These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Combat Drone Operation Being Effectively Removed from the Game

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ayuren Aakiwa
When i Look Up At The Stars I Am Filled With Rage
#221 - 2014-05-14 18:24:17 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Ayuren Aakiwa wrote:
For those of us who don't want to read 11 pages of man children whining at each other, should combat drone op 5 be trained or no?

The highest of Scout Drone Operation or Combat Drone Operation will be used. Since SDO is a rank 1 skill (versus CDO being a rank 2), you're better off training SDO to V before summer. Check EveMon.




tyvm
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#222 - 2014-05-14 19:18:10 UTC
Xasnevian wrote:
Tippia, I asked you if you really were not getting this.
…and as you can se, I am.
Just because your nonsensical view is… well… nonsensical doesn't mean people don't get it or that they're trolling. It just means they don't agree with the nonsense.

And yes, trying to claim that getting more is a loss is nothing short of nonsense.

Quote:
As I stated before; CCP Rise usually puts HUGE WARNING SIGNS around this kind of stuff, so that people know that they are speculating. There were no warning signs and the devblog wasn't adjusted after the forum post.
…which is also very common. Again, just because you jumped on something before the details were out does not mean CCP owes you anything or that they did anything wrong. It means you made an uninformed decision and speculated on a change you didn't fully understand. You end up with less gain than if you had made a sensible decision — that's your problem and not something that needs any kind of fix or compensation.

All devblogs are always subject to change up until the minute you see it in a patch note. Dev blogs for changes that are two months out even more so. Jumping on changes the second they are suggested and not waiting a day or two — especially when, again, the change is two months out — is also nonsensical. Even if you make that silly mistake, claiming that it's anyone else's fault that you kept making the mistake even after the information was out is more nonsensical yet.

Quote:
the fact is that I and many other players trained this skill for nothing.
…and had you stayed informed; had you had a sensible approach to dev blogs; had you planned ahead, you wouldn't have made that mistake. It's still your mistake though — not something you can blame CCP for.

James Amril-Kesh wrote:
I'm getting less gain, for having trained more.
…which still means you're not losing anything — not time, not ability, not any mechanics — so no matter how much you twist and turn, there simply is nothing to reimburse.
Walter Hart White
Heisenberg Minings
#223 - 2014-05-14 19:35:54 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Xasnevian wrote:
Tippia, I asked you if you really were not getting this.
…and as you can se, I am.
Just because your nonsensical view is… well… nonsensical doesn't mean people don't get it or that they're trolling. It just means they don't agree with the nonsense.

And yes, trying to claim that getting more is a loss is nothing short of nonsense.

Quote:
As I stated before; CCP Rise usually puts HUGE WARNING SIGNS around this kind of stuff, so that people know that they are speculating. There were no warning signs and the devblog wasn't adjusted after the forum post.
…which is also very common. Again, just because you jumped on something before the details were out does not mean CCP owes you anything or that they did anything wrong. It means you made an uninformed decision and speculated on a change you didn't fully understand. You end up with less gain than if you had made a sensible decision — that's your problem and not something that needs any kind of fix or compensation.

All devblogs are always subject to change up until the minute you see it in a patch note. Dev blogs for changes that are two months out even more so. Jumping on changes the second they are suggested and not waiting a day or two — especially when, again, the change is two months out — is also nonsensical. Even if you make that silly mistake, claiming that it's anyone else's fault that you kept making the mistake even after the information was out is more nonsensical yet.

Quote:
the fact is that I and many other players trained this skill for nothing.
…and had you stayed informed; had you had a sensible approach to dev blogs; had you planned ahead, you wouldn't have made that mistake. It's still your mistake though — not something you can blame CCP for.

James Amril-Kesh wrote:
I'm getting less gain, for having trained more.
…which still means you're not losing anything — not time, not ability, not any mechanics — so no matter how much you twist and turn, there simply is nothing to reimburse.

GG 7.43/10 would be trolled again. Now get out.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#224 - 2014-05-14 19:41:09 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Tippia wrote:
…which still means you're not losing anything

Except, you know, the training advantage that I had.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#225 - 2014-05-14 19:42:38 UTC
Why did that post say edited when I never even clicked edit and the edit history shows no changes whatsoever?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#226 - 2014-05-14 19:48:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Ramona McCandless
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Why did that post say edited when I never even clicked edit and the edit history shows no changes whatsoever?


The Null Cartels told the ISD to.... oh...wait... hang on....

