These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Reduce the ridiculous SP requirements for Command Ships.

Author
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2014-07-18 23:59:52 UTC
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
Wall of text
In that large post there wasn't a single argument supporting why EVE wouldn't be a more enjoyable game for everybody if you had access to all that stuff in 12 months instead of 18.

As all other posters, you're just explaining the status quo and saying that, because :reasons:, it surely must be a perfect game design decision when a player with 4 accounts will have access to around 70% of subcapital content after an year and a half.

I'm frankly astonished by so much blind faith in ccp.

If you were honest, you'd say you personally don't have a clue if current training times are a good or bad gameplay decision, but

1. If they more or less worked until now, radically changing them could be risky - if it ain't (terribly) broke don't fix it etc.
2. Most people tend to be pissed off when other people get things faster/easier than they did, even if it's irrational

Which, imho, are the only 2 real reasons why ccp is weary of facilitating ship/gear access.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!

Bohneik Itohn
10.K
#82 - 2014-07-19 00:11:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Bohneik Itohn
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
Things that sound like a drunken confession during a shaky marriage.


You're missing the mark here. Let's review, because there's a lot of useless crap in this thread and some of it seems to be getting mixed up.

Of course you use your leadership skills immediately after training into a CBC. I use my paltry leadership skills that aren't anywhere near V. No one said they weren't useful, just not 100% relevant to flying the ship well from a single player's/character's perspective. Not everyone does multiple accounts. Nor should they be expected to.

Is this relevant for a command ship? Well yes and no. CBC's shine in fleets, but do not need fleets to shine. If a player wants to actively progress in a line of ships while providing boosts during fleet activities they currently have two options which are much quicker to get into while allowing them to get back on track of increasing core skills such as gunnery, missiles, engineering, armor, shield, etc... This means they can take and max out a single link for a T1 BC and provide good boosts while flying a T1 BC, and will be able to get more bang for their buck in the T1 than if they had rushed a T2. They get to actively participate in the fights sooner, in other words, and they also get to use that T1 BC for solo play when they are not in a fleet without embarrassing themselves sooner than they otherwise would.

They also have the same option for a T3, and then have options for using that T3 for multiple purposes. Train up a single link type and fit it when needed. If the fleet doesn't need you as a booster today they can fly DPS, tackle, recon, E-war, and if in a pinch logi. The only two roles a T2 BC can play as secondary roles are DPS and tank, and it takes longer to train into that T2 BC than it does a T3, so you again have the problem that the T3 pilot gets to go back to focusing on their core skills before the CBC pilot, and thus gets to use their ship for other purposes sooner.

The leadership skills are great, but they don't let you explore all of the fitting options you would have available if you had another million SP in engineering, they don't give you the extra 100+ DPS in a HAC that those last few bonuses give you, they don't give you training to fly the HAC in the first place whereas other ship skill requirements do, and there are redundant skills across the races. If your corp or alliance flies armor the time you have to spend training Siege Warfare could be better used training Armored Warfare Specialist, and vice versa if they fly shield tanks. If you took a Nighthawk as an example and replaced Armored Warfare and Skirmish warfare with shield management and target navigation prediction (not saying these are good examples, just grabbing random combat oriented skills that're the same training time) the Nighthawk pilot is still trained to use the two bonused warfare links right off the bat, has better combat skills and thus survivability than if he had trained the leadership skills, and still has the option to train into a third link skill at their convenience which is always less of a priority anyways since it doesn't have a juicy bonus.

As a benefit to being able to train in combat skills at the same time as working towards his Nighthawk, that pilot can also fly other ships more competently when a Nighthawk is not necessary or problematic. Remember. No multiple characters in this scenario. One character every day, and if you can't fly something useful you're out of the loop or on your own. In this scenario, if you're on your own you still have something to do other than spin that pretty Nighthawk, because you can take it out with more confidence that you aren't just wasting your time and throwing something moderately expensive at the killboards. And you get to do it in a nice ship.

So the breakdown:


  1. A single character needs alternatives to just a single ship that can be situational by design or because of the character's training.

  2. A single character has better alternatives than a CBC given bulletpoint #1 if they wish to be a fleet booster.

  3. CBC's can be used for more than just fleet boosting, and it's only reasonable that their training requirements not only reflect this but encourage and enable it.

  4. Good leadership skills are not an incentive in themselves to go down the CBC line. You can use them without a CBC just as effectively, but it is rarely satisfying for that to be your sole major contribution to a fleet.


Is my perspective making more sense now? Keep in mind I'm not calling for CBC training to be streamlined and sped up. It would take LONGER to train into CBC's for all 4 factions if what I suggested was implemented in any fashion.

Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!  - Freyya

Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help.

Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#83 - 2014-07-19 00:29:48 UTC
I think a pretty fair compromise would be to have it so you only need the lvl 5 link skills for the link bonuses the ship in question gets. For example, You would only need information warfare and siege warfare to 5 for caldari command ships since those are what you'd use on it, since you get bonuses for them. I don't see myself needed to train anything else up because the type of fleets I'd see myself running with links wouldn't really need anything else.

Think of it this way; sure it makes sense from a utility level to have the people in charge of links in a fleet to be able to use ALL links, but if you're in a setting where you're trying to pull a lot of people together with limited resources...I'd be fine with having more people who can just run t1 links from a t1 battlecruiser than fewer people running full t2 links from command ships, and not being able to give all people in the fleet those boosts due to a shortage of members with skill invested in that. Granted, in either case I'd love to see links be forced to be on-grid since that would level the playing field for FW, but that's a different matter entirely.


TLDR; Have lvl 5 command link requirements only pertain to the links they get bonuses for.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#84 - 2014-07-19 00:34:06 UTC
Owen Levanth wrote:
I think people would have a lot less of a problem with the long train into command ships if they could at least have a choice for something else to skill in.

But nope, with command ships it's either suffering through these skills or not flying any T2-battlecruiser at all.

Because of this, even though I like some of the battlecruisers, I won't even bother training any of them past level 4. Why should I? the battlecruisers I like most don't even have T2-versions.

So will I take a Ferox into LowSec to see how much damage I can do before even a medium jump drive can't save me anymore? Yes, I will.

Would I take a command ship around? Maybe in about three years. That's how far down the necessary skills are on my personal list. Having some kind of T2-battlecruiser with more combat oriented skills needed would be nice, but too bad, they don't exist.

With the last batch of ships slowly coming into focus for a balance pass, why not take the chance and introduce T2 battlecruisers who can actually be battlecruisers, instead of glorified fleet HQs?


inb4 Ishukone naga with 100% optimal range bonus.
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#85 - 2014-07-19 00:34:14 UTC
@ Gully : I am still arguing against the op, and the silly 'its brutal for new players' dude, none of you. I know I can argue with you guys. And it doesn't mean I have faith, I reserve that for something else, and even if I just keep to the status quo, it doesn't matter because the OP is claiming it doesn't work and he has the burden of proof. Not me, I can just describe why it works as it is.

@ Bohneik: Same goes for you, I am not fighting your arguments, they go both ways in certain aspects and I can accept that, I am just trying to get some sense into some of the ignorant trolls, but I guess I should know better. I already said I was out, should have stuck with that.

Off to bed °°
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#86 - 2014-07-19 01:14:01 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:

TLDR; Have lvl 5 command link requirements only pertain to the links they get bonuses for.

Again, there are no Level 5 link skills required. Only leadership skills. Which are different because they work without a module.
And are only a *2 Multi.

Also there is not a 'Caldari Command ships' skill. There is 'Command Ships'. No Race involved, and CCP have been working on going away from extra requirements on the ships other than the Level 5 Racial skill and the T2 skill. Because that creates bad complexity where people train the lvl 5 racial skill, the T2 skill then discover they still can't fly that ship.

So.... No. Keep it simple.

As for Bohneik, Multiple accounts have nothing to do with flying in a fleet. Most fleets don't want you multi boxing even, especially in booster spots since multiboxing ups chances of a crash.
Yes, leadership skills don't let you explore everything, of course, being Battle Cruisers that are at the large end of sub caps, firstly they aren't meant to be as fast to train into as HAC's, so you should already have that engineering skill. Secondly they are fleet ships. People don't train into Interdictors then complain they aren't super fast solo ships for PvP. People train into Interdictors to work with a fleet. Use the right tool for the right job. It's meant to be a fleet ship. The fact it can be used solo is a bonus on top of that ability.
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
#87 - 2014-07-19 10:07:41 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Owen Levanth wrote:
I think people would have a lot less of a problem with the long train into command ships if they could at least have a choice for something else to skill in.

But nope, with command ships it's either suffering through these skills or not flying any T2-battlecruiser at all.

Because of this, even though I like some of the battlecruisers, I won't even bother training any of them past level 4. Why should I? the battlecruisers I like most don't even have T2-versions.

So will I take a Ferox into LowSec to see how much damage I can do before even a medium jump drive can't save me anymore? Yes, I will.

Would I take a command ship around? Maybe in about three years. That's how far down the necessary skills are on my personal list. Having some kind of T2-battlecruiser with more combat oriented skills needed would be nice, but too bad, they don't exist.

With the last batch of ships slowly coming into focus for a balance pass, why not take the chance and introduce T2 battlecruisers who can actually be battlecruisers, instead of glorified fleet HQs?


inb4 Ishukone naga with 100% optimal range bonus.


I'm not sure what would be more funny to see in a T2 Oracle: 100% range bonus on lasers, or a Khanid-missile Oracle. Lol
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#88 - 2014-07-19 11:31:51 UTC
Aren't T2 ships about specialization? I feel like the current CS skill branch resembles specialization quite neatly.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Bohneik Itohn
10.K
#89 - 2014-07-19 14:15:46 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:

As for Bohneik, Multiple accounts have nothing to do with flying in a fleet. Most fleets don't want you multi boxing even, especially in booster spots since multiboxing ups chances of a crash.
Yes, leadership skills don't let you explore everything, of course, being Battle Cruisers that are at the large end of sub caps, firstly they aren't meant to be as fast to train into as HAC's, so you should already have that engineering skill. Secondly they are fleet ships. People don't train into Interdictors then complain they aren't super fast solo ships for PvP. People train into Interdictors to work with a fleet. Use the right tool for the right job. It's meant to be a fleet ship. The fact it can be used solo is a bonus on top of that ability.


I never asked for them to be faster to train. Reading comprehension helps here. I said because there are other ships I can train in it's place that allow me to finish up core skills at the same time for ships in general, training for those other ships feels less like a tangent in my training regimen that and something that I will benefit from more overall. If you're a low SP character you are not going to train an engineering skill to V before you train a half a dozen other skills to IV unless there is a hull that strongly supports that choice. All of the other T2's support that choice, with CBC's being an outlier with no clear explanation as to why other than the word "command" being taken as the only thing that defines the ships, which is simply not true.

Every ship is a fleet ship. There is not a single hull in the game that does not perform better with support. Even a shuttle benefits from fleet boosts. Many of them are also solo ships. CBC's may really shine in fleets but they can shine for solo play also, and there is no reason not to reflect and support that in the requirements.

People didn't train into interdictors and then complain they aren't super fast solo ships for PvP... Primarily because they ARE super fast ships that excel in solo PvP and you find them all over the damn place in null, camping gates all by themselves and giving zero f**ks as they bump you at 4km/s and ram their OH'd guns down your throat.

Sabres are scary.

Also: Read where I mention that it takes less time for me to train Marauders than CBC's. If I cared about the actual number of days, I'd harp on this.

Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!  - Freyya

Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help.

Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
#90 - 2014-07-20 09:17:27 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Aren't T2 ships about specialization? I feel like the current CS skill branch resembles specialization quite neatly.


You have to learn leadership-skills accross the board, with no variation between the different races.

This isn't specialization except in the broadest terms. With the same logic, I could claim a ship demanding perfect missile, hybrid and laser skills at the same time is specialized in shooting things.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#91 - 2014-07-20 11:03:06 UTC
Owen Levanth wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Aren't T2 ships about specialization? I feel like the current CS skill branch resembles specialization quite neatly.


You have to learn leadership-skills accross the board, with no variation between the different races.

This isn't specialization except in the broadest terms. With the same logic, I could claim a ship demanding perfect missile, hybrid and laser skills at the same time is specialized in shooting things.


Not really. You train Leadership skills for a Leadership hull. That's 1 single skill category (2 if you factor in Spaceship Command). HAC, for instance, as a cruiser spec require you to train skills in 3 different skill categories (4 with SC). Marauders also require 4 SC. Dictors 5.

So, since CS only require 2 skill categories for the ship - and even 2, which are very well connected to the role of the ship -, their skilling and hull can be called very specialized.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#92 - 2014-07-20 13:08:46 UTC
Bohneik Itohn wrote:

Also: Read where I mention that it takes less time for me to train Marauders than CBC's. If I cared about the actual number of days, I'd harp on this.

Except it doesn't take you less days to train for a Marauder than a Command Ship.
It takes you more, unless you deliberately make your training as slow as possible and don't bother with a cha implant. In which case if you are trying to claim that taking the worst possible case scenario and using that as your baseline, you are showing exactly how desperate you are in this thread. So... Thanks I guess for harping on about that in most of your posts.
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#93 - 2014-07-20 13:21:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Fer'isam K'ahn
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Bohneik Itohn wrote:

Also: Read where I mention that it takes less time for me to train Marauders than CBC's. If I cared about the actual number of days, I'd harp on this.

Except it doesn't take you less days to train for a Marauder than a Command Ship.
It takes you more, unless you deliberately make your training as slow as possible and don't bother with a cha implant. In which case if you are trying to claim that taking the worst possible case scenario and using that as your baseline, you are showing exactly how desperate you are in this thread. So... Thanks I guess for harping on about that in most of your posts.


Not gonna argue anymore, abut here are some facts, since some are screaming how brutal it is for beginners .. LOL

Paladin 115,5 days
Eos 105 days

Guess who is right °°

And that's just sitting in it. With decent support and weapon skills you can probably tripe each ... oh, how is the 'beginner' hostage ?
Emma Muutaras
State War Academy
Caldari State
#94 - 2014-07-20 13:41:38 UTC
from a brand new toon to train into a max boosting toon it would take around 353 days this is all specializations for links to 5, wing command 5 and CBC 5 this does not include any support skills at all this is only links skills.

with support skills this train would easily reach 500 days.

the question is is that a bad thing? CBC's are top end ships that specialize it fleet boasting there skill train should take quite awhile still 500 days does seam a little much
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#95 - 2014-07-20 13:50:33 UTC
No, 500 days isn't too long for a ship that boosts 254 other ships with 15-20% effectiveness.

I train for a pirate battleship with dual weapon system for 15 months now and am far from perfect and that ship is for the benefit of 1 capsuleer. I still don't get this 'weh weh, me, ME, COMMAND SHIP NAO' whining, just because they got butthurt by a boosting alt or want that battlecruiser just because it has a yellow ribbon. BFD - HTFU
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#96 - 2014-07-20 22:48:12 UTC
Emma Muutaras wrote:
from a brand new toon to train into a max boosting toon it would take around 353 days this is all specializations for links to 5, wing command 5 and CBC 5 this does not include any support skills at all this is only links skills.

with support skills this train would easily reach 500 days.

the question is is that a bad thing? CBC's are top end ships that specialize it fleet boasting there skill train should take quite awhile still 500 days does seam a little much

To max out any ship takes a very long train. Maxing out a ship class is different from being effective, All V's are never needed. Just nice to have. Boosts can be used fine with 1's even.
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#97 - 2014-07-20 23:10:45 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Bohneik Itohn wrote:

Also: Read where I mention that it takes less time for me to train Marauders than CBC's. If I cared about the actual number of days, I'd harp on this.

