These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Citadels] Capital Q&A

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#181 - 2015-12-10 01:55:00 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:

Wrote some stuff, Rowells decided to try and twist into something irrelevant


SP bloat is only an issue when you don't have the skills. more classes being split and more SP to train creates a longer road from start to finish. With the removal of clone costs, a character does not have to worry about having 50mil SP vs 100mil SP assuming the two are equal in relative usage.

Its less of an addition of an entirely different class, more of an addition to an existing class (and then the subsequent seperation: that argument is semantical). Sort of like the Tier3 battlecruiser introduction. A whole new ship that people had already maxed out on. Or (if i recall my history correctly) similar to super carrier skill tree direction. Uses the same skill as a normal carrier, for a different purpose. The bloat will mostly be felt by the pervailing assumptions of what certain levels of SP mean. "I have 50mil SP, has a bit of a different cannotation than it did back in 2003. And honestly, if CCP is in this game for the long-haul, it will be unnavoidable. Hard to keep that excitement and awe in players when the blocks are always the same.

I really do believe that they will simply give you the equivalent racial skill for the new FAX rather than having fresh set of SP to train on anything completely unrelated. Gallente Carrier IV will get you Gallente FAX IV and so on.

On the other hand, they could easily add them like bowheads, and no skills you had would allow you to fly it right away. However, I do see some desire fro the devs to make this transition more smooth and less abrubt than simply stopping all triage capabilities for a few days/weeks while everyone trains to do it. So, I'll lean my guesses more in that favor.

The real key here is not that the are removing a role per se, but a module. The only ship that can use triage is the carrier, and removing it from the character is just short of actually deleting it from the database in terms of usability. If CCP were to only add a new FAX skill which you had to train, it would suck, but not entirely too bad (unless you trained carrier to V and expected V in FAX).

And I am somewhat unfovarable towards the argument that if a ship no longer needs a certain skill, you should get it back, with the caveat that the skill can still be used elsewhere. It definitely hurts more for people who use supers (seeing as a flying coffin was never fun to begin with), but with citadels coming out at the same time, the time between not being able to use RR skills on your coffin and being able to leave that coffin will be relatively short. So long as CCP continues down the path of removing the necessity of sitting in the coffin (maybe to almost complete removal at some point), then the argument of the flexibility of that character will lose its strength.

TL;DR there are precedents leaning mostly one way, and counterexamples leaning in wuite another, so it will mostly depend on how the siotuation is finally interpreted by the man in charge.

offtopic: did they ever confirm/deny if supers would be able to get insurance now?
Your longer road from start to finish, is SP bloat, the more skills get added the larger the pool of SP becomes, if CCP simply give every character who has capital remote skills trained the equivalent skill to fly the new class of ship, Capital Logistics, it creates SP bloat. Many will never use a Capital Logistics ship so why would they want skills for it. Those skills were trained for a specific class of ship that will no longer be able to use them - The option to have them given as un-allocated SP should be considered.

Seriously, we do not play the same game - I would imagine less than 10% of Super / Titan pilots will ever be able to dock and leave them. I have over 100 supers/titans on watchlist, 90% of which belong not to blob groups, who will be the only ones to ever own a citadel large enough for a super to dock on but to smaller groups. You are right though, it will suck more for super pilots, who will likely end up with skills for a ship they will never even have the option to fly.
Citadels do far more toward breaking Super / Titan game play than the introduction of the disposable logistics ship will. The removal of Pos's is likely to see many supers, who's owners are not part of one of the blobs, logged off permanently. Supers and Titans are incredibly difficult to move safely now, the removal of the ability to have safe pos's only adds to this. (removing watch lists may help a little)

Thing here is - They are removing role bonuses, not a module - Carriers will no longer receive bonuses to remote reps, energy transfers and can no longer fit or use a triage module - These were ship bonuses, not just modules and they are being removed.
Your tier 3 battlecruiser analogy - They didn't require additional skills, you didn't lose roles from another battlecruiser when they were released, they were simply added and can be used with existing skills.

It IS a totally new class of ship, many will never want to fly - Why should they be forced to accept skills for something they have no interest in when it is not their doing the associated skills no longer suit what they were trained for?

