EVE Information Portal

So, the idea of the change is to stop skills that give access to too many hulls, to promote specialization, but one is actually "punished" for not training every ship under the sun prior to the change since it will mean getting less free candy?
Does that really make sense to you?

As a fairly specc'ed char (Minmatar/Angel only), my options are to ruin my character with another two cruiser skills I have no interest in flying, or missing out on 4.096m SP less candy (16 ranks, 2 race's destroyer/battlecruiser 5)? 2 months of skilltime?

No good thing will come out of any of the options presented so far. If a char has the destroyer skill, drop him the 4 books in his home station and give him the SP he actually has in that skill as unallocated SP. Same for BC. Or, if you want to keep the "can fly the same ships before and after" constraint, give everybody 4 times the SP they had in the skills.
So they can decide.

And maybe give us the option to permanently unlearn a skill, losing (!) the SP in it, so we can clean up orphaned requirement skills if they offend us optically in our character sheet.....

Also, trying to offset reduced capital skill-training times with the new requirement design with additional requisites either means meaningless requisites that everyone is guaranteed to have (Mining I), or even MORE candy that needs to be handed out so noone loses the ability to fly a ship. I already see the mad scramble of supercap pilots trying to get the needed skillbooks that they had dropped in some corner of New Eden to their ship so they can officially fly and use it again.

TL;DR: I support the idea and the intent of the change. But the implementation concepts presented so far scream "whiteboard now!"

And maybe give us the option to permanently unlearn a skill, losing (!) the SP in it, so we can clean up orphaned requirement skills if they offend us optically in our character sheet.....

While your post screams "Obsessive/ Compulsive".



Really? REALLY?!?

Insanely OCD-riddled whine post.

No. There are ships in the game that need fixing. These will be your new ships once they are fixed. Totally new ships are not needed. Changing the skill tree is not needed.

What good is a new line of destroyers. What would be the purpose. They would just further obsolete so many of the cruisers already in the game with no utility.

But if its role is to give newbies a chance to help posrep/mine from with good bonuses, and not go in fleets, thats not a bad thing.

They fill the very important role of a bridge to mining hulls, and the less important role of helping with gruntwork. Why should the vets in logis/carriers carry all the load?

I'm more worried about more useless hulls, like the Celestis. Might not see many ospreys, or Bellicoses, but when is the last time you saw anyone at all in a Celestis, or a Breacher?

The whole point of the skill changes, and the end of the Tier system, is to rectify the problem of obsolete hulls in the cruiser line (among others)... AND to make it far easier to introduce new varients of hulls that they would have liked to have done in the past but could not.

There have been literally dozens of excellent proposals for new, unique, useful Destroyer hulls made over the years... Point Defense Destroyers, Counter Covert Ops Destoyers, Heavy Bombers, Ninja Salvaging Craft to name a very few. The old system made their introduction problematic, the new system makes their serious consideration realistic... and at the same time addressess the core issues that make a great many existing ships obsolete.

There have been literally dozens of excellent proposals for new, unique, useful Destroyer hulls made over the years... Point Defense Destroyers, Counter Covert Ops Destoyers, Heavy Bombers, Ninja Salvaging Craft to name a very few. The old system made their introduction problematic, the new system makes their serious consideration realistic... and at the same time addressess the core issues that make a great many existing ships obsolete.