These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: The great ship skill change of summer 2013

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#481 - 2013-02-08 14:25:33 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Alrigh folks, good news.

We'll change the way training works so that you can still train the skills you have after change, even if you don't meet the prerequisite anymore.

Ex:

You have Amarr Freighter 1 after the change but not Advanced Spaceship Command 5. You can still fly the Providence and you will now still be able to train Amarr Freighter past 1 as long as you have the skill injected.


Hope that's clear - trying my very best Sad

Thanks!

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#482 - 2013-02-08 14:28:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Unforgiven Storm
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Alrigh folks, good news.

We'll change the way training works so that you can still train the skills you have after change, even if you don't meet the prerequisite anymore.

Ex:

You have Amarr Freighter 1 after the change but not Advanced Spaceship Command 5. You can still fly the Providence and you will now still be able to train Amarr Freighter past 1 as long as you have the skill injected.

Hope that's clear - trying my very best Sad


If you are still open to critics and reviews, there are still a couple of things that needed to be clarified:

1 - With these changes all T2 ships will need the main requirement skill to be trained at level V, but for JF an exception will be opened? why? CCP doesn't want to give out 7M skill points to people? that door is already open for destroyers and battlecruisers!

Keep things consistent, do it right !

My sugestion:

- Keep all T2 requirements at level V, even if that means giving more free skill points.


2 - While checking out the pre-requisites changes of some of the ships one thing stands out, there was a huge attempt to keep training time the same as before creating hysterical requirements for some ships that is putting everybody bumping heads against a wall, some of the edge cases I found:

2a - carriers / supercarriers - removing the racial battleship V and we have less 40 days to train. But then you had Jump Fuel Conservation IV and Jump Drive Calibration III. I can accept this if it was done also for the dread and titan, but no! Why Capital Ships 4 for regular carriers? Adding the Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration skill at 1 as prerequisite to the Dread but not Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration I to carriers? Adding the Jump Portal Generation skill at 1 as requirement to Titans but not Doomsday Operation I, the most important weapon a titan can use? where is the consistency?

Keep things consistent, do it right !

My sugestion:

- First keep Capital Ships III for regular carriers and only increase it to IV for Supercarriers.
- Second add the same requirements to all the capital ships or none at all, I’m talking about had Jump Fuel Conservation IV and Jump Drive Calibration III
- Third keep things consistent between all capitals, if you add some specific requirements to some capitals, finish the job you started: Add Projected electronic counter measures I and Fighter Bombers I to Supercarriers ; Add Doomsday Operation I to Titans; Add Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration I and Fighters I to Carriers !

Keep things consistent, do it right !

2b - Siege Warfare V to fly Damnation; Armored Warfare V to fly the Vulture; Skirmish Warfare V to fly an Eos or Information Warfare V to fly a Claymore, really? Why train something that is not directly related with ship, the links and bonus the ship will give? That doesn’t make any sense, looking to your proposal only 2 of these skills make sense for each type of command ship: http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/63522/1/Commandshipchanges2.jpg

Keep things consistent, do it right !

My sugestion:

- If you really have the want to keep training times the same, instead of 4 requirements, keep only the requirements for the 2 skills that makes sense for each command ship (according with your proposal) and increase the training factor of the warfare skills from 2 to 3, instead of 9 days * 4 things will be 17 days * 2 and the times will be closer to what you want, just give the extra skill points to the persons that trained the skill and close this page in a clean way.

Keep things consistent, do it right !

3b - Cloaking 4 added as skill requirement of the Recon Ships skill !! Really, one of the recons don’t have the bonus to fit cloaking device T2, you know this right? Are you planning in giving both ships this bonus and forget to tell us?

Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-)
Flying Apocalypse
#483 - 2013-02-08 14:32:15 UTC
Unforgiven Storm wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Alrigh folks, good news.

We'll change the way training works so that you can still train the skills you have after change, even if you don't meet the prerequisite anymore.

Ex:

You have Amarr Freighter 1 after the change but not Advanced Spaceship Command 5. You can still fly the Providence and you will now still be able to train Amarr Freighter past 1 as long as you have the skill injected.

Hope that's clear - trying my very best Sad


If you are still open to critics and reviews, there are still a couple of things than needed to be clarified:

1 - With these changes all T2 ships will need the main requirement skill to be trained at level V, but for JF an exception will be opened? why? CCP doesn't want to give out 7M skill points to people? that door is already open for destroyers and battlecruisers!

Keep things consistent, do it right !

My sugestion:

- Keep all T2 requirements at level V, even if that means giving more free skill points.


