This one change will break the null meta and potentially other security status. The result would be null alliances, as they rat on, will build rep which will unlock specific reputation rates by region. this will bring about massive demands for null missions, sparking life to null mission corps, and unique alliance faction builds.
Or not. Thereās a faction requirement to buy navy ships, why should I have to have good standings with the navy to steal it from you and fly it myself?
Donāt make suggestions like this and driveā¦
-1
These special ships have unique access codes which require standings in their respective factions to access the control systems of these ships
thus you need standings to fly them.
Alliances having unique meta based around faction ships would be interesting, and it would break the constant 5 year cycles of whats best (in this case machs)
Limiting peopleās choices seems pretty much the opposite of the direction the game is generally heading and will just piss people off.
Another -1
Given that the style choices would still exist in t1s and t2s Iām not sure you could actually phrase it as ālimiting choicesā.
Itās an idea worth a bit more thought as it does promote use of t2 ships quite a bit, and t2 have had a hard time of it lately vs pirate.
PS: did you know that pirate ship BPCs drop as loot from killing those pirates? And so are most likely to be found by people with very low standings with that pirate faction who canāt fly the awesome ship they just got? Of course you didnāt, because like all of your ideas you didnāt think about it for more than 30 seconds.
Heās not talking about style choices, heās talking about ships, and no two ships are exactly the same.
As a principle, CCP apply a āif you could fly it before, you can fly it afterā approach to change.
So anyone that can fly the ships now, will be able to fly them after the change. However, anyone who canāt fly them now, and anyone new in the future, wonāt be able to fly them, even if they have the skills, if they donāt have the standing.
Thatās limiting the choice of people.
As a side effect, adds to the āif you havenāt already started the game, you donāt have any chance against the vetsā stereotype, because it isnāt just a catch up on skills issue, itās a grind specific standings issue as well (and as yet, thereās no injectors for that).
To do that, for most of the pirate side of that suggestion, the agents are not in highsec.
For the Machariel mentioned in post 4, every single level 1 agent is in either Curse, Feythabolis or Fountain. Every level 4 and 5 agent is the same. All up, of the 75 Angel Cartel agents, only 3 exist outside nullsec, being 2 level 2 and 1 level 3 agent that are in 0.5 space, but to get to them, you first have to run the level 1 missions in null.
For Sansha, 100% of the agents are nullsec.
For Serpentis, 100% of the agents are nullsec.
For Blood Raiders, 100% of the agents are nullsec.
For Guristas, all level 1 agent are nullsec. 1 level 2 agent is in lowsec, 2 level 3 agents are in lowsec and 2 are in highsec. All the rest for level 2 and 3 are nullsec. All level 4 and 5 agents are in nullsec.
So of the 369 total mission agents in those 5 pirate factions, 361 of them are in nullsec.
Unless people are prepare to go run the missions in nullsec, theyāll never be able to fly those ships, despite them providing great platforms to do so (eg. blitzing Level 4 missions in a Machariel in Highsec as an Omega will only be possible if you can already fly a Mach now, or are first prepared to go grind missions in nullsec. Nullsec residents have a huge advantage there).
That just adds to the null v high divide and removes access to ships, from highsec only players. That limits their choice compared to the current situation.
Which is only quoted by CCP when talking about changing skills and even then theyāve broken it on several occasions.
You can also get pirate standings doing high sec arcs. However yes, null would have easier access to a particular faction of pirates, high however would have easier access to navy ships. Since you donāt get any empire agents in null.
In saying all that Iām not sure if I like the idea or not. Just that it is perhaps worth a deeper look into things, low level pirate agents could always appear in high if there was the additional downside of them always being anti empire so shredding your navy ship access as well. And low level agents wonāt wreck the lp market as they give out far less.
Itās certainly a novel idea and does bring back meaning to standings while not messing with t2 ship progressions, or t3 for that matter. It would just somewhat change what flying a pirate or navy ship meant.
Name a single occasion where CCP have made a change that stopped players from flying ships they could previously fly.
Navy ships if you only had lvl 1.
Nope. Anyone that could fly them before could still fly them after.
Incorrect. You need lvl 2 in the relevant ship skill to fly a Navy ship. There is no magic way to allow you to fly one with lvl 1 in the skill.
If you could fly any ship before a change was made, you can still fly it after a change is made. CCP have not once deviated from it.
Iām calling ā ā ā ā ā ā ā ā Nevyn. Go quote a devblog, forum thread, or other comms where it has ever been otherwise.
Thereās no need to ā ā ā ā ā ā ā ā to try to make a point. Find an actual example, after all, itās apparently occurred on several occasions, so should be easy to show a real example.
The closest to a solid argument would be when former carriers were split to Carrier or FAX when FAX were introduced. Some people couldnāt fly their FAX after FAX was introduced, but could still fly Carriers.
I found you one. Navy ships. They got changed to require higher than 1 in the skill. (Pretty sure they all need 2).
The relevant Odyssey Dev blog appears to have been lost in CCPs website changes however and Iām not spending hours searching for it on a cellphone just to satisfy your pedantic need to be right even when given an example.
Itās not a pedantic need. Itās a fundamental part of the argument tied into this change.
The whole āitās occurred on several occasionsā, but Iām magically only on a phone and canāt be bothered approach, is simply a mask for - I canāt find an example (even though itās apparently occurred on several occasions).
Itās a ā ā ā ā ā ā ā ā claim.
Iāve given you an example. You want to prove it wrong, you go find the sources. But you wonāt because you know the example is accurate, which is why you moved your goalpost from find an example to find an example and reference it.
So you want me to go find sources that donāt exist?
Ok. What a joke.
It isnāt accurate, but Iām looking. Itās got to be not just skill requirements changes. It has to be skill requirements changes that meant players that could fly a ship before, couldnāt fly it after.
Your claim is wrong and you are doing the typical, āyou go prove me wrongā. Itās not my claim. Itās yours and it isnāt proven right.
But I am looking because you didnāt find an example, you just made up some crap and posted it as though itās an example. Thatās not an example and not moved goalposts.
EDIT:
You are wrong.
From the Odyssey patch notes, changes were applied that allowed players you keep flying ships they could previously fly, even if they didnāt qualify under the updated required. CCP were consistent in their approach:
From these patch notes:
Well done finding the notes.
Not so well done actually finding the bit that I was talking about rather than leaping on the first skill changes line you could.
So yes. Like Iāve said the whole time. Skill requirements from 1 to 2. Not adjusted. You couldnāt fly them after the change if you only had lvl 1 but you could before the change.
ā ā ā ā ā ā ā ā . You absolutely could. I did.
That they didnāt adjust skillpoints for people didnāt stop them from flying the ships even if they didnāt meet the new requirements.
You are absolutely wrong Nevin and what youāve quoted doesnāt say what you think it says. It only says they didnāt adjust skillpoints, not that they stopped players from flying ships they could previously fly.
