance of the ship because usually the bonuses are dependent on levels of hull skill - sometimes on several - faction ships/t2 ships.

Any chance?

I would guess no chance, because this just doesn't fit into the current system of masteries only using certificates. You'd require different spaceship command certificates for almost every ship.

However, I don't think that this is a big problem, you just have to be aware that mastery alone is not representative without considering the prereq skills, which luckily have an icon right next to the mastery icon.