2 - While checking out the pre-requisites changes of some of the ships one thing stands out, there was a huge attempt to keep training time the same as before creating hysterical requirements for some ships that is putting everybody bumping heads against a wall, some of the edge cases I found:

2a - carriers / supercarriers - removing the racial battleship V and we have less 40 days to train. But then you had Jump Fuel Conservation IV and Jump Drive Calibration III. I can accept this if it was done also for the dread and titan, but no! Why Capital Ships 4 for regular carriers? Adding the Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration skill at 1 as prerequisite to the Dread but not Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration I to carriers? Adding the Jump Portal Generation skill at 1 as requirement to Titans but not Doomsday Operation I, the most important weapon a titan can use? where is the consistency?

Keep things consistent, do it right !

My sugestion:

- First keep Capital Ships III for regular carriers and only increase it to IV for Supercarriers.
- Second add the same requirements to all the capital ships or none at all, I’m talking about had Jump Fuel Conservation IV and Jump Drive Calibration III
- Third keep things consistent between all capitals, if you add some specific requirements to some capitals, finish the job you started: Add Projected electronic counter measures I and Fighter Bombers I to Supercarriers ; Add Doomsday Operation I to Titans; Add Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration I and Fighters I to Carriers !

Keep things consistent, do it right !

2b - Siege Warfare V to fly Damnation; Armored Warfare V to fly the Vulture; Skirmish Warfare V to fly an Eos or Information Warfare V to fly a Claymore, really? Why train something that is not directly related with ship, the links and bonus the ship will give? That doesn’t make any sense, looking to your proposal only 2 of these skills make sense for each type of command ship: http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/63522/1/Commandshipchanges2.jpg

Keep things consistent, do it right !

My sugestion:

- If you really have the want to keep training times the same, instead of 4 requirements, keep only the requirements for the 2 skills that makes sense for each command ship (according with your proposal) and increase the training factor of the warfare skills from 2 to 3, instead of 9 days * 4 things will be 17 days * 2 and the times will be closer to what you want, just give the extra skill points to the persons that trained the skill and close this page in a clean way.

Keep things consistent, do it right !

3b - Cloaking 4 added as skill requirement of the Recon Ships skill !! Really, one of the recons don’t have the bonus to fit cloaking device T2, you know this right? Are you planning in giving both ships this bonus and forget to tell us?


You are a goon so I'll instantly assume you are trolling...But in case you are not...You want a lot of free stuff from ccp don't you? something like "instant gratification"?

For some reason I can't delete my signature o.o
Sinzor Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#484 - 2013-02-08 14:40:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Sinzor Aumer
Sinzor Aumer wrote:
Unkind Omen wrote:
And for sake of justice never forget that hull skills are only the small part of skills one have to train to operate ship properly. One will have to invest a lot into core/gunnery skills before he will be actually capable of using larger hull sizes properly.

Every time they simplify the game a little - there is a lot of difficulties still left... until it's not. A bittervet can remember learning skills, no warp-to-zero, old-school probing, and all that things that I have no idea of.

:trollface:

CCP Fozzie wrote:
Clone costs in their current form are not something we as a design department are happy with. Beyond that we can't make commitments on the issue at this time.


Grath Telkin wrote:
You could, you know, just across the board cut them all in half and I'd love you long time.

And a space-poor PL dude! I concur, your troll-fu is stronger then my :-((
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#485 - 2013-02-08 14:48:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Unforgiven Storm
Flying Apocalypse wrote:

You are a goon so I'll instantly assume you are trolling...But in case you are not...You want a lot of free stuff from ccp don't you? something like "instant gratification"?

Space ships is serious stuff for me to be trolling about Roll

In a more serious note, I always love free stuff, but believe me this is not the case.

Instead of following my suggestions, CCP can just give up on this obsession on keeping all previous and new training times the same, go back and remove some of these new skills requirements that doesn't make any sense and

Keep things consistent

That is only thing I'm asking. When these changes are done and the dust settles I would like to look to each ship requirements and say, "OK it makes sense and its consistent will all the same ships in this class"!

Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-)
Anthar Thebess
#486 - 2013-02-08 14:51:49 UTC
To be honest.
1. Command ships changes are strange.
- Someone stated correctly - if i fly Shield Command ship -WHY THE HELL I NEED ARMOUR SKILLS! :)

2. Recons
- Cloaking IV as a prerequisite for a ship that will not a covert op cloak - WHY?

3. Carriers/Dreads
- From my perspective if i will have alt in a wormhole - what is the reason for Jump Drive calibration, and Jump Fuel Conservation at this high lvl? I can understand other things - but why skills that only determine how far, and how cheap you can jump?
- Dreads - Siege as a prerequisite - strange , i can still undock without a siege module ... and fly this ship - so why do i need it train before sitting in this ship?

4. Electronic Atack ships
- Long range targeting? WHY those are frigates, this 5% does not help much - and is not so important for this ship class!