*parsing*
*parsing*
>Unknown variable at line 234
>Run backup redundancy...
*Loading*

http://bit.ly/1goGBEp

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Xasnevian
sadfadsfadsadsf
#227 - 2014-05-14 20:02:16 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
So you are saying that everything realeased in a Dev Blog that has not been noted with a warning sign has appeared in the patch or expansion it was mooted for without change in all cases, quineg?
No. I understand and accept that devblogs contain information that is subject to change. I'm saying that a warning sign might have stopped me from directly putting it in my queue. (this is not me blaming anyone, but me noting one of the things that are odd about this whole thing)


Tippia wrote:
Xasnevian wrote:
Tippia, I asked you if you really were not getting this.
…and as you can se, I am.
You are a lot of things, Tippia, but no, you're really not getting this! ;)

Also, the rest of your post doesn't contain anything new, and I'm tired, so I'm not responding to that.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#228 - 2014-05-14 20:14:22 UTC
Do your SP go up when this change hits.
Yes; No Refund needed.
No; Then refund may be needed.

Since there is no case you can have where you trained any of these skills and not get more SP, no refund is needed. It's really that simple. It doesn't matter if someone else gets more than you, fixating on that is just being spoilt. The only thing that matters is you do not loose SP.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#229 - 2014-05-14 20:16:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Except, you know, the training advantage that I had.

Against some it's being reduced (mostly by a very minute amount); against others, it's being increased. But sure, that's actually the only reasonable complaint and it is completely different from the whole SP/time/onozCCPdidn'tsendmeanemail complaint that people bring up.

So this is where I'll actually use the HTFU argument. The game is being made better; you're only losing (minutely) from it against a specific subset of other players, but being compensated for it against others; and in the end this is the only really fair way of doing things. So what if some will be able to gain more than others from it than you and I will? It's the price of improvement.

Quote:
Why did that post say edited when I never even clicked edit and the edit history shows no changes whatsoever?
Because the forums are very often confused about whether a post already exists or not. Lol
At least that version is better than the opposite: when you edit a post and it appears as edited, but without the edited text…

Xasnevian wrote:
You are a lot of things, Tippia, but no, you're really not getting this!
Yes I am. I'm simply not agreeing with you because you position is nonsensical. Your inability to respond to my posts just shows that you are aware of this and can't really argue for it any further without injecting even more obvious nonsense, so you have to go for the ad hominem instead.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#230 - 2014-05-14 20:53:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Tippia wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Except, you know, the training advantage that I had.

Against some it's being reduced (mostly by a very minute amount); against others, it's being increased. But sure, that's actually the only reasonable complaint and it is completely different from the whole SP/time/onozCCPdidn'tsendmeanemail complaint that people bring up.

Where would we see an increase in advantage? Given the way the skills are cloning it should be impossible to lose effectiveness unless I'm missing some scenario.
Xasnevian
sadfadsfadsadsf
#231 - 2014-05-14 21:03:54 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
It's really that simple. It doesn't matter if someone else gets more than you, fixating on that is just being spoilt. The only thing that matters is you do not loose SP.
No it's not. Yes it does. A lot of people loose SP in the form of not having gained as much as they could've. Some people consider this losing. Some people do not.


Tippia wrote:
Yes I am. I'm simply not agreeing with you because you position is nonsensical. Your inability to respond to my posts just shows that you are aware of this and can't really argue for it any further without injecting even more obvious nonsense, so you have to go for the ad hominem instead.
We're very aware of the fact you're not agreeing with some of us. How you disagree with people and force your opinion on those who think differently is very aggressive, but that doesn't make you right or others wrong. It simply makes you non-constructive.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#232 - 2014-05-14 21:23:26 UTC
Fozzie has confirmed here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4594548#post4594548

CCP Fozzie wrote:
Jane Shapperd wrote:
So what about those who trained both skills Combat Drone Operation & Scout Drone Operation to 5

will they be compensated for training combat drone operation ?

as if they didn't train combat drone operation to 5 , they will get both new skills to level 5


Nope, because there's nothing to be compensated for.

If you have either Combat Drone Operation or Scout Drone Operation (or both) trained to level 5 you get the maximum possible ranks of the new skills.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#233 - 2014-05-14 21:44:55 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Where would we see an increase in advantage?
Against anyone who has the skills trained at a lower level than you do.

Xasnevian wrote:
No it's not. Yes it does.
Yes it really is that simple, especially since you have said that it does not matter if someone else gains more. You have explicitly told us not to look at others time and time again in your attempts at creating a scenario where this change is somehow unfair. Make up your mind.

Quote:
A lot of people loose SP
Not a single one does. It is literally impossible to lose SP from this change. Earning less than you could have is not a loss no matter how you try to paint it as such, unless you're an Enron accountant. Any attempt to even suggest that there is any kind of SP loss going on here is inherently 100% incorrect.