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#182 - 2015-12-10 03:35:08 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:

Seriously, we do not play the same game - I would imagine less than 10% of Super / Titan pilots will ever be able to dock and leave them. I have over 100 supers/titans on watchlist, 90% of which belong not to blob groups, who will be the only ones to ever own a citadel large enough for a super to dock on but to smaller groups. You are right though, it will suck more for super pilots, who will likely end up with skills for a ship they will never even have the option to fly.
Citadels do far more toward breaking Super / Titan game play than the introduction of the disposable logistics ship will. The removal of Pos's is likely to see many supers, who's owners are not part of one of the blobs, logged off permanently. Supers and Titans are incredibly difficult to move safely now, the removal of the ability to have safe pos's only adds to this. (removing watch lists may help a little)


I completely agree with you here. The thought of trying to move my Titan as a member of a small corporation is pretty disheartening. That's true even with more than a dozen personal cyno pilots at my disposal. In fact, I would go so far as to say that if I left my current situation, selling or retiring my Titan would probably be a prerequisite. And that is a real shame.

Supercapitals are going from coffins to anchors.

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

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#183 - 2015-12-10 05:28:43 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Your longer road from start to finish, is SP bloat, the more skills get added the larger the pool of SP becomes, if CCP simply give every character who has capital remote skills trained the equivalent skill to fly the new class of ship, Capital Logistics, it creates SP bloat. Many will never use a Capital Logistics ship so why would they want skills for it. Those skills were trained for a specific class of ship that will no longer be able to use them - The option to have them given as un-allocated SP should be considered

...

Or they could avoid more SP bloat by turning capital logistics skills into unallocated SP.[
Ok, then how is relocation gonna solve bloat? Are you not adding the new logistics skills? Then the refunded SP is irrelevant. Are you saying they need to add the skill then refund for choice? Still bloat.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Seriously, we do not play the same game - I would imagine less than 10% of Super / Titan pilots will ever be able to dock and leave them. I have over 100 supers/titans on watchlist, 90% of which belong not to blob groups, who will be the only ones to ever own a citadel large enough for a super to dock on but to smaller groups. You are right though, it will suck more for super pilots, who will likely end up with skills for a ship they will never even have the option to fly.

Maybe you need a bigger sample size. The info from that is fairly outdated, but do you have any evidence, that the trend happening there has changed drastically as to meet your 90% "not belonging to blob groups"? It's ironic coming from you, seeing as every two posts you mention how the blobs have so many supers that smaller groups cant use them or whatever the complaint of the day is. Or are you going to try and tell me that the blobs do not, in fact, have most of the supers in their pocket?

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Citadels do far more toward breaking Super / Titan game play than the introduction of the disposable logistics ship will. The removal of Pos's is likely to see many supers, who's owners are not part of one of the blobs, logged off permanently. Supers and Titans are incredibly difficult to move safely now, the removal of the ability to have safe pos's only adds to this. (removing watch lists may help a little)
While I agree on the watchlist thing, do you have any further evidence to show that there is a significant amount of pilots who own supers and do not have access to a relatively decent sized corp or alliance? Considering they managed to build the damn thing, I figure defending a large citadel somewhere in the asscrack of lowsec wouldn't be too difficult in comparison to POSes. Oh, and before you mention something about cost or no docking:

"If your ship has access to dock into the structure it can use tethering. This doesn't mean you ship can dock however. For instance, you may have access to dock into a Medium Citadel as a Titan pilot, but you still are unable to dock. Your Titan will still be tethered when in range of the structure." -CCP Ytterbium

So, good news, you can safely keep your titan as you would today. Maybe you can't dock it, but pragmatically little loss in overall function. And its a simple 350-700mil to own. Not to different from now. And you only have to have someone online for three hours a week to not see it go up in ashes without some warning.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Thing here is - They are removing role bonuses, not a module - Carriers will no longer receive bonuses to remote reps, energy transfers and can no longer fit or use a triage module - These were ship bonuses, not just modules and they are being removed.
Your tier 3 battlecruiser analogy - They didn't require additional skills, you didn't lose roles from another battlecruiser when they were released, they were simply added and can be used with existing skills.

It IS a totally new class of ship, many will never want to fly - Why should they be forced to accept skills for something they have no interest in when it is not their doing the associated skills no longer suit what they were trained for?
Are you really going to delve into semantics? do I have to lay out the entire process of how removing the role bonus means that ship loses access to the module? Do I have to cover every little baby step of the thought process? Yes, they are removing role bonuses. They are taking away the triage module from the carrier, altogether. The role of the FAX is not so uniquely different from a current triage carrier, in the fact that its main purpose (in triage mind you) is almost identical, as far as can be told with the information available.

And I understand the Tier3 BC was not a perfect analogy, thats why there is a 'sort of' in front of it. Which is why I also brought up the Cuper Carrier Additions. They started out as just bigger and better carriers, but now their role is completely sifferent. And they use the same skill. And before you say it again, Iam fully aware it is not a perfect analogy. It doesn't need to be, since my point isn't as simple as "they will do this again".

