These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Information on proposed Destroyer and Battlecruiser Skill changes

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#81 - 2012-12-31 19:21:55 UTC
Devaroni wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
CCP has said that if you're partially through training BC IV to BC V, you will only get racial BC IV after the change, and the partial levels will not transfer.


Can you show me where that was stated? So do you get reimbursed the points if you are partially trained in BCs? I mean if i spend 20 days training BC V, and I only make it through 15 days of training before the patch hits... do I lose those 15 days?

I'd like a source for this information too if you have it.


It's in the OP, 2 devblogs have explained it & you can also find it in the F&I forum.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#82 - 2013-01-06 03:17:02 UTC
What I don't get is the logic behind making a game that is already hellish on new players even more unforgiving towards them. Can give whatever reason you want for the change, but in the end, they either have to sacrifice useful skill training for a month to make sure its not a problem later, or suck it up and really, I don't see the point in effectively punishing latecomers to the game. Sure you ultimately don't NEED them all, but it IS a significant hit to their potential versatility. Plus is there really even enough ships of those classes to warrant the change in the first place? I mean, the new Destroyers help, but they don't exactly cover all the potential role sets, and they'll be making them required for Cruisers I've been hearing? OK, now someone who has no reason to initially train Destroyers has to just to get at the ships that actually fit their chosen role. I don't know, it just doesn't make sense to make things harder for a small group rather arbitrarily. Its not like cross-faction training isn't already time consuming to do effectively.
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#83 - 2013-01-06 03:24:10 UTC
Jesus people just get all your all-race frig, cruiser, and the BC skill to 5. Problem solved.

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#84 - 2013-01-06 03:27:09 UTC
Gogela wrote:
Jesus people just get all your all-race frig, cruiser, and the BC skill to 5. Problem solved.


Except it forces people to waste time on skills they aren't necessarily ready for, sacrificing quite a bit of improvement on what they currently DO need and are ready for, so no, its not that simple.
Morgred
Cold Lazarus Inc
The-Expanse
#85 - 2013-01-17 01:27:03 UTC
I would actually like to see the harbinger be the drone boat for amarr,

if the prophecy ends up being the drone boat it wont make any sense, lets compare it to the ferrox. the ferrox can have either missile launchers or guns on it, the vulture is the gun boat iteration of the ferrox, and the nighthawk is the missile boat iteration of the ferrox. caldari use both hybrid turrets and missiles so this setup is sound with both the lore and the t2 versions have a fitting commonality with the t1 version.

prophecy, laser boat, absolution, t2 laser boat, damnation is a missile boat and while this doesn't seem to fit with amarr at all, remember that the khandid kingdom is a splinter group of amarrians that have adopted many caldari concepts and technology, so lore wise the damnation makes sense.

some of you might be saying that the amarr empire does have an example of a drone boat, so making the prophecy a drone boat harkens to that idea, i say lets look closely at the arbitrator, yes it is a drone boat, the pilgrim is a drone boat, and the curse is a drone boat, so unless we want to make the prophecy a drone boat, absolution a drone boat, and the damnation a drone boat to fit the evolutionary model that the arbitrator fits, it doesn't make sense.

now in my opinion the harbinger being a drone boat makes sense because it is already a stand alone ship with no t2 iterations, so we can make it anything we want without having fitting commonality issues or lore issues.
John DaiSho
LowKey Ops
Snuffed Out
#86 - 2013-01-17 01:29:57 UTC
Morgred wrote:
I would actually like to see the harbinger be the drone boat for amarr,

if the prophecy ends up being the drone boat it wont make any sense, lets compare it to the ferrox. the ferrox can have either missile launchers or guns on it, the vulture is the gun boat iteration of the ferrox, and the nighthawk is the missile boat iteration of the ferrox. caldari use both hybrid turrets and missiles so this setup is sound with both the lore and the t2 versions have a fitting commonality with the t1 version.

