Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Why do you need to train for armour links for a shield command ship and vice versa?

Perhaps if CCP instead introduced new skills to train that would help apply T1 hull's resists, improve armor/shield factors or some other bonuses then it would help. Of course, this would also mean those bonuses would not be cumulative to the bonuses given by T2 and T3 ships (thus negating OP balance as you specialize).

That would help the Battlecruisers to bring them somewhat inline. Perhaps something similar to (or even replacing) the Armor and Shield Resistance skills- which currently only give bonuses to passive modules.

Not saying it's the "best" idea- just "an" idea.

There's a lot of different types they could branch new ships out into for specializations- but with the development time/resources for the team to introduce new ships into the game, I don't think it's a viable solution. They average about one new ship type every 3 months (and sometimes 6 months+) as it is.

That said- a skill based bonus that replaces the passive resist ones would also 1) apply retroactively to those who've already trained, meaning they don't "lose" anything for points invested, but instead gain and 2) would help to mitigate for seemingly "weaker" ships such as T1's, etc.

Applying skill based bonuses (instead of increasing hull bonuses) also keeps hull flavors from becoming FOTM and keeps options open for specialization while retaining "base" bonuses for skills. Command Ships, IMO should retain their functions- and I also don't think reducing training time is the answer (we already see way too many "off-grid boosters" fielded as it is.)

I think they need to get rid of off-grid boosting, force them on-grid (just like every other ship engaged) and then they would be somewhat balanced. Want boosts and bonuses? Get your a** on grid, then.

I still remember when DAoC had "buffbots" and they made the change to range so that people had to bring them close to the engaged group to get bonuses and all the whining that ensued- but it also made the game much better eventually, as people couldn't just exploit the feature in order to gain an advantage.

I agree completely, it's long overdue actually with all the ishtars and deimoses terrorizing null sec in fleet gangs. I'm training for the Sleipnir purely for its brick tanking ability and decent brawling prowess with no interest at all in the command warfare link abilities ( I use a T3 for that). It would be so awesome if and when CCP decides to roll out with the T2 Battlecruisers and replace that annoying Can use 3 Warfare Link modules simultaneously Role bonus for something more useful for combat purposes, like -75% Reduction to Microwarpdrive capacitor consumption or -50% Resistance against Energy Neutralizer/Vampire drainage or 100% bonus to sensor strength. Oh and another turrent slot (^_^).

For a start there is no links category but yes.
The only Link skill is Warfare Link Specialist IV.
The other Four skills are LEADERSHIP skills that operate entirely independently of any link modules on your ships. And also do not allow you to use links directly either.

I was just curious why it's impossible to have poorly skilled command ships with weak links. I understand the logic behind it, but I don't agree with it. Accepting the logic as sound requires some double standards and equivocation, but this isn't new. I thought maybe command ships were a special case where enforcing a minimum standard of skills made sense.

I would rather see performance and balance that is skill based, rather than item based. This way players would have incentive to train things, and realize a benefit from those skills.

I thought it might have been a confusion of potential, but I'm beginning to think EVE is just guilty of coveting items like other MMOs. As in, a command ship is sacred and as such a character must use T2 links on it, and have fully trained Battlecruisers to V.

Unfortunately the best thing to do is just get those leadership skills trained for and out of the way. Once they are gone your frustrations about the annoying training length will end unless your Caldari. And the only CS ships that's worth that annoying training requirement are the Sleipnir and Damnation.

I have an idea: why not adjust the old field command ships (now with "tier 2" battlecruiser hulls) to have room to fit the ganglinks and be able to do so, but have the bonus to link effectiveness as a role bonus, and give them only combat skill bonuses, and then cut out the leadership requirements for their use? Could add in some of the HAC requirements to balance out the total SP cost.

Remind me, what link skills do I need to fly a command ship?

Seriously, other than warfare link specialist 4, which does not unlock any links at all, what link skills do I need to fly my command ships?

My link skills are at 2, yet I can fly every CS going. Is this some kind of bug?

Missie-pvp alt runs across a 200mil Gist X-type large SB. Checks on training queue for claymore. :(

In my experience, CS are usually fit without links to serve as a rearrrrry heavy combat ship. The option to shove in a link is certainly not the main reason people get those things. Add to that the only *valid* linkboats are damnation, vulture and eos for a big part, leaves out the others as *ships that make you train a lot of things you'll -promise- never need.*

Kinda the same happened to the devoter when someone thought: *Let's turn this one into a better beamzealot*

If you could fly them before they changed the skill, you can still fly them. It doesn't check the link skills when you board the ship, only when you try and inject the Command Ship skill.