Also, I've always wanted to ask, can you quantitatively describe to me what makes a group, a small group and also what makes a group, a blob?
Calypso Warsmith
Strata Dynamics
Power Absolute Inc.
#184 - 2015-12-10 17:59:49 UTC
So CCPs changes are moving titans and supers back to alliance level assets like they were meant to be when they launched.


Eh. With the changes to how structure attacking and space capturing work I don't see this as a bad thing.



I can see titans and supers being handed out to the pilots that can fly them for an Op to be a thing soon.
Maretul Negustor
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#185 - 2015-12-10 18:59:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Maretul Negustor
What is the plan for the Dreads? has thought about them more useful so they do not just stand on our station and can only be used to shoot outpos down but could also make combat site with other guns? so it can use for more on par with a TANATOS ?? we are alike who have talked about the face and virtually worthless at our stations and not used other than to shoot on outpos,

what is your plan to make it better for we are some who do not sit and think it funny ha a ship that virtually can not use for anything? Some have a plan for us ?????
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#186 - 2015-12-10 22:46:42 UTC
Quote:
Rowells
Said a whole lot of stuff
Re-allocation of current capital logistics skills reduces bloat - By players choosing to take skills they will no longer use (due to changes made by CCP) - and putting those SP into something they can use. Bloat is kept down - They aren't forced to keep skills no longer relevant to the ships they choose to fly. Not every carrier pilot wants or needs the skills to fly a new class of ship. I know i don't need racial Fax skills X 4 on each of my characters. Right now Triage 5 is used for 4 racial carriers. It will soon be 4 separate skills, how can you not see that as SP bloat?
If CCP decide to just convert current skills to the new class of ship - Many players will end up with skills they will never use - bloated useless skill sets.

Aside from not including NPC corps in your little doc, I don't know when that was done but trust me, it is far from accurate.
The one thing your sheet does do, is show how unbalanced and game limiting Citadels are going to be for Super and Titan pilots not in large groups. IF Xlarge Citadels are to become a thing (unlikely) it will be achieved by small groups banding together (forming new alliances called coalitions) and we all know how well that worked out last time we had but a few bonded groups in nulsec. The only real hold out from days of old, CFC is the prime example why CCP should be doing EVERYTHING they can to make sure coalitions are not relevant. Instead they come up with game design that encourages them at the expense of anyone who does not like blob warfare. As it is now, the large groups won't fight each other, nothing CCP has planned is likely to change that.

109 super, titan pilots on 3 watch lists (my characters), 6 of those belong to groups mentioned in your spreadsheet (spent the time this morning double checking). I do have other proof, which due to the nature of owning supers and titans, I'll not discuss here.
Really the proof is there to find - Look at the killboards, many of the titans and supers that die each day DO NOT belong to major groups.
As for tethering a titan to a medium citadel, for the whole world to see, no thanks - That is just asking for a large group to come and kill your citadel and the titan. (Devs really don't think things through very well, or they just don't even consider smaller groups in game design)

Semantics, lol -
There is no semantics there - CCP is changing the way a ship is used, some of the skills that used to apply to that class of ship no longer do - Players should have an option to use those skills in a way they seem fit - CCP has never forced a player to use any particular type or class of ship - It has always been player choice. By simply moving capital logistics skills to a new class of ship, CCP is removing player choice. I don't want to have CCP tell me what ships I can and can't use, I want to use skills i have spent time training in a way that I choose.


Your last question is the easiest to answer in a way you might understand - CFC is made up of many small groups, as individuals most are not very good but combined they become a blob. As a coalition they still aren't any better individually, just they now have sheer numbers to overwhelm (a blob).

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Hiljah
Slap Fight Martial Artists
#187 - 2015-12-11 00:33:18 UTC
Let's take what I think are the most obvious examples of a skill that should be refunded to FAX / Carrier pilots:
Advanced Drone Interfacing (FAX), Fighters (FAX), Capital Remote Armor Repair Systems ( Carrier ), Capital Shield Emission Systems ( Carrier ), Capital Capacitor Emission Systems ( Carrier ), Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration ( Carrier ).

Let's say you could train each of these to 5 in 30 days.

So 60 days lost for FAX pilots, and 90 days lost for Carrier pilots.

Since we're paying for access and skills we need to calculate what skills are worth.
I have a little over 50 million sp, and I think a reasonable price for this might be 25 billion isk.
25B isk / 1.2B isk per PLEX = 20 PLEX = $400

I've paid around $550 for game time, so 400/550 = 72%
Lets call it 70% paid for SP, 30% paid for access.

Let's say you pay $11 a month,
so FAX pilots are expected to lose up to 2 x 11 x .7 = 15.40 dollars,
and Carrier pilots are expected to lose up to 3 x 11 x .7 = 23.10 dollars

This assumes more than ideal attributes and implants, and that I even want to fly either of these after the change.