prophecy, laser boat, absolution, t2 laser boat, damnation is a missile boat and while this doesn't seem to fit with amarr at all, remember that the khandid kingdom is a splinter group of amarrians that have adopted many caldari concepts and technology, so lore wise the damnation makes sense.

some of you might be saying that the amarr empire does have an example of a drone boat, so making the prophecy a drone boat harkens to that idea, i say lets look closely at the arbitrator, yes it is a drone boat, the pilgrim is a drone boat, and the curse is a drone boat, so unless we want to make the prophecy a drone boat, absolution a drone boat, and the damnation a drone boat to fit the evolutionary model that the arbitrator fits, it doesn't make sense.

now in my opinion the harbinger being a drone boat makes sense because it is already a stand alone ship with no t2 iterations, so we can make it anything we want without having fitting commonality issues or lore issues.


Have you seen the lore writing of Fozzie, explaining why the tristan became a droneboat, even when its T2 version is using torps? I guess as long as you have enough fantasy and are able to make a nice story you can get very good reasons why the prophecy is a droneboat and its T2 counterparts are not.
Prince Mammon
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#87 - 2013-01-17 01:33:14 UTC
These changes seem fine, if they were made years ago. Now it's simply adding more skills your forced to train to use the same ships.

I wonder if someone makes more money if it takes you longer to train skills to use these ships...

CCP Gargant: "total blanket no-tolerance policy was enacted on accusing the ISD of misbehaving" Who else said there people couldn't be accused of misbehaving? Nothing to see here, move along.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#88 - 2013-01-17 05:22:52 UTC
You're not forced to train them at all. Everybody's training them because it's an opportunity to circumvent having to train more skills later in the event they decide to crosstrain later. In many cases like mine these are skills I would have trained anyway.

Besides, you don't have to train anything to be able to fly after the change what you can fly now. This has been said so many times...

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Sarah Schneider
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#89 - 2013-01-17 06:51:49 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
Gogela wrote:
Jesus people just get all your all-race frig, cruiser, and the BC skill to 5. Problem solved.


Except it forces people to waste time on skills they aren't necessarily ready for, sacrificing quite a bit of improvement on what they currently DO need and are ready for, so no, its not that simple.

No one's forcing you to do anything per se. If you don't need them don't train them, and no "a bit of improvement" is a very subjective term that is your opinion. CCP realizes the huge negative impact these changes are going to affect players, but they still said "we know, but it's necessary", after incarna and after all the rages for the past year, so it means as it is, necessary.

Is it currently broken? no, it works fine, but that's probably the only thing it does, it works. How about from the development side of things? How about the whole tiericide thing that will look ridiculous seeing that destroyers and battlecruisers are the only two skills that's not streamlined properly and as CCP said, the current system is a bad one, if it's worth taking a hit for changing them for the better, so be it.

"I'd rather have other players get shot by other players than not interacting with others" -CCP Soundwave
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#90 - 2013-01-17 07:16:15 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
Gogela wrote:
Jesus people just get all your all-race frig, cruiser, and the BC skill to 5. Problem solved.


Except it forces people to waste time on skills they aren't necessarily ready for, sacrificing quite a bit of improvement on what they currently DO need and are ready for, so no, its not that simple.


Except, it really doesn't. It gives players an opportunity to get a jump start on future training if they want to, but it doesn't actually penalize them, if they don't. If you are using the ships to their full extent already, nothing changes, if you arent, and dont train the skill, you can actually train up for a single race of battlecruisers FASTER after the patch.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#91 - 2013-01-17 07:37:06 UTC
So my skill sheet won't have some generic Battlecruiser and Destroyer skill.

It will proudly proclaim Gallente Battlecruiser and Gallente Destroyer. Sweet!

Mr Epeen Cool
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#92 - 2013-01-17 07:37:20 UTC
Arronicus wrote:
you can actually train up for a single race of battlecruisers FASTER after the patch.

It won't be any faster than it is now. The battlecruisers skills will be of the same rank as they are now (rank 6).