Except it doesn't take you less days to train for a Marauder than a Command Ship.
It takes you more, unless you deliberately make your training as slow as possible and don't bother with a cha implant. In which case if you are trying to claim that taking the worst possible case scenario and using that as your baseline, you are showing exactly how desperate you are in this thread. So... Thanks I guess for harping on about that in most of your posts.


Yes, we're aware of the overall SP requirements.

The point is that the prerequisites for the Marauder help you in any ship, in PvE and PvP, and whether you're solo or in a gang. The Marauder prereqs are also capital ship prereqs, (the same is true of the Black Ops requirements, the other T2 battleship) and capitals are pretty much the endgame right now.

The command ship prerequisites only help you in a gang, and even then only if you're the only person in the gang to have them. They also gate access to a combat ship via Charisma skills, the only ship where this is the case. The fact is the vast majority of the time you spend in a command ship, you will not be getting any bonuses from the leadership skills.

Finally, right now T1 battlecruisers are also in a really bad place. Cruiser V and Battleship V not only benefit a lot of high quality ships by themselves, but Cruiser V also allows you to undock a HAC almost immediately after training it. Battlecruiser V benefits almost nothing you actually want to fly on its own, and you still have months of training to go after training it before you can undock a CS. T1 BCs see very little use for anything but suicide ganking these days. The attack BCs also require large gun skills, so a player trained into medium weapons and going for command ships sees pretty much no benefit at all from Battlecruiser V. Put all this together, and what happens is the BC skill also ends up feeling like an annoying timesink, deadweight SP to access the only BCs that are actually good, namely the command ships.

Then on top of all that, players that trained Cruiser V and BC V before the patch (there's probably 250 of these players for every 1 player that had the leadership skills trained) got access to essentially 7 million SP for free. (three racial BC skills and no need to train the leadership skills, ever) That's a huge insult to the people starting to train for these ships now.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#98 - 2014-07-20 23:30:00 UTC
55 Days is not 'months'.
And 25 Days for HAC skills is not 'almost instantly'
Tug on the emotive heart strings all you want, but the mice don't lie.

Same as trying to tug on the skill change to racials. Yes people got 'free' sp, that allowed them to do exactly what they had access to before. So it's actually a penalty to those people, not a bonus because it added 7 Million SP to their clone costs and they got zero abilities.

Now, if you are trying to make a case that the entire BC class feels like it lacks a decent slot in the current Meta of EVE, that's an entirely different point, possibly valid, but for a different thread.

P.S. Command ships use Medium weapons. As do most of the T1's.
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#99 - 2014-07-20 23:38:57 UTC
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
No, 500 days isn't too long for a ship that boosts 254 other ships with 15-20% effectiveness.
Are you a Star Citizen backer?

Pays real cash every month...

Concedes that years is a reasonable time to wait...

Because then 'it's gonna be so awesome'...

Yeah, sounds like it.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!

Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#100 - 2014-07-20 23:39:37 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
55 Days is not 'months'.
And 25 Days for HAC skills is not 'almost instantly'
Tug on the emotive heart strings all you want, but the mice don't lie.

Same as trying to tug on the skill change to racials. Yes people got 'free' sp, that allowed them to do exactly what they had access to before. So it's actually a penalty to those people, not a bonus because it added 7 Million SP to their clone costs and they got zero abilities.

Now, if you are trying to make a case that the entire BC class feels like it lacks a decent slot in the current Meta of EVE, that's an entirely different point, possibly valid, but for a different thread.

P.S. Command ships use Medium weapons. As do most of the T1's.


...what? The only thing you need besides Cruiser V for HACs is Energy Grid Upgrades.

It's not a penalty when you consider they will never need to train the leadership skills for the life of their character. They already have everything those leadership skills open up, and combat pilots are not used as link alts.

Yes, command ships use medium weapons. However, T3 BCs use large weapons, and are the only BCs really used at all. Therefore, they cannot be used by a medium-weapon pilot training for command ships, so said pilot does not get any benefit out of training Battlecruiser V, which makes the skill another long annoying timesink for them.