It's not a lot, but it's enough to make me mad at being told I should HTFU about it, since refunding skill points wouldn't actually cost CCP this amount.
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#188 - 2015-12-12 20:09:18 UTC
Hiljah wrote:
Let's take what I think are the most obvious examples of a skill that should be refunded to FAX / Carrier pilots:
Advanced Drone Interfacing (FAX), Fighters (FAX), Capital Remote Armor Repair Systems ( Carrier ), Capital Shield Emission Systems ( Carrier ), Capital Capacitor Emission Systems ( Carrier ), Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration ( Carrier ).

Let's say you could train each of these to 5 in 30 days.

So 60 days lost for FAX pilots, and 90 days lost for Carrier pilots.

Since we're paying for access and skills we need to calculate what skills are worth.
I have a little over 50 million sp, and I think a reasonable price for this might be 25 billion isk.
25B isk / 1.2B isk per PLEX = 20 PLEX = $400

I've paid around $550 for game time, so 400/550 = 72%
Lets call it 70% paid for SP, 30% paid for access.

Let's say you pay $11 a month,
so FAX pilots are expected to lose up to 2 x 11 x .7 = 15.40 dollars,
and Carrier pilots are expected to lose up to 3 x 11 x .7 = 23.10 dollars

This assumes more than ideal attributes and implants, and that I even want to fly either of these after the change.

It's not a lot, but it's enough to make me mad at being told I should HTFU about it, since refunding skill points wouldn't actually cost CCP this amount.


Yepp and not only that... some people pay a lot more than $11 a month! If i don't plex it's $14.95 for me xhow ever many accounts i'm using for capitals at the time (2-3 usually).

Been around since the beginning.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#189 - 2015-12-12 20:42:46 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Re-allocation of current capital logistics skills reduces bloat - By players choosing to take skills they will no longer use (due to changes made by CCP) - and putting those SP into something they can use. Bloat is kept down - They aren't forced to keep skills no longer relevant to the ships they choose to fly. Not every carrier pilot wants or needs the skills to fly a new class of ship. I know i don't need racial Fax skills X 4 on each of my characters. Right now Triage 5 is used for 4 racial carriers. It will soon be 4 separate skills, how can you not see that as SP bloat?
If CCP decide to just convert current skills to the new class of ship - Many players will end up with skills they will never use - bloated useless skill sets.

Mind telling me re-allocation makes the total possible SP any different? Unless of course you're upset that some people ill go from 30mil to 33mil SP, which is absolutely arbitrary in that case. And are you going to try and complain about "useless skillsets"? How do they affect you? Are those SP in the way? Or are you concerned the extra bonus of SP isn't going somewhere else? No sympathy there.

And not every capital pilots likes that their ship is getting touched at all. You want refund every damn ship that gets rebalanced? Role changes aren't some completely new thing either. Almost the entire line of industrial ships and barges got new roles, and no refunds. Mining cruisers aren't a thing anymore. So simply crying "role change" isn't even the precedence.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Aside from not including NPC corps in your little doc, I don't know when that was done but trust me, it is far from accurate.

Why should I trust you?

Sgt Ocker wrote:
The one thing your sheet does do, is show how unbalanced and game limiting Citadels are going to be for Super and Titan pilots not in large groups. IF Xlarge Citadels are to become a thing (unlikely) it will be achieved by small groups banding together (forming new alliances called coalitions) and we all know how well that worked out last time we had but a few bonded groups in nulsec. The only real hold out from days of old, CFC is the prime example why CCP should be doing EVERYTHING they can to make sure coalitions are not relevant. Instead they come up with game design that encourages them at the expense of anyone who does not like blob warfare. As it is now, the large groups won't fight each other, nothing CCP has planned is likely to change that.

So is the sheet accurate or not? You don't get to say its wrong and try to reference it without being a hypocrite. This isn't some Old El Paso wprld where you can get hard and soft. If that little chart is "far from accurate", then it must easy to determine that any conclusions drawn from it are "far from accurate".
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#190 - 2015-12-12 20:43:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
Sgt Ocker wrote:
muh sekrit intel

Really? Are you a grade schooler?

"I have a secret, but I can't tell you! tee hee!"

Sgt Ocker wrote:
As for tethering a titan to a medium citadel, for the whole world to see, no thanks - That is just asking for a large group to come and kill your citadel and the titan. (Devs really don't think things through very well, or they just don't even consider smaller groups in game design)

Oh, kinda like how titans aren't available for public display now? Unless of course you had special snowflake docking privelages for your titan, in which case, my bad.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Semantics, lol -
There is no semantics there - CCP is changing the way a ship is used, some of the skills that used to apply to that class of ship no longer do - Players should have an option to use those skills in a way they seem fit - CCP has never forced a player to use any particular type or class of ship - It has always been player choice. By simply moving capital logistics skills to a new class of ship, CCP is removing player choice. I don't want to have CCP tell me what ships I can and can't use, I want to use skills i have spent time training in a way that I choose.