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#93 - 2013-01-17 08:02:56 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Arronicus wrote:
you can actually train up for a single race of battlecruisers FASTER after the patch.

It won't be any faster than it is now. The battlecruisers skills will be of the same rank as they are now (rank 6).

What will be faster is training for single-race command ships post-patch.

.
Mund Richard
#94 - 2013-01-17 08:05:24 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Arronicus wrote:
you can actually train up for a single race of battlecruisers FASTER after the patch.
It won't be any faster than it is now. The battlecruisers skills will be of the same rank as they are now (rank 6).
What will be faster is training for single-race command ships post-patch.
Except if it won't necessary be.
Racial Cruiser will be removed az a prereq, but the last official statement I caught was "we don't know yet", about the training for command ships becoming shorter, or adding extra skill requirements to keep it the same length.

Of course, I may have missed something, point the way and make me happy.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Garia666
CyberShield Inc
HYDRA RELOADED
#95 - 2013-01-17 08:28:13 UTC
i heard rumours they want to make an drone boat from the geddon..
this news is very disturbing.
is there any written communication about that?

If someone can help me out i would be gratefull
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#96 - 2013-01-17 09:58:50 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Hello boyz,

We currently working hard to get that skill plan cleared up and final so we can tell you in advance what's going to happen.

This change is mainly done for:


  • Consistency: we would like all ship training to be consistent and logical with each other, which isn't the case at the moment. We have racial tech1 spaceship command skills (Amarr Cruiser, Amarr Frigate, Amarr Battleship), plus some generic skills (Destroyers, Battlecruisers) which mess things up. Thus training for Amarr Command Ships require a weird mix of Amarr Cruiser plus Battlecruisers 5 instead of simply going for Amarr Battlecruiser 5.

  • Easier to specialize: the point of splitting the Destroyer and Battlecruiser skills in four is to make it faster for new players to specialize in tech2 ships. New players are often recommended to specialize to compete with veterans and we would like to promote this. The side-effect is that it will take more time to generalize in more than one race, but we consider it to be acceptable and something more suited for longer-term players with more skill points to work with.

  • Cut nested requirements: there are some tech2 ship skills that require others to be achieved. This is the case for Heavy Assault Ships for instance, which require Assault Ships to be flown. Ideally, we would prefer if pilots that specialize in a certain ship class don't have to train another class they don't care about. Example: if I am a pilot interested in supporting my fleet with Warfare Links, why do I either have to train for Logistics or Heavy Assault Ships to either unlock Field or Fleet Command Ships? The difficulty however is to replace those skills with others that make sense for the tweaked ships themselves (we don't want them to be too easy to train however).

  • Clear ship and module specialization confusion: in some cases, you are not only required to train a set of skills for the tech2 ship you wish to unlock, but also have to train another set of highly specialized skills for the module that goes into the ship itself. There is nothing anywhere telling you about that and that is a double training time sink (ex: Interdictors and the interdiction sphere launcher). Which is why we would like to couple this point with the one above and rework some of the tech2 ship specialization skills to make more sense in general.


No matter what, please remember that you will still be able to fly unlocked ships even after the change. More info to be delivered as soon as possible through a Dev Blog.


Hope that helps a bit.
mkint
#97 - 2013-01-17 11:20:50 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Hello boyz,

We currently working hard to get that skill plan cleared up and final so we can tell you in advance what's going to happen.

This change is mainly done for:


  • Consistency: we would like all ship training to be consistent and logical with each other, which isn't the case at the moment. We have racial tech1 spaceship command skills (Amarr Cruiser, Amarr Frigate, Amarr Battleship), plus some generic skills (Destroyers, Battlecruisers) which mess things up. Thus training for Amarr Command Ships require a weird mix of Amarr Cruiser plus Battlecruisers 5 instead of simply going for Amarr Battlecruiser 5.

