EVE Information Portal

Frigate, dessy, cruiser etc. skills are for tech 1 ships, interceptors, logistics etc. skills are for tech 2 ships. The former are racial the latter are not. I find it hard believe CCP would introduce racial T2 ship skills.



Most likely, yes.



Then again this is CCP we are talking about so... Funny things have happened before.

Funny thing, Gallente isn't the only race meant to have pwn droneboats, we just have more of them. Amarr has one or 2, as well as the Khanid missileboat platforms.

The races do have a fair amount of diversity in them.

Edit: also, ever notice the proteus is a terrible droneboat? Even if you fit it for drones, its pretty sucktastic next to an ishtar for a fraction of the price.

For now, I can fly Caldari+Gallente+Minmatar ships. All of, them begining from frigates and ending the BS. All of them, T1 and T2.
After this update I will have to learn all of them again separated race by race?
This smells like ****!!!! What is this for?

Go read the OP/devblog. If you can fly it now you will still be able to fly it.

Sheesh people, if you are gonna get worked up about something, make sure it hasn't been resolved already

I am amazed at the old players comming to the "rescue" of the younger players, Usualy the answers are when I started playing it was way harder bla bla bla.

And now when the older players fear (not even justified at the moment) they might lose a couple of days training, it would not be nice towards the younger players.

I consider myself one of those younger players about 1.25 years old, and I'm realy thrilled to see this change.

I'm Caldari, yes with in 3 months I could fly a Drake without to much troubles and then came the long waiting, little to nothing happens then for a long time.

This would give you a more gradual way of progressing, the fact ships get role bonusses which in a way they already have, makes it more intresting for younger players to enter the world of eve since you can become a rather usefull asset in a short time instead of being pushed in to the tackler role when you enter a pvp group. It's more fun to get a new toy every other month then get half in 3 months and then need to wait half a year to fly somthing else that can be used more than on a few occasions.

a second pro I see in these changes is that it might no longer be intrsting to fly cane of drake blobs;
1) it takes longer to fly them
2) with specialisation of (bombardment ships, Ships of the line, and attack vessles) it might not be so wise to put your bets on one horse, so more diversion of ships in a fleet, new tactics ect ect.

The fact every body flies them very often (almost every players guide tells you to rush to your racial Battlecruiser) points out exactly why it is broken.

And to every one that fances with the streamlining and dumbing down of EVE because of the roles, realy using EFT to calculate what does the most DPS against EH is a "very" complex system. Now you will need to think more about the ballance your fleet or the capacity of your piliots

We have been following this thread closely and compiled a Q&A list to the most commonly asked questions, we hope this helps a bit.

• Q: Will all of these ship balancing changes be applied in one go for Inferno?

A: No, the nuance is we will begin this general ship balancing plan with Inferno. Not only trying to revamp everything for Inferno would require a massive commitment, but even if it was possible, doing so in one move would be quite risky as ship balancing is a delicate process.

That means we will proceed slowly, one step at a time, starting with the ship classes that need the most love (most likely tech 1 frigates and destroyers), then moving our way up. This blog is describing future vision changes in an effort to increase transparency. We definitely want to have more blogs, discussion and feedback along the way.



• Q: With the skill changes, I will have to train for [racial cruiser V] and [racial battlecruiser V] to train for a Command Ship, how does that make it easier for me?

A: This is a misunderstanding, the changes don't work that way. While training for the next tech 1 ship class size will require that you train the racial skill to 4, training for the tech 2 version will only require the main racial skill at 5. That is the whole point with splitting destroyers and battlecruiser skills into four variants in the first place.

Example:

• Before, training for a Harbinger required you to train for Amarr Frigate 4, Amarr Cruiser 3 and Battlecruisers at 2
• Before, training for an Absolution required you to train for Amarr Frigate 4, Amarr Cruiser 5, Battlecruiser at 5 and Heavy Assault Ships at 4
• Now, training for a Harbinger requires you to train for Amarr Frigate 4, Amarr Destroyer 4, Amarr Cruiser 4 and then Amarr Battlecruiser at 1.
• Now, training for an Absolution requires you to train for Amarr Frigate 4, Amarr Destroyer 4, Amarr Cruiser 4 and Amarr Battlecruiser at 5. There is no more need for the Amarr Cruiser 5 and Heavy Assault Ship at 4.