You are literally trying to conrtadict yourself everywhere you can in a single post. If moving a role to a hull is forcing player choice, then choosing a specific hull in the first place is exactly the same thing.

And its ironic that you think there is no semantics. You're entire basis of argument usually boils down to semantics as exampled below:



Sgt Ocker wrote:
Your last question is the easiest to answer in a way you might understand - CFC is made up of many small groups, as individuals most are not very good but combined they become a blob. As a coalition they still aren't any better individually, just they now have sheer numbers to overwhelm (a blob).

That is literally the longest way I've seen any say that they don't know what the word quantitative means.

My nutsack is made of a couple small groups. Am I my own coalition now? Can I call myself the Couldn't be F**ked Coalition?
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#191 - 2015-12-12 23:26:50 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
muh sekrit intel

Really? Are you a grade schooler?

"I have a secret, but I can't tell you! tee hee!"

Sgt Ocker wrote:
As for tethering a titan to a medium citadel, for the whole world to see, no thanks - That is just asking for a large group to come and kill your citadel and the titan. (Devs really don't think things through very well, or they just don't even consider smaller groups in game design)

Oh, kinda like how titans aren't available for public display now? Unless of course you had special snowflake docking privelages for your titan, in which case, my bad.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Semantics, lol -
There is no semantics there - CCP is changing the way a ship is used, some of the skills that used to apply to that class of ship no longer do - Players should have an option to use those skills in a way they seem fit - CCP has never forced a player to use any particular type or class of ship - It has always been player choice. By simply moving capital logistics skills to a new class of ship, CCP is removing player choice. I don't want to have CCP tell me what ships I can and can't use, I want to use skills i have spent time training in a way that I choose.

You are literally trying to conrtadict yourself everywhere you can in a single post. If moving a role to a hull is forcing player choice, then choosing a specific hull in the first place is exactly the same thing.

And its ironic that you think there is no semantics. You're entire basis of argument usually boils down to semantics as exampled below:



Sgt Ocker wrote:
Your last question is the easiest to answer in a way you might understand - CFC is made up of many small groups, as individuals most are not very good but combined they become a blob. As a coalition they still aren't any better individually, just they now have sheer numbers to overwhelm (a blob).

That is literally the longest way I've seen any say that they don't know what the word quantitative means.

My nutsack is made of a couple small groups. Am I my own coalition now? Can I call myself the Couldn't be F**ked Coalition?

Up for telling everyone on the forums where your titan is staged (if you have one), or where Fcons supers are built and how many per month. Would giving that sort of information out not be sort of childish and petty (not unlike you responses). Only a child could see not giving out information that is considered by many as something not to be discussed in public as a tee hee moment.


And yes I can reference your little spreadsheet both ways, it shows 2 completely different things - According to it, a minority of players in Eve are likely to ever be able to dock a super or titan. And the other reference to it not being accurate as to how many supers and titans there are in game - no it is not accurate, for a start it left out members of npc corps.
I don't care if you trust me or not, just looking at the spreadsheet anyone with a tiny bit of common sense would know it is not accurate.

quantitative - What i said is accurate in context, although qualitative more than quantitative.

As for reallocation instead of skills being moved to a new class of ship - I can only hope CCP are not as close minded as you. Your 3 mil SP turns into 12 mil if you have all 4 carriers trained.
CCP has created a new class of ship and is deciding whether or not skills, I trained for an entirely different purpose, should be automatically assigned to this new class of ship. A ship many will choose never to fly due to it design, players don't train ships just because they are in the skill list, they train only those ships they "choose" to fly. If CCP move triage and RR skills to a new class of ship, they are removing player choice. Your not that thick are you?

Interesting, never really looked at the CFC from a members point of view - mittens as the body and the rest of the CFC as the contents of his nusac (99% of which will never amount to anything) sounds about right. (there's a pod, ewar only, the unneeded 99% are cuming too)

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#192 - 2015-12-13 18:32:12 UTC
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Justin Cody wrote:
triage needs to keep ewar immunity for the FAX otherwise it is pointless.


If super capital ewar leaves, then FAX should not get ewar immunity.

