Why yes, yes I do.
2 Likes
A lot of my own gameplay involves actions like âgathering resourcesâ and âimporting ships and modules I needâ or âexporting goods I madeâ that I all do to ensure I have more ships to fight other players in.
Does that mean my gameplay loop -which is all about preparing for PvP- is âlargely non-PvPâ?
Or are you oversimplifying the definitions in an attempt to make it sound like this game is not about PvP?
Would you say that gathering resources faster and more efficiently to have the stronger army in a PvP game like Starcraft is not PvP and that such a game is largely non-PvP because of such resource gathering phases?
Or is it too complicated to think about definitions this way?
1 Like
It is either due to
- character skills or
- fitting
As it canât be anything else. It might not been obvious but it wasnât particularly obscure either.
It was a skill difference which is fairly easy to find out even if it takes time to compare and check one by one if affects anything related.
It would have been more obscure one was flying with a different subsystem and that caused the difference, but even that is a difference that can be found out eventually as part of the ship fitting.
None of it was hidden, just not immediately apparent either, you had to work for your answer a bit, thatâs all.
If there was a hidden value that you couldnât at all even see in-game or something now that would be not obvious, but a fitting or skill difference is the very first thing one would assume in such a case.
Not every answer has to be spoonfed in my opinion.
2 Likes
It is easy to retrospectively know the answers to things. My point is that at the time, one does not necessarily even know the questions to ask. It is Donald Rumsfeldâs âunknown unknownsâ.
1 Like
Not really. As I wrote it is either a skill or a fitting thing, the rest is just putting in the effort to figure out.
You overstate this thing because it was difficult for you but objectively it wasnât. You just had an improper approach that made it difficult or impossible for you specifically to solve it but it wasnât an unknown that you couldnât known.
2 Likes
Ah, but it was an unknown unknown, rather than a known unknown.
1 Like
To her, but not in general. Itâs like saying miners who canât figure out how to not get ganked face an unknown unknown, while simply they just donât approach it properly while to a reasonable observer it is quite easy to figure out.
One manâs unknown unknown is another manâs known known.
1 Like
Exactly.
We know where the miners are. They are to the north, south, west, and east, somewhat, of Bagdad and Tikrit.
1 Like
But like I already saidâŚhindsight is a wonderful thing, and it makes the problem look easier to have solved in the first place.
Furthermore, with the specific issue I hadâŚI never did find anything that specifically elucidated the missing skills. All the more of an issue as the character I wanted to train to the level of was not themselves 100% skilled. I got there in the end by trial and errorâŚand probably spent more days training than I needed to.
Weâre supposed to be in the year 23,000âŚyet thereâs nothing that says â allow me to determine and list the exact skills character X has that allow them to have xyz parameters in fittings for ship Yâ. Something so fundamental is not being âspoonfedâ.
Trial and error may be fine for the first time you set up a shipâŚbut one shouldnât have to go through the process again on subsequent chars.
You keep repeating this but this is why Iâve used an objective approach that is not reliant on prior knowledge. The problem was easier than the way you approached it. It is okay, nobody blames you, but still if youâve been pragmatic about it you would solve it sooner. Instead you seem to have panicked and with that mindset you did not find a solution. frustrating, yes, but avoidable.
You could just compare the skills and check each that is different then go one by one to see what they influence and see if that could apply to your ship and its fit (including, yes, subsystems). You did not do that, that was your mistake.
Again, not here to blame you but donât paint this specific situation worse just because it caused you frustration, in this instance, the issue was not with the game.
No..I did do that. Thatâs the whole issue. All the more awkward as both chars are on the same account. Its nothing like as straightforward as you implyâŚas the trainee char may already have more skills in some relevant areas than the one to be trained to. Not to mention implants, etc. The only solution is trial and errorâŚwhich is absurd bearing in mind EVEâs cloning