These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Tech III battleships

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Trader168510351
Doomheim
#21 - 2014-02-09 07:29:00 UTC
Jhanax wrote:
Am curious to know if there are any plans for tech III battleships to be introduced in future expansions ? If so, has anyone got ideas for the subsystem specs ?



I believe I recall a dev post once talking about giving tech 3 battleships a jump drive subsystem.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2014-02-09 07:30:55 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jhanax wrote:
You seem very negative. Is there anything about this game you actually like ?
Almost all of it. What I don't like is imbalance and wasted resources, especially when presented as if it were even remotely a good idea.

Translates to I hate risk and love blobs. Why should I lose a fight to someone who has skill and balls enough to risk a lot to get a win.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2014-02-09 07:31:32 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Level 5 of a ship skill gives you the option to activate a ship specialist bonus which doubles the ships bonuses of previous levels but getting killed in the ship causes you to lose level 5 (20 to 30) days of training. So 50% tracking from level 5 of a Thrasher gets you 100% tracking but the possibility to lose level 5.



No skill loss in general is a poor idea in EVE. Yes other MMO's have XP or SP loss. But they also then have a way to get that back (powerleveling anyone?)

An idea like the above would simply mean nobody would train their skills to 5. At least not until everything else was done to 4 first.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#24 - 2014-02-09 07:31:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Jhanax wrote:
Imagine this in game:

Level 5 of a ship skill gives you the option to activate a ship specialist bonus which doubles the ships bonuses of previous levels but getting killed in the ship causes you to lose level 5 (20 to 30) days of training. So 50% tracking from level 5 of a Thrasher gets you 100% tracking but the possibility to lose level 5.

Now, I like that idea !!

…an idea that promotes the EVE style of grinding; heavily promotes risk-avoidance; and creates vast chasms between older and newer players. None of them are good components of a competitive yet inclusive game that hinges on stuff constantly blowing up.

Infinity Ziona wrote:
Translates to I hate risk and love blobs. Why should I lose a fight to someone who has skill and balls enough to risk a lot to get a win.
Eh, what? What does programming manpower have to do with risk and blobs? Ugh
No, it does not translate to that. It translate to “more bloat is not the same as better gameplay”.
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2014-02-09 07:36:36 UTC
Jhanax wrote:


Imagine this in game:

Level 5 of a ship skill gives you the option to activate a ship specialist bonus which doubles the ships bonuses of previous levels but getting killed in the ship causes you to lose level 5 (20 to 30) days of training. So 50% tracking from level 5 of a Thrasher gets you 100% tracking but the possibility to lose level 5.



Now, I like that idea !!


Learn how to quote properly please, I find this kind of quoting annoying.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2014-02-09 07:41:33 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jhanax wrote:
Imagine this in game:

Level 5 of a ship skill gives you the option to activate a ship specialist bonus which doubles the ships bonuses of previous levels but getting killed in the ship causes you to lose level 5 (20 to 30) days of training. So 50% tracking from level 5 of a Thrasher gets you 100% tracking but the possibility to lose level 5.

Now, I like that idea !!

…an idea that promotes the EVE style of grinding; heavily promotes risk-avoidance; and creates vast chasms between older and newer players. None of them are good components of a competitive yet inclusive game that hinges on stuff constantly blowing up.

Infinity Ziona wrote:
Translates to I hate risk and love blobs. Why should I lose a fight to someone who has skill and balls enough to risk a lot to get a win.
Eh, what? What does programming manpower have to do with risk and blobs? Ugh
No, it does not translate to that. It translate to “more bloat is not the same as better gameplay”.

No it rewards risk and skill. The skill to use the advantage you have from risking so many skill points. Choices in MMOs are great. That you would be too afraid to use it is no consequence. You're already risk avoidant, no need to promote it. It's endemic to EvE Online these days.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Jhanax
BLKRaptors
#27 - 2014-02-09 07:43:31 UTC
Tuttomenui II wrote:
Jhanax wrote:


Imagine this in game:

Level 5 of a ship skill gives you the option to activate a ship specialist bonus which doubles the ships bonuses of previous levels but getting killed in the ship causes you to lose level 5 (20 to 30) days of training. So 50% tracking from level 5 of a Thrasher gets you 100% tracking but the possibility to lose level 5.



Now, I like that idea !!


Learn how to quote properly please, I find this kind of quoting annoying.



Learn how to stick to the subject please, I find this kind of Grammar Nazi annoying.
Jhanax
BLKRaptors
#28 - 2014-02-09 07:45:46 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Jhanax wrote:
Imagine this in game:

Level 5 of a ship skill gives you the option to activate a ship specialist bonus which doubles the ships bonuses of previous levels but getting killed in the ship causes you to lose level 5 (20 to 30) days of training. So 50% tracking from level 5 of a Thrasher gets you 100% tracking but the possibility to lose level 5.

Now, I like that idea !!

