|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 31 post(s) |
Bam Stroker
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
203
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 06:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm not even an industrialist but I know I would feel ripped off by this change. As has been covered in the thread already it's one thing to fiddle with the numbers while leaving the skill's purpose intact but it's another thing to change it into a different skill entirely.
Come Crius CCP should just delete the ME skill, refund the SP and seed the books for the new TE skill then let the players decide if they want to re-invest that SP into the new skill or allocate it elsewhere. EVE Down Under 2014 (Australia's very own fanfest) 21st to 23rd November 2014 in Sydney, Australia www.evedownunder.com |
Bam Stroker
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
204
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 07:31:00 -
[2] - Quote
mynnna wrote:If they did this, then when and if they do change the skill into something else again, all the same people would be back here whining about CCP having cheated them out of a skill And if the circumstances are the same as they are in this case then those people would be perfectly entitled to whine about it. EVE Down Under 2014 (Australia's very own fanfest) 21st to 23rd November 2014 in Sydney, Australia www.evedownunder.com |
Bam Stroker
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
205
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 16:38:00 -
[3] - Quote
I'll begrudgingly accept the technical and resource reasons you cited for ruling out the SP refund but this part of your explanation has me scratching my head:
CCP Greyscale wrote:We are very keen to avoid doing refunds *wherever* possible, hence the desire to repurpose this skill rather than delete it (reasons: we dislike skillpoint reassignment as the act of reassignment incrementally devalues the perceived value of skillpoints accumulated over time This entire issue here *is* essentially about the perception players have that their skill points are being devalued.
Ok, so refunding the SP is in the "too hard basket". You still need to find a way to make players feel as though the SP they invested in training ME has value because as it stands they're being short-changed.
By all means please take another look at how you're approaching these skill changes and find a solution that preserves the value of our SP which is your own stated priority. EVE Down Under 2014 (Australia's very own fanfest) 21st to 23rd November 2014 in Sydney, Australia www.evedownunder.com |
Bam Stroker
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
207
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
H3llHound wrote:If you would have read the indy devblogs you would have known that CCP will change the skill. So really its just your own fault. "The Material Efficiency skill will be repurposed, stay tuned for more information on that in a future blog." From https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/researching-the-future/
and
"We're looking to cap the maximum bonus of this using the old Material Efficiency skill, which will no longer be affecting waste (see previous blog)." from https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/the-price-of-change/ where it was implied the change to ME would be to reduce the cost of installing subsequent jobs - nothing about production time.
As far as I can tell those are the only references to a change to the ME skill from the Crius-related dev blogs. Yes, they indicate a change is coming but exactly what that change was didn't emerge until the 11th hour when now it's too late to incorporate community feedback:
CCP Greyscale wrote:We are in any case too close to the release to implement a refund at this time, and that is a non-disputable statement of fact ... *If* we decide to make changes, they may not be viable for the initial Crius release That said I'm happy to be corrected if this change was made explicit somewhere earlier. Just show me where. EVE Down Under 2014 (Australia's very own fanfest) 21st to 23rd November 2014 in Sydney, Australia www.evedownunder.com |
|
|
|