  • Easier to specialize: the point of splitting the Destroyer and Battlecruiser skills in four is to make it faster for new players to specialize in tech2 ships. New players are often recommended to specialize to compete with veterans and we would like to promote this. The side-effect is that it will take more time to generalize in more than one race, but we consider it to be acceptable and something more suited for longer-term players with more skill points to work with.

  • Cut nested requirements: there are some tech2 ship skills that require others to be achieved. This is the case for Heavy Assault Ships for instance, which require Assault Ships to be flown. Ideally, we would prefer if pilots that specialize in a certain ship class don't have to train another class they don't care about. Example: if I am a pilot interested in supporting my fleet with Warfare Links, why do I either have to train for Logistics or Heavy Assault Ships to either unlock Field or Fleet Command Ships? The difficulty however is to replace those skills with others that make sense for the tweaked ships themselves (we don't want them to be too easy to train however).

  • Clear ship and module specialization confusion: in some cases, you are not only required to train a set of skills for the tech2 ship you wish to unlock, but also have to train another set of highly specialized skills for the module that goes into the ship itself. There is nothing anywhere telling you about that and that is a double training time sink (ex: Interdictors and the interdiction sphere launcher). Which is why we would like to couple this point with the one above and rework some of the tech2 ship specialization skills to make more sense in general.


No matter what, please remember that you will still be able to fly unlocked ships even after the change. More info to be delivered as soon as possible through a Dev Blog.


Hope that helps a bit.

While I won't be affected by this either way, I do want to counter that not only does the old way make sense, but it helps explain the quirks of the hulls themselves to the uninitiated. I don't ever recall wondering what size modules go on a battlecruiser or destroyer as a rookie. It is obvious that a dessie gets frig size modules by the skills it requires.
Still, I'm long past the point of this change ever hurting me except in being asked annoying questions.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#98 - 2013-01-17 11:41:56 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
mkint wrote:
While I won't be affected by this either way, I do want to counter that not only does the old way make sense, but it helps explain the quirks of the hulls themselves to the uninitiated. I don't ever recall wondering what size modules go on a battlecruiser or destroyer as a rookie. It is obvious that a dessie gets frig size modules by the skills it requires.
Still, I'm long past the point of this change ever hurting me except in being asked annoying questions.

You may have thought it was obvious, and I may have and several others, but having been in help chat for a long time we do get quite a few questions about what sized modules are supposed to be fitted to certain ships, particularly destroyers and battlecruisers.

In any event I'm always willing to help out whoever needs clarification, if I'm online and not too busy at the time.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Bastion Arzi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#99 - 2013-01-17 13:15:26 UTC
Hi ,

skimmed through the thread so forgive me if this has been stated but when are the changes likely to happen?

the first post just says sometime this year - do we now know when?

thanks in advance
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#100 - 2013-01-17 13:27:50 UTC
Bastion Arzi wrote:
Hi ,

skimmed through the thread so forgive me if this has been stated but when are the changes likely to happen?

the first post just says sometime this year - do we now know when?

thanks in advance

It was posted in the combat battlecruisers thread.

CCP Fozzie wrote:
Are the Battlecruiser skills being split into racial version at the same time as these changes?

We have been planning to split the Battlecruiser and Destroyer skills into racial variations (Details can be found in CCP Ytterbium's dev blog here) for a while, but we've been vague about the when. Originally I had hoped to get the changes into this point release, but we've seen an opportunity to both build better tools to help players understand the changes (communicating the mechanics involved is something we could have done better so far) and also combine the skill changes with some other adjustments that fit together well. So I now have permission to let you all know that the skill change is scheduled for our Summer expansion 2013 (which most of you know tends to fall in the late spring). We'll be working to make sure that as many people as possible understand the changes beforehand. I know that some of you may feel that we've been stringing you guys along since the changes were first proposed so long ago, but we're working to make sure a huge change like this is done in the most responsible way possible.

To repeat, the skill split is scheduled for the big Summer 2013 expansion.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)