These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Rather than having SP loss for a Tech 3 ship when it gets blown up...
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation
#1 - 2014-11-30 20:52:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Orion Pax
Rather than having skill point loss for a Tech 3 ship when it gets blown up, make it so that it requires an expensive implant that is required to use the ship. This encourages players to use more Tech 3 ships without the fear of SP loss.
Zmikund
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2014-11-30 20:54:29 UTC
Losing skillpoints when you die in ship is stupid, CCP should get rid of it ... its main reason why so many ppl dont want to fly/skill to max theese hulls ...
Lugh Crow-Slave
#3 - 2014-11-30 21:32:56 UTC
Zmikund wrote:
Losing skillpoints when you die in ship is stupid, CCP should get rid of it ... its main reason why so many ppl dont want to fly/skill to max theese hulls ...


It's the main reason i fly them losing them isk wise isn't a problem but if it means an extra 21hrs of training suddenly a little risk is tossed back in. you remove the SP lose the odd hero railgu fleet will become much much more standard as its easy to get a pilot into and SRPed ship but their is no way for an alliance to replace SP



also i know this exact idea has come up b4 and the wording is way to close for this to just be a search fail

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Ama Scelesta
#4 - 2014-11-30 21:40:48 UTC
Orion Pax wrote:
Rather than having skill point loss for a Tech 3 ship when it gets blown up, make it so that it requires an expensive implant that is required to use the ship. This encourages players to use more Tech 3 ships without the fear of SP loss.

Losing SP might be stupid or not, but you're talking about adding a totally pointless tax to flying these ships. That is stupid and certainly not something CCP should be implementing no matter what they do or don't do with the SP loss. T3 ships are already popular and incredibly powerful, so I don't see any dramatic need to get more people to fly them. Anyone with a spine already does when the need arises.

Zmikund wrote:
Losing skillpoints when you die in ship is stupid, CCP should get rid of it ... its main reason why so many ppl dont want to fly/skill to max theese hulls ...

How many is that and is that a problem? I don't mean to be an ass, but stating it is a widely spread problem doesn't mean it is. The SP loss is also intended to be a deterrent to their casual use, so saying it functions as a deterrent to their casual use might not make a good case for a change. You might not want the change anyway, since the reason they are powerful ships is because there is a unique cost to losing them. Cost initially designed to be heavy in an environment where money doesn't mean anything to some people anymore. SP on the other hand always tends to have value. If you remove that unique cost, you are likely going to see a corresponding nerf to their abilities or some other heavy deterrent to their common use. What is unlikely to happen is the outright removal of the SP loss with no further changes unless you can make a really compelling case why it would be good and why the current situation is harmful.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#5 - 2014-11-30 22:27:59 UTC
First T3 Cruisers need a massive nerf stick to their most powerful Subs. They are currently vastly out of balance with the rest of the game and do not actually fit where CCP want T3's to fit. So the skill loss is needed as some sort of balance while this situation lasts.
If the tactical destroyers 'modes' works well and CCP apply this to T3 cruisers to bring them back into balance as well, and they are no longer more powerful than T2/Pirate then the skill loss can go away.
Ix Method
Doomheim
#6 - 2014-11-30 22:36:33 UTC
If the new T3 is anything to go by this will all be kinda moot. T3s with a few interesting specialties rather than ******* stupid Tank/Gank probably won't need such brick walls to restrict their use.

Travelling at the speed of love.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#7 - 2014-11-30 23:02:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Zan Shiro
so I have to pull an implant (or hardwire, to be nit picky they are different and we could have the grey area of slot 6 to debate what it is since it can take omegas or hardwires) if I want to fly a t3?


My t3 clones runs full set implants. And hardwires in slots 7-10. All carefully chosen.

Or are we getting a slot 11 for this because otherwise for many pilots this is a nerf more than a benefit really.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#8 - 2014-11-30 23:07:24 UTC
Ama Scelesta wrote:
-snip-
Anyone with a spine already does when the need arises..


Pweese, giva mah spine, don't have one

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation
#9 - 2014-11-30 23:34:09 UTC
Zan Shiro wrote:
so I have to pull an implant (or hardwire, to be nit picky they are different and we could have the grey area of slot 6 to debate what it is since it can take omegas or hardwires) if I want to fly a t3?


My t3 clones runs full set implants. And hardwires in slots 7-10. All carefully chosen.

Or are we getting a slot 11 for this because otherwise for many pilots this is a nerf more than a benefit really.



Good question. I was thinking along the lines of a slot 11.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-12-01 00:15:39 UTC
Howabout make a SP dump skill you can train at any time (same attributes as the subsystem skills) which can store unlimited SP for the purpose of being available when you lose SP--it'll take from the dump skill first to prevent you from losing a level of the skill if you have enough SP stored. That way you still spend SP but you don't have to lose any skill levels when it happens.

There are plenty of pilots out there who have nothing important left to train. I don't want to see the SP loss removed until the strategic cruisers receive heavy nerfs and are no longer overpowered. The first thing to nerf is their insane EHP--either cut those resists to t1 or cut the base HP a lot. (I'd go with the first option)

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Leonard Nimoy II
Doomheim
#11 - 2014-12-01 00:34:03 UTC
i actually think losing SP for t3 losses is good.....the only reason I say that is that the subsystem skills really aren't a lot of training. Lvl 5 only takes like 4.5 days, and that's without any implants.
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#12 - 2014-12-01 10:21:06 UTC
I d o not think the SP loss should be removed.