…an idea that promotes the EVE style of grinding; heavily promotes risk-avoidance; and creates vast chasms between older and newer players. None of them are good components of a competitive yet inclusive game that hinges on stuff constantly blowing up.

Infinity Ziona wrote:
Translates to I hate risk and love blobs. Why should I lose a fight to someone who has skill and balls enough to risk a lot to get a win.
Eh, what? What does programming manpower have to do with risk and blobs? Ugh
No, it does not translate to that. It translate to “more bloat is not the same as better gameplay”.

No it rewards risk and skill. The skill to use the advantage you have from risking so many skill points. Choices in MMOs are great. That you would be too afraid to use it is no consequence. You're already risk avoidant, no need to promote it. It's endemic to EvE Online these days.



Here here. (gets out popcorn)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#29 - 2014-02-09 07:47:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Infinity Ziona wrote:
No it rewards risk and skill. The skill to use the advantage you have from risking so many skill points.
…except that the behaviour it will promote is waiting and blobbing — always ensuring you have the max bonus; always ensuring that you win. In other words, almost the exact opposite of what you're going for.

The current system of declining returns for exponential increases in training time offers an interesting choice: is that last percent really worth it or are you better off getting five different bonuses for the same input? Your suggestion replaces that choice with a dominant strategy where more is strictly better as long as you keep it, so obviously people will go for it and then do everything to ensure they don't lose it.

As such, it doesn't particularly reward either skill or risk, but rather safety behaviour and turtling. The former could conceivably be fine:ish, if it teaches people to not be victims, but there are better ways of doing that than also teaching them the most boring form of gameplay.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2014-02-09 07:47:44 UTC
Derath Ellecon wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Level 5 of a ship skill gives you the option to activate a ship specialist bonus which doubles the ships bonuses of previous levels but getting killed in the ship causes you to lose level 5 (20 to 30) days of training. So 50% tracking from level 5 of a Thrasher gets you 100% tracking but the possibility to lose level 5.



No skill loss in general is a poor idea in EVE. Yes other MMO's have XP or SP loss. But they also then have a way to get that back (powerleveling anyone?)

An idea like the above would simply mean nobody would train their skills to 5. At least not until everything else was done to 4 first.

Why is it a bad idea? Like I said you could CHOOSE to activate it or not. Are you saying that the chioce is wrong to have because you wouldn't use it and would get upset when others did and beat you? That pretty much is exactly what I said people would cry. "It's not fair because I'm too scared to use it but he isn't so I lost boohoohoo".

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2014-02-09 07:51:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Double Post

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#32 - 2014-02-09 08:01:02 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
No that's nonsense imo. You would find people would not use such bonuses in PvP, even in large fleets. Especially in large fleets.
They would when and if they know they'll win. The way to ensure a win is to completely outblob the opponent.

It thus creates a self-reinforcing cycle: the more you blob, the more reason there is to use it since it doubles the size of your blob; the more you use it, the more reason there is to always blob since it reduces the risk of ever losing anything.

You're confusing the term “blob” with “fleet on fleet combat”.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2014-02-09 08:03:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
No it rewards risk and skill. The skill to use the advantage you have from risking so many skill points.
…except that the behaviour it will promote is waiting and blobbing — always ensuring you have the max bonus; always ensuring that you win. In other words, almost the exact opposite of what you're going for.

The current system of declining returns for exponential increases in training time offers an interesting choice: is that last percent really worth it or are you better off getting five different bonuses for the same input? Your suggestion replaces that choice with a dominant strategy where more is strictly better as long as you keep it, so obviously people will go for it and then do everything to ensure they don't lose it.

As such, it doesn't particularly reward either skill or risk, but rather safety behaviour and turtling. The former could conceivably be fine:ish, if it teaches people to not be victims, but there are better ways of doing that than also teaching them the most boring form of gameplay.

Nonsense. As usual.

The last %'s reward on ships is usually a T2 or T3 ship upgrade. The possibility that you would lose 30 days on BS, and absurdly large amounts on caps would ensure that it would never become a dominant strategy. A 100% bonus on ships that takes 1 to a few months to recover from vs bringing another guy in a ship would mean people such as yourself would always opt for the extra ship.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Jhanax
BLKRaptors
#34 - 2014-02-09 08:05:20 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
No that's nonsense imo. You would find people would not use such bonuses in PvP, even in large fleets. Especially in large fleets.
They would when and if they know they'll win. The way to ensure a win is to completely outblob the opponent.

It thus creates a self-reinforcing cycle: the more you blob, the more reason there is to use it since it doubles the size of your blob; the more you use it, the more reason there is to always blob since it reduces the risk of ever losing anything.

You're confusing the term “blob” with “fleet on fleet combat”.



If eve was completely like what you seam to be promoting, NO ONE would ever win any battle ! Is that enough balance for you ?
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2014-02-09 08:06:44 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
No that's nonsense imo. You would find people would not use such bonuses in PvP, even in large fleets. Especially in large fleets.
They would when and if they know they'll win. The way to ensure a win is to completely outblob the opponent.