• Q: Isn't forcing us to train [Racial Destroyer] at 4 is lame considering there is only one ship for each race?

A: absolutely, we have been discussing that before this blog went out, and we will keep considering options until we come up with a solution that improves this situation. One way could be adding more destroyer hulls, if we can find a role for them.



• Q: can we opt out for skills we don't want during the reimbursement process?

A: well, again, it depends on how it is done. We may just bluntly give all four variants at V if you had battlecruiser V for example, or maybe require that you also add the relevant Cruiser skill trained at level 3 to be eligible. On the latter case, just don't train the cruiser 3 skill, and you should not receive the new racial battlecruiser at 5. Not sure why one would do that however, it's like skipping free candy or cake while visiting your grandma.

Example:

• If we go for option 1: you will get Amarr, Caldari, Gallente and Minmatar Battlecruiser skills at 5 if you previously had the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5.
• If we go for option 2: you will get Amarr Battlecruiser skill at 5 only if you previously fulfilled all conditions to fly Amarr Battlecruisers, which means having the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5, PLUS the Amarr Cruiser at 3.

To remind it again, there are other options to consider, but no matter which one which choose, you won't lose anything out of the skill reimbursement plan.



• Q: Are you going to split the tech 2 skills into four racial variants as well?

A: No. Tech 2 skills already are specializations over tech 1 hulls, there is no need specialize them further. The skill change main purpose is to make the progression between tech 1 and tech 2 clearer and more consistent, not to create more skill variants for the sake of it. Besides, training for a tech 2 vessel already requires you to train for the relevant tech 1 racial ship skill anyway.

Example:
There is no point splitting Recon Ships to Amarr Recon Ships, because flying a Pilgrim already requires you to have Amarr Cruiser at 5.
This also covers the question with the Jump Freighters. While Freighters may only require [Racial Industrial 4] to train, Jump Freighters will not be split up.



• Q: Don’t you believe requiring [Race Industrial / Battleship 4] to train for Freighters / Capital ships make them too easy to aim for?

A: Possibly. Most likely. Again, there is nothing preventing us from increasing other skill requirements on Freighters or Capital Ships to keep the average training time identical if that is an issue. Such a change is quite far ahead in the future anyway, there is plenty of time to discuss and reconsider this.



• Q: You said in the Dev Blog that Amarr would be the first to be looked at, does that mean they are going to be screwed with Inferno?

A: No. This line of Dev Blogs presents our theoretical, long term plan for ship balancing. Such changes are just too massive to be released in one go, thus we need as much feedback as possible before going forward. As said before, we want to implement this massive change into small, iterative steps, focusing on one ship class at a time.



• Q: Fail!!11!! Shouldn’t there be a Naga instead of the Rokh in the Caldari ship tree?

A: There is a Rokh instead of a Naga because we used backgrounds from last year Fanfest presentation as they were looking great and suiting each tree theme. This choice was purely cosmetic.

Thanks for keeping us in the map and letting us to provide the comments we have. Lots of emotion in this thread and around this issue, but it will end up fine when corner stones find their places.

Remind me to buy the JF skillbook for my alt with Freighter IV...

You really shouldn't remove the BS V requirement for caps.
Caps are the main reason people train it to V.

ytterbium, thank you for your q&a. it clarifies the big questions. maybe you can link it very prominently in the very first post of this thread, so that guys who just read the dev blog do not rage-spam the same questions over and over again?

i really like this ship lines idea getting more refined and put into context with the rest of eve.



i guess it is not the rokh in the backround which triggered the lol, but the one which replaces the little picture representing the naga next to the drake and ferox in the ship tree.

edit:


thats not quite true. it may be true for every cap-ship alt, but there are a lot of people who have other reasons.
but lets here your arguments, if you have any despite "the training queue for caps is 30 days shorter. everybody will fly caps now".