It's only fair. Take it away from dreads in siege too. Might as well have everyone get ewared to death.


its not about fairness. It is about game mechanics. supercapitals get to recieve remote support and FAX don't. period. There is a reason for ewar immunity. resistance is fine for supers. jammers might need a their own modifier for ships that don't have an out and out ECM bonus.

flavor > balance > fairness

Don't ever use the word fairness. It is too subjective and projects one's own desires onto a broader community which may or may not be true or helpful.
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#193 - 2015-12-15 02:08:59 UTC
Justin Cody wrote:
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Justin Cody wrote:
triage needs to keep ewar immunity for the FAX otherwise it is pointless.


If super capital ewar leaves, then FAX should not get ewar immunity.

It's only fair. Take it away from dreads in siege too. Might as well have everyone get ewared to death.


its not about fairness. It is about game mechanics. supercapitals get to recieve remote support and FAX don't. period. There is a reason for ewar immunity. resistance is fine for supers. jammers might need a their own modifier for ships that don't have an out and out ECM bonus.

flavor > balance > fairness

Don't ever use the word fairness. It is too subjective and projects one's own desires onto a broader community which may or may not be true or helpful.


If you are talking about gameplay, then supercapitals die regardless of remote support or not. So it's only normal/gameplay they keep their inmunity to ewar.

Been around since the beginning.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#194 - 2015-12-16 19:59:09 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Up for telling everyone on the forums where your titan is staged (if you have one), or where Fcons supers are built and how many per month. Would giving that sort of information out not be sort of childish and petty (not unlike you responses). Only a child could see not giving out information that is considered by many as something not to be discussed in public as a tee hee moment.

Feel free to come through branch and find the SCAAs yourself. No special intel needed here. Or just look for some dude whos got his logged in and probe it down.

Did you think it was somehow different from now?


Sgt Ocker wrote:
And yes I can reference your little spreadsheet both ways, it shows 2 completely different things - According to it, a minority of players in Eve are likely to ever be able to dock a super or titan. And the other reference to it not being accurate as to how many supers and titans there are in game - no it is not accurate, for a start it left out members of npc corps.
I don't care if you trust me or not, just looking at the spreadsheet anyone with a tiny bit of common sense would know it is not accurate.

No you can't. Its either way wrong like you said, or you next statements after that are wrong. You're trying to tell everyone that you have special permissions to contradict yourself.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
quantitative - What i said is accurate in context, although qualitative more than quantitative.

and that is why your arguments never get anywhere. They always fit the descriptive profile you need without actually revealing how ridiculous your assumptions really are.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
As for reallocation instead of skills being moved to a new class of ship - I can only hope CCP are not as close minded as you. Your 3 mil SP turns into 12 mil if you have all 4 carriers trained.
CCP has created a new class of ship and is deciding whether or not skills, I trained for an entirely different purpose, should be automatically assigned to this new class of ship. A ship many will choose never to fly due to it design, players don't train ships just because they are in the skill list, they train only those ships they "choose" to fly. If CCP move triage and RR skills to a new class of ship, they are removing player choice. Your not that thick are you?

You are desperately trying to connect 2 different things together.

Remember that whole part about the longer overall train of skills? refunding SP doesn't solve that. Everyone who doesnt have the skill, still has to train 12mil more new skills, whereas everyone who had the skill gets a free pass to do as they please with them. Thus, foavoring capital pilots over everyone else. People without the skills, have even longer to train, while the capital pilots are allowed to just bail the skills and throw them at anything they like, instead of choosing a capital skill to use.

It may be beneficial for you, but everyone else wonders where their ishtar SP is or their [insert nerfed and changed changed ship here]
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#195 - 2015-12-16 22:30:16 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Up for telling everyone on the forums where your titan is staged (if you have one), or where Fcons supers are built and how many per month. Would giving that sort of information out not be sort of childish and petty (not unlike you responses). Only a child could see not giving out information that is considered by many as something not to be discussed in public as a tee hee moment.

Feel free to come through branch and find the SCAAs yourself. No special intel needed here. Or just look for some dude whos got his logged in and probe it down.

Did you think it was somehow different from now?


Sgt Ocker wrote:
And yes I can reference your little spreadsheet both ways, it shows 2 completely different things - According to it, a minority of players in Eve are likely to ever be able to dock a super or titan. And the other reference to it not being accurate as to how many supers and titans there are in game - no it is not accurate, for a start it left out members of npc corps.
I don't care if you trust me or not, just looking at the spreadsheet anyone with a tiny bit of common sense would know it is not accurate.