It thus creates a self-reinforcing cycle: the more you blob, the more reason there is to use it since it doubles the size of your blob; the more you use it, the more reason there is to always blob since it reduces the risk of ever losing anything.

You're confusing the term “blob” with “fleet on fleet combat”.

I would find it hard to believe that blobbers would choose to risk so much that they cannot recover back by dweebery (plex, SRP, renting space)

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#36 - 2014-02-09 08:08:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Nonsense. As usual.
No argument and an abject failure to read, as usual.

Quote:
The possibility that you would lose 30 days on BS, and absurdly large amounts on caps would ensure that it would never become a dominant strategy.
The possibility to double your bonuses means training to V becomes a dominant strategy rather than an interesting cost-benefit choice that puts another nail in the “can't catch up” coffin.

Quote:
I would find it hard to believe that blobbers would choose to risk so much that they cannot recover back by dweebery (plex, SRP, renting space)
That's just it: they wouldn't risk anything exactly because they're blobbing. A group of 40 people being effectively turned into a group of 80 going after opponents in the (low) single digits makes it a non-issue and should someone be so horrible that he actually does lose a ship, all that happens is that he switches to a different V-skilled ship for a month and keep dweeing it up.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2014-02-09 08:11:42 UTC
Anyway I wasn't suggesting it as a real change, just as an example of why people would be against it and find lots of silly excuses why it would be overpowered, unfair etc etc... and well, I think it didn't take long for that silliness to turn up.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2014-02-09 08:13:28 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Nonsense. As usual.
No argument and an abject failure to read, as usual.

Quote:
The possibility that you would lose 30 days on BS, and absurdly large amounts on caps would ensure that it would never become a dominant strategy.
The possibility to double your bonuses means training to V becomes a dominant strategy rather than an interesting cost-benefit choice that puts another nail in the “can't catch up” coffin.

Not really, the bonuses are no where near worthwhile when in a consolidated fleet. In fleets individual ship bonuses don't really matter. Perhaps with the exception of caps but training up and then losing Titan V over and over would be extremely unpleasant and I doubt any Titan pilots would consider doing it.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#39 - 2014-02-09 08:14:57 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
No it rewards risk and skill. The skill to use the advantage you have from risking so many skill points.
…except that the behaviour it will promote is waiting and blobbing — always ensuring you have the max bonus; always ensuring that you win. In other words, almost the exact opposite of what you're going for.

The current system of declining returns for exponential increases in training time offers an interesting choice: is that last percent really worth it or are you better off getting five different bonuses for the same input? Your suggestion replaces that choice with a dominant strategy where more is strictly better as long as you keep it, so obviously people will go for it and then do everything to ensure they don't lose it.

As such, it doesn't particularly reward either skill or risk, but rather safety behaviour and turtling. The former could conceivably be fine:ish, if it teaches people to not be victims, but there are better ways of doing that than also teaching them the most boring form of gameplay.

Nonsense. As usual.

The last %'s reward on ships is usually a T2 or T3 ship upgrade. The possibility that you would lose 30 days on BS, and absurdly large amounts on caps would ensure that it would never become a dominant strategy. A 100% bonus on ships that takes 1 to a few months to recover from vs bringing another guy in a ship would mean people such as yourself would always opt for the extra ship.


In Chess, the winning strategy is often to sacrifice your OP piece early for a later advantage. That will never happen in EVE because people will cry if the possibility of sacrificing an OP ship for a loss of SP is on the table. PVP is one of the most risk averse activities in this game.

Not a perfect analogy. But the best I can come up with this time of night.

Mr Epeen Cool
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2014-02-09 08:18:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Nonsense. As usual.
No argument and an abject failure to read, as usual.

Quote:
The possibility that you would lose 30 days on BS, and absurdly large amounts on caps would ensure that it would never become a dominant strategy.
The possibility to double your bonuses means training to V becomes a dominant strategy rather than an interesting cost-benefit choice that puts another nail in the “can't catch up” coffin.

Quote:
I would find it hard to believe that blobbers would choose to risk so much that they cannot recover back by dweebery (plex, SRP, renting space)
That's just it: they wouldn't risk anything exactly because they're blobbing. A group of 40 people being effectively turned into a group of 80 going after opponents in the (low) single digits makes it a non-issue and should someone be so horrible that he actually does lose a ship, all that happens is that he switches to a different V-skilled ship for a month and keep dweeing it up.

Yeah um, double bonuses does not turn 1 ship into 2 ships. It turns a Vindi into 1 ship with an extra 37.5% damage on the original, with 20% bonus to web velocity (10% extra per level) and 7% bonus to tracking per level extra.

Last I checked the Vindi had a lot of other stats including EHP, PG, CPU.... think you need to learn some EvE mechanics...

Edit: oh yeah and for that month, he's not able to train up anything else or he does and can't fly that bonused ship again. Its an actual loss, not a fake one like losing a SRP ship.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Previous page123Next page