CCP Please reconsider skills:
Command ships - prerequisites only for a proper ships, and for example add armour/shield resistances skills there .
* If i can boost someone resistances - i have to know how.

Recons.
No cloak, please. I have this already trained - but need of a covert op cloak ( or any cloak ) for a ship that have no need of using it...

Capitals.
Dreads - other skills - no siege.
Carriers - etc...


Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Onyx Nyx
The Veldspar Protectorate
#487 - 2013-02-08 14:53:42 UTC
I am concerned, and I have heard murmurings, that CCP will not reimburse the current battleship 5 requirement to fly capital ships. I have two characters whose sole purpose is to fly carriers and dreads and once these changes go through, my two characters and everyone else that has characters for dedicated capital roles is going have 1,984,000 SP of wasted training time.

Needless to say, if these changes go through without reimbursement, it is a ****-move and huge loss of goodwill on CCP's part.

I kill kittens, and puppies and bunnies. I maim toddlers and teens and then more.

  • Richard (http://www.lfgcomic.com/)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#488 - 2013-02-08 15:10:56 UTC
It's not ******* wasted. You can still fly battleships, can't you? Stop complaining.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
stoicfaux
#489 - 2013-02-08 15:11:47 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:

3. Carriers/Dreads
- From my perspective if i will have alt in a wormhole - what is the reason for Jump Drive calibration, and Jump Fuel Conservation at this high lvl? I can understand other things - but why skills that only determine how far, and how cheap you can jump?

/RP /lore: The ships were initially designed for normal space. It sounds like you're asking for a dread/carrier variant that sacrifices jump capability for an improvement in something else to better fit the needs and foibles of wormholes.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Onyx Nyx
The Veldspar Protectorate
#490 - 2013-02-08 15:12:11 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's not ******* wasted. You can still fly battleships, can't you? Stop complaining.


Good for you. Now go sit in your corner while the adults are talking.

I kill kittens, and puppies and bunnies. I maim toddlers and teens and then more.

  • Richard (http://www.lfgcomic.com/)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#491 - 2013-02-08 15:13:38 UTC
Onyx Nyx wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's not ******* wasted. You can still fly battleships, can't you? Stop complaining.


Good for you. Now go sit in your corner while the adults are talking.

You whine like a child and then call yourself an adult. That's classic.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
stoicfaux
#492 - 2013-02-08 15:13:44 UTC
Onyx Nyx wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's not ******* wasted. You can still fly battleships, can't you? Stop complaining.


Good for you. Now go sit in your corner while the adults are talking.

Careful, the corner is relative.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#493 - 2013-02-08 15:14:39 UTC
MisterNick wrote:
Looks like you've got your work cut out when it comes to rebalancing the T1 industrials. Example: If you can hop into an Iteron V at skill level 1, people are unlikely to ever bother with the other Iteron versions.

The indy ships will no doubt get mining-barge-ified when they're rebalanced, such that all of them are available at level I, and each has a distinct role (huge tank, huge cargo, quick align, etc.). People won't train up the skill to get into a "better" ship anymore, just to get more benefit out of all of them (while being able to select whichever best fits the needs of a particular hauling job at will).

Can't say I see anything wrong with the changes really.

I did not see any mention of remaps in the dev blog. I suggest that the scope of these changes would make it fair to tack on two bonus remaps for every character in game that does not already have at least two in the bank on the day of the Great Skill Change (especially considering you did not give us the option to pick one up this past Christmas).

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Radius Prime
Tax Evading Ass.
#494 - 2013-02-08 15:15:30 UTC
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:
One change I certainly do not like is merging the Navigation requirements for carrier into the skill requirements.

This will mess up my planned future skill progression (distant future, admittedly) quite a bit, since I had planned to learn the ship command part of the carrier requirements at the end of a PER/WIL mapping period, then remap for support skills (regular remap available by then) and learn the navigation part there.

That's no longer possible which means postponing carriers by a full year or burning another bonus remap, after the AI patch already ate my first :(.


Welcome to EVE... Stopped counting the number of times I had to remap or change training plans because of Dev decisions. When they changed the racial aspects of toons back in 2009 it was fubar. Afterwards they removed learning skills and we got some free remaps to compensate. All those are now wasted because of remaps they made me do by adding skills,removing or changing skills. Not to mention the month I spent researching what would be best race/bloodline for training only to find out that the devs had removed that whole aspect from the game. FUBAR.

We deserve a free remap for all these changes to skills!!!!!!!!!!!

Was hoping we would get one for X-mas but proved to be idle hope.