No you can't. Its either way wrong like you said, or you next statements after that are wrong. You're trying to tell everyone that you have special permissions to contradict yourself.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
quantitative - What i said is accurate in context, although qualitative more than quantitative.

and that is why your arguments never get anywhere. They always fit the descriptive profile you need without actually revealing how ridiculous your assumptions really are.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
As for reallocation instead of skills being moved to a new class of ship - I can only hope CCP are not as close minded as you. Your 3 mil SP turns into 12 mil if you have all 4 carriers trained.
CCP has created a new class of ship and is deciding whether or not skills, I trained for an entirely different purpose, should be automatically assigned to this new class of ship. A ship many will choose never to fly due to it design, players don't train ships just because they are in the skill list, they train only those ships they "choose" to fly. If CCP move triage and RR skills to a new class of ship, they are removing player choice. Your not that thick are you?

You are desperately trying to connect 2 different things together.

Remember that whole part about the longer overall train of skills? refunding SP doesn't solve that. Everyone who doesnt have the skill, still has to train 12mil more new skills, whereas everyone who had the skill gets a free pass to do as they please with them. Thus, foavoring capital pilots over everyone else. People without the skills, have even longer to train, while the capital pilots are allowed to just bail the skills and throw them at anything they like, instead of choosing a capital skill to use.

It may be beneficial for you, but everyone else wonders where their ishtar SP is or their [insert nerfed and changed changed ship here]

You really just can't see how wrong you are, with every multi quote response but that's ok.. Your obviously not as intelligent as I gave you credit for. You might want to brush up on your literacy comprehension skills, a spread sheet can show various different things, depending on what your looking for.

Instance; you called me childish for not wanting to give specifics about something, then won't do the same when asked. So is it childish only when someone else does it?

As for SP refund - The fact someone without capital logistic skills has to train them for a totally new class of ship, is a choice they make. Pilots who trained those skill for a carrier should be given a choice as to whether they want to use existing skills for a new class of ship or use that SP in a way they choose to use it. If I had no capital logistics skills, I would not choose to train them for a completely new class of disposable multi billion isk ship. I would rather put that SP into something I would choose to fly, maybe use it to finish off a few lvl 5 skills i haven't done because I was training capital logistics skills for when using a carrier (a class of ship I chose to train for).

I don't know of any skills that would have been trained specifically for the Ishtar that are not now still applicable to that ship post nerf.
I would be interested to see where in the past CCP has removed roles from a ship making skills specifically trained for it no longer relevant. Your Ishtar analogy is not one of them. So far - Your argument is a bucket full of holes.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#196 - 2015-12-17 20:13:23 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
You really just can't see how wrong you are, with every multi quote response but that's ok.. Your obviously not as intelligent as I gave you credit for. You might want to brush up on your literacy comprehension skills, a spread sheet can show various different things, depending on what your looking for.

So can words if you hit the random button enough. Or a watchlist...or you.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Instance; you called me childish for not wanting to give specifics about something, then won't do the same when asked. So is it childish only when someone else does it?

I called you a grade schooler because you were expecting your self-approved authority to trump anything in the room. You still havent actually reasoned why anyone here should trust your imaginary list. You got offended that anyone would question you and blew it off.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
As for SP refund - The fact someone without capital logistic skills has to train them for a totally new class of ship, is a choice they make. Pilots who trained those skill for a carrier should be given a choice as to whether they want to use existing skills for a new class of ship or use that SP in a way they choose to use it. If I had no capital logistics skills, I would not choose to train them for a completely new class of disposable multi billion isk ship. I would rather put that SP into something I would choose to fly, maybe use it to finish off a few lvl 5 skills i haven't done because I was training capital logistics skills for when using a carrier (a class of ship I chose to train for).

So we're back to the training for roles? What happened to SP bloat? I thight that was your issue? Because if its not, then you can just take your extra SP and be happy that you lost nothing in terms of SP usage. Or are you still trying to fit the narrative that allows you to retrain those SP for something else you dont want to wait for? You've moved the goalpost enough that its a different field.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
I don't know of any skills that would have been trained specifically for the Ishtar that are not now still applicable to that ship post nerf.
And you cant see how that doesnt apply to new ships that are practically pre-trained for you? Or were looking to apply it somewhere else, because it's 'different now'.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#197 - 2015-12-18 02:20:08 UTC
Rowells wrote:


Sgt Ocker wrote:
I don't know of any skills that would have been trained specifically for the Ishtar that are not now still applicable to that ship post nerf.
And you cant see how that doesnt apply to new ships that are practically pre-trained for you? Or were looking to apply it somewhere else, because it's 'different now'.


Are those new ships removing abilities and roles (skills trained previously for a certain ship) from ANY ship they were trained for?
Will players lose the ability to utilize previously trained skills on a given ship because CCP released a new class of ship?
Your arrogance (or is it ignorance) is not becoming, it is also not going to win arguments. Generalizing and moving away from specifics, is what you lost on.
Your wrong and no matter what snide childish remarks you make, you will still be wrong.