Quote:
How you disagree with people and force your opinion on those who think differently is very aggressive, but that doesn't make you right or others wrong.
No, what makes me right and the others wrong are the simple fact that the facts are on my side and not on theirs; that they have no sensible argument and I do; and that they have had to resort to fallacies to even attempt to appear as if they even have anything to say any more.

That supposed aggressiveness of yours is simply not not suffering their lack of logic, their reliance on fiction, their ignorance — be it wilful or accidental — or their attempts at shifting the blame for their own mistakes, the latter especially given all the time and information that has been available to avoid exactly those mistakes.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#234 - 2014-05-14 21:50:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Tippia wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Where would we see an increase in advantage?
Against anyone who has the skills trained at a lower level than you do.
I guess I'm missing something here. Someone who doesn't have the skills trained isn't losing anything save potential training time which, according to the way this is being handled, isn't a factor. Performance wise they will either remain the same or gain.


Edit: No, actually that isn't entirely true, those without DI V will be closer to those with DI V post patch intentionally.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#235 - 2014-05-14 21:53:12 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I guess I'm missing something here.
Probably the word “training” in “training advantage”. P
To get the same advantages as you have now, people will in the future have to train for longer.

Quote:
Performance wise they will either remain the same or gain.
Yes, but the training required to get that performance will increase, and so will the gaps between the different stages of having the skills trained.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#236 - 2014-05-14 21:59:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Tippia wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I guess I'm missing something here.
Probably the word “training” in “training advantage”. P
To get the same advantages as you have now, people will in the future have to train for longer.

Quote:
Performance wise they will either remain the same or gain.
Yes, but the training required to get that performance will increase, and so will the gaps between the different stages of having the skills trained.

Maybe I misunderstood the nature of James' complaint then. I took it to mean that what he was losing was the performance difference he trained for, rather than the training time change.

Edit: Actually, he's losing in training advantage as you describe it to anyone who trained SDO V but CDO to anything less than V.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#237 - 2014-05-14 22:02:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Maybe I misunderstood the nature of James' complaint then. I took it to mean that what he was losing was the performance difference he trained for, rather than the training time change.

Oh he is. I'm saying that while he might lose a bonus advantage against some, the bonuses he has will be harder for others to gain so he's earning a training time advantage against those — he's (well… we're) being given free time that those with lower skill levels will have to slog through while we do not.

Whether this advantage balances out the one that's lost is a matter for discussion, of course. I think it does, since it also pays for a much more coherent and logical skill setup, and if some people happen to gain 7 days of training while I only gain 3, then so what. Ye olde Sound of Music image macro comes to mind to express how much that bothers me.
Logan Revelore
Symbiotic Systems
#238 - 2014-05-14 22:22:56 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
drone avionics skill is totally separate from this discussion. it's being neither removed or replaced, merely renamed.

Nope, you have misunderstood the changes. Scout drone operation is being converted to drone avionics as stated in the original devblog.

This is what I mean when I say CCP has made a bit of hash of these changes. Scout drone operation was originally being renamed drone avionics. Now it is being split into 3 different skills, two of which where initially meant to be covered by combat drone operation.


scout drone operation is being renamed and nothing more, as stated in the original dev blog.

scout drone operation isn't being split in to anything, combat drone operation is being split. however it's being split and granted at the level of SDO or CDO (whichever is higher).

CDO -> replaced by 2 new skills at the level of which ever is higher between SDO and CDO.
SDO -> being renamed.


So what you're saying is that anyone that's currently training drones should stop training CDO immediately, since this training is essentially wasted if they just focus on getting SDO to 5 instead, if they haven't already.

I was currently training CDO and have now stopped and swapped to train SDO instead (both were at rank 4), since my time training on CDO will be wasted come expansion time.

So there is wasted SP when you look at it this way, since I don't think I'll be reimbursed for the lost training time that I spent on training CDO.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#239 - 2014-05-14 22:26:49 UTC
Logan Revelore wrote:
So there is wasted SP when you look at it this way, since I don't think I'll be reimbursed for the lost training time that I spent on training CDO.

You will end up with more SP than you actually trained for, so it's hardly a loss.
Logan Revelore
Symbiotic Systems
#240 - 2014-05-14 22:41:24 UTC
Money Makin Mitch wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Money Makin Mitch wrote:
I'm pretty ticked off that I wasted 10d x6 training a skill to 5 that I didn't need and is now being removed from the game.



I trained that skill abut 6 years ago. It was worth it for me then, and it was worth it for you when you trained it.

I only trained it b/c of the devblog, and I only trained it in the last few weeks.

Was not worth it at all.


Same, and now feel I've wasted the last 5 days of training or so.