Reopen the EVE gate so we can invade Serenity. Goons can go first.
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#495 - 2013-02-08 15:15:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Unforgiven Storm
Onyx Nyx wrote:
I am concerned, and I have heard murmurings, that CCP will not reimburse the current battleship 5 requirement to fly capital ships. I have two characters whose sole purpose is to fly carriers and dreads and once these changes go through, my two characters and everyone else that has characters for dedicated capital roles is going have 1,984,000 SP of wasted training time.

Needless to say, if these changes go through without reimbursement, it is a ****-move and huge loss of goodwill on CCP's part.


While I feel your pain ( I'm 5 days for Amarr BS 5) so I can cross-train carrier (I already fly Caldari).

It will be a huge problem for CCP to distinguish the ones that want to keep V because they want to use it to fly a marauder from the ones that have dedicated pilots for capitals. CCP cannot possible guess what each person wants and even if they went for something like, "file a petition to get your skills points back", the GMs will go on strike !

Against my own interests I say this and its a pain to admit it, but there is no way for CCP to give us the points back without creating a mess of procedure and I have to agree with them on this point and just accept it.

Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-)
Sinzor Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#496 - 2013-02-08 15:16:12 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Clone costs in their current form are not something we as a design department are happy with. Beyond that we can't make commitments on the issue at this time.

In fact, the solution is easy.
Introduce some high-rank skill that reduces clone costs. It'll be by no means mandatory for new players - and veterans would be glad to learn something useful.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#497 - 2013-02-08 15:16:20 UTC
Freighdee Katt wrote:
I did not see any mention of remaps in the dev blog. I suggest that the scope of these changes would make it fair to tack on two bonus remaps for every character in game that does not already have at least two in the bank on the day of the Great Skill Change (especially considering you did not give us the option to pick one up this past Christmas).

Why?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Onyx Nyx
The Veldspar Protectorate
#498 - 2013-02-08 15:28:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Onyx Nyx
Unforgiven Storm wrote:
Onyx Nyx wrote:
I am concerned, and I have heard murmurings, that CCP will not reimburse the current battleship 5 requirement to fly capital ships. I have two characters whose sole purpose is to fly carriers and dreads and once these changes go through, my two characters and everyone else that has characters for dedicated capital roles is going have 1,984,000 SP of wasted training time.

Needless to say, if these changes go through without reimbursement, it is a ****-move and huge loss of goodwill on CCP's part.


While I feel your pain ( I'm 5 days for Amarr BS 5) so I can cross-train carrier (I already fly Caldari).

It will be a huge problem for CCP to distinguish the ones that want to keep V because they want to use it to fly a marauder from the ones that have dedicated pilots for capitals. CCP cannot possible guess what each person wants and even if they went for something like, "file a petition to get your skills points back", the GMs will go on strike !

Against my our interests I say this and its a pain to admit it, but there is no way for CCP to give us the points back without creating a mess of procedure and I have to agree with them on this point and just accept it.


I appreciate that you took the time to give me a proper and educated response, even if it wasn't from CCP, and while I agree with you that this is going to taste very sour. I do hope CCP does not implement these changes as they currently stand and glosses this over as quickly as possible, some of the decisions are incredibly wonky (hello command ships)

I kill kittens, and puppies and bunnies. I maim toddlers and teens and then more.

  • Richard (http://www.lfgcomic.com/)
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#499 - 2013-02-08 15:28:35 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Clone costs in their current form are not something we as a design department are happy with. Beyond that we can't make commitments on the issue at this time.

Clone insurance maybe? Keep the reasonably high cost, but make it run for a fixed term like 90 or 180 days, and you're covered no matter how many times you get podded during that period. This way you still have an ISK sink for the 200m SP club, but nobody is discouraged from flying around in teeny weeny easy to pop ships.

Just make sure you don't ignore those warning mails you get when it's about to run out --- there would probably need to be a warning in big red letters that pops up and warns you if YOU'RE ABOUT TO UNDOCK WITHOUT CLONE INSURANCE ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO DO THIS???!

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#500 - 2013-02-08 15:30:08 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Freighdee Katt wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Clone costs in their current form are not something we as a design department are happy with. Beyond that we can't make commitments on the issue at this time.

Clone insurance maybe? Keep the reasonably high cost, but make it run for a fixed term like 90 or 180 days, and you're covered no matter how many times you get podded during that period. This way you still have an ISK sink for the 200m SP club, but nobody is discouraged from flying around in teeny weeny easy to pop ships.

Just make sure you don't ignore those warning mails you get when it's about to run out --- there would probably need to be a warning in big red letters that pops up and warns you if YOU'RE ABOUT TO UNDOCK WITHOUT CLONE INSURANCE ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO DO THIS???!

This is a very reasonable idea.
This might actually increase the isk sink given the number of people with high SP that don't ever get podded, but will keep their insurance regardless because they don't want to risk getting podded just once and losing skills.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)