You expected me to believe your spreadsheet without question - When it was (rightly) questioned you got all butt hurt and started name calling - And I'm the childish one LOL
Anyone with a few active brain cells would know, that spreadsheet is not a full and accurate representation.

Trust me - Is not trying to justify or disprove anything - It was having a laugh at your limited idea of what is.
I apologize, I obviously made a mistake in thinking you spoke English and would understand sarcasm and or snide comments.

You didn't post anything provable, just some random spread sheet - And we are supposed to take your word for it that it is correct and accurate?
I didn't get offended, why would I get offended? I know the information you posted to be grossly inaccurate and said so, that is not being offended.
You seem to be under the illusion, you know what does and does not affect me. (an internet psychologist, your not)

You don't actually reply to posts, you try to interpret them to suit you and respond without addressing any of the facts. Using examples such as Ishtars and new Destroyers, only shows your lack of understanding of the issue I was attempting to address. That or you just like being obnoxious.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#198 - 2015-12-18 05:01:36 UTC
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Justin Cody wrote:
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Justin Cody wrote:
triage needs to keep ewar immunity for the FAX otherwise it is pointless.


If super capital ewar leaves, then FAX should not get ewar immunity.

It's only fair. Take it away from dreads in siege too. Might as well have everyone get ewared to death.


its not about fairness. It is about game mechanics. supercapitals get to recieve remote support and FAX don't. period. There is a reason for ewar immunity. resistance is fine for supers. jammers might need a their own modifier for ships that don't have an out and out ECM bonus.

flavor > balance > fairness

Don't ever use the word fairness. It is too subjective and projects one's own desires onto a broader community which may or may not be true or helpful.


If you are talking about gameplay, then supercapitals die regardless of remote support or not. So it's only normal/gameplay they keep their inmunity to ewar.


It isn't about dying. It is about remote support vs no remote support. FAX get no support and Supers do - therefore supers don't need immunity. It is a chain of logic.
Anthar Thebess
#199 - 2015-12-18 12:28:12 UTC
Still don't understand most of the people issue with skills.

There need to be FAX skillbook , as ship class is being split to 2 different ships.
Carrier (dps) Fax ( logistics)
To be consistent we cannot have just 1 skill book as :
- FAX will be not T2 logistic ships so you cannot just have ( Logistics Carrier) skill book
- To fly dreads you need Siege skills , so for Fax you need Triage skills ( instead for prereq of drone skills)
- For all T1 hulls we have currently dedicated racial skill book starting from Frigate to a Titan.

This will grant some players additional skill points , and will increase the entry level for other.
The same happened when we had destroyer and battlecruiser split.
This is not a good solution, but again we need to be consistent.

People who trained Carrier for the remote rep ability should already have Triage skills at least on level 1 , so they should get racial FAX skill at the level of current carrier skill. ( yes some people will get a lot SP )

If someone did not train triage to any level on a carrier , but have remote capital rep skills at lvl 5 should not get any FAX skills.
Current carrier is considered as ultimate logistic ship , so if you have now taxi carrier, after the split you will also have taxi carrier.
You will be able to use capital remote modules ( maybe ) on a carrier , but they will be worthless.


Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Lugh Crow-Slave
#200 - 2015-12-19 19:39:46 UTC
Hiljah wrote:
Let's take what I think are the most obvious examples of a skill that should be refunded to FAX / Carrier pilots:
Advanced Drone Interfacing (FAX), Fighters (FAX), Capital Remote Armor Repair Systems ( Carrier ), Capital Shield Emission Systems ( Carrier ), Capital Capacitor Emission Systems ( Carrier ), Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration ( Carrier ).

Let's say you could train each of these to 5 in 30 days.

So 60 days lost for FAX pilots, and 90 days lost for Carrier pilots.

Since we're paying for access and skills we need to calculate what skills are worth.
I have a little over 50 million sp, and I think a reasonable price for this might be 25 billion isk.
25B isk / 1.2B isk per PLEX = 20 PLEX = $400

I've paid around $550 for game time, so 400/550 = 72%
Lets call it 70% paid for SP, 30% paid for access.

Let's say you pay $11 a month,
so FAX pilots are expected to lose up to 2 x 11 x .7 = 15.40 dollars,
and Carrier pilots are expected to lose up to 3 x 11 x .7 = 23.10 dollars

This assumes more than ideal attributes and implants, and that I even want to fly either of these after the change.

It's not a lot, but it's enough to make me mad at being told I should HTFU about it, since refunding skill points wouldn't actually cost CCP this amount.



Except nothing is stopping pilots from flying both

If you trained all those skills up then you were probably using them the only thing that is changing is you won't be able to use them au the same time


The only skill I could see bedding consisted is the carrier skill as many pilots may have trained that ONLY for the logistics role

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble