|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 28 post(s) |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
145
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 16:12:00 -
[1] - Quote
Quote:How the flying fXXk can this 'faster specialization'?
They're removing the need for lower-class skills to IV or V, and this is assuming racial battlecruisers remains the same rank as it does now. Right now, training for a T2 battlecruiser requires: Racial Frigate V, Assault Ships IV, Racial Cruiser V, Heavy Assault Ships IV, Battlecruiser V, Command Ships I (and a slew of support skills, but those prereqs aren't changing).
Afterward: Racial Frigate IV, Racial Cruiser IV, Racial Battlecruiser V, Command Ships I. Cutting out Frigate V, Cruiser V, AS IV, and HAS IV will save you ~30 days of training (actually, I think that's lowballing a little). |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
146
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 16:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Iniquita wrote:I think its worth remember that there is a fifth leadership type in eve. Have you taken into consideration how a nerf to off grid boosting would affect mining in eve? Yup it's something we're putting a lot of thought into. Moving links ongrid has significant technical blockers at the moment so it's not coming anytime soon, and between now and that bright sunny someday we'll spend a lot of time consulting with miners to make sure gameplay stays interesting and useful.
I am disappoint. Have you guys considered the possibility of giving links an optimal range that they work inside of, rather than an on-grid/off-grid distinction. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
147
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
I have a question about battlecruisers related their concept/role (especially non-Tier 3 battlecruisers):
What does CCP expect them to do? Frigates and cruisers seem to have a pretty clearly defined conceptual spaces: light roaming/support and heavy roaming/support, respectively. More to the point, frigates and cruiser are pretty clearly distinct in terms of how you use them. Are battlecruiser supposed to be like super-destroyers: capable of dumping all over cruisers but of limited utility vs anything else? Are they supposed to be fleet-capable cruisers that don't immediately wilt under the firepower of a modest fleet engagement? It still seems like tier 1 and 2 battlecruisers are going to be over-sized cruisers where you take a moderate hit to mobility in exchange for a lot more firepower and tank. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
150
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 08:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
Valkyrie D'ark wrote: This is a horrible idea. You guys concentrate on one piece of a jigsaw puzzle but forget the big picture. Remember that capital ships are also part of the fleet booster family. Do you expect them to run after and keep up with all the members in the fleet? What about Rorquals and Orcas?
You could keep your fleet within range to receive boosts from the capitals. Or just have separate boosters for capitals and subcapitals.
Quote: Also you would want your squads throughout the solar system to be receiving bonuses, no matter where they are, not force them to blob.
Multiple command ships. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
156
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 00:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
Start at page one.
Take a drink every time some illiterate asks what is going to happen to their battlecruisers skill.
Take a shot every time Fozzie repeats himself with regard to how the skill changeover is going to work. |
|
|
|