The only thing I can think to make it possible to train to level V on t3 subsystems would be that the game automatically removes the lowest level of subsystem training when the T3 is detroyed. This way players could still train to lvl 5 and choose the subsystem that would be taking the SP hit on loss, instead of it being random, and it would also specialize pilots in their selected subsyetms and make it reasonable to train some subsystems to lvl 5...

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#13 - 2014-12-01 11:21:44 UTC
Saisin wrote:
I d o not think the SP loss should be removed.

The only thing I can think to make it possible to train to level V on t3 subsystems would be that the game automatically removes the lowest level of subsystem training when the T3 is detroyed. This way players could still train to lvl 5 and choose the subsystem that would be taking the SP hit on loss, instead of it being random, and it would also specialize pilots in their selected subsyetms and make it reasonable to train some subsystems to lvl 5...




I don't like the idea of giving people a ship that is so versatile, and then make them do a decision on which part of that ship they never ever intend to use.


Remove Skillpoint loss, crank up the Ranks of the skills, and separate the Subsystem bonuses into per level of STRATEGIC CRUISER and per level of SUBSYSTEM.

Thus, maxing these things costs a lot more SP and time, and they're not the replacement for all Tech 2 ships at a fraction of the SP you need for the Tech 2s anymore.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#14 - 2014-12-01 12:18:03 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
First T3 Cruisers need a massive nerf stick to their most powerful Subs. They are currently vastly out of balance with the rest of the game and do not actually fit where CCP want T3's to fit. So the skill loss is needed as some sort of balance while this situation lasts.
If the tactical destroyers 'modes' works well and CCP apply this to T3 cruisers to bring them back into balance as well, and they are no longer more powerful than T2/Pirate then the skill loss can go away.

Please shoot yourself for even suggesting such a horrific proposal.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#15 - 2014-12-01 12:27:41 UTC
With the recent buffs to other ships, I find T3s at the moment fulfil their roles perfectly atm and actually are in a perfect position balance wise. Some of the sub systems could be toned down slightly and others improved, but generally they match up well with T"2 ships, with T2 being better in some areas and T3 having more flexibility and a few ace cards of their own such as EHP, although at a massive increase in cost.

Right now T3s are in a perfect balance I find, they are viable in a great many roles, although you will still get a lot more bang for the buck, and also a more focused approach in a specific area with a specialised T2 ship.

Also quit complaining about SP loss and just suck it up. There should be more ways to lose SP in this game, not less.
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#16 - 2014-12-01 13:36:01 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
With the recent buffs to other ships, I find T3s at the moment fulfil their roles perfectly atm and actually are in a perfect position balance wise. Some of the sub systems could be toned down slightly and others improved, but generally they match up well with T"2 ships, with T2 being better in some areas and T3 having more flexibility and a few ace cards of their own such as EHP, although at a massive increase in cost.

Right now T3s are in a perfect balance I find, they are viable in a great many roles, although you will still get a lot more bang for the buck, and also a more focused approach in a specific area with a specialised T2 ship.

Also quit complaining about SP loss and just suck it up. There should be more ways to lose SP in this game, not less.



Imo, they are too easy to train in. You basically invest the time required for a 5x SKill to V, and you suddenly got the CovOps Recon Hac with nullification.

So, i'd suggets beefing up SP requirements, maybe some minor adjustments within the subsystems so all of them have a purpose and not half is horrible, half is mandatory.


And with the Pod changes incoming, i feel there doesn't need to be any way to lose SP anymore.
Tappits
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#17 - 2014-12-01 14:18:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Tappits
Zmikund wrote:
Losing skillpoints when you die in ship is stupid, CCP should get rid of it ... its main reason why so many ppl dont want to fly/skill to max theese hulls ...


Then that's up to them.. if you what to get the max out your ship there is a disadvantage if you die (4days of retraining a skill)
I don't see this to be that bad to say you cam make T3's into well loads of useful things.
Vibrance Sovereign
Sovereign Fleet Tax Shelter
#18 - 2014-12-01 14:23:54 UTC
They could continue this business with the "fatigue" timers...

T3 interfacing fatigue... the more you die in them, the longer you have to recover before you sit in another T3.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#19 - 2014-12-01 14:45:10 UTC
Vibrance Sovereign wrote:
They could continue this business with the "fatigue" timers...

T3 interfacing fatigue... the more you die in them, the longer you have to recover before you sit in another T3.


Terrible mechanic.

T3's should keep current resistances, but have the buffer defense subs nerfed. That would bring them in line, without ruining them.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Gawain Edmond
Khanid Bureau of Industry
#20 - 2014-12-01 14:49:49 UTC
Vibrance Sovereign wrote:
They could continue this business with the "fatigue" timers...

T3 interfacing fatigue... the more you die in them, the longer you have to recover before you sit in another T3.



Didn't someone suggest this idea for pod loss recently too? it's a terrible idea.... it wasn't you was it? Making it so someone can't play the game is a bad idea. That is all that does and will never and should never be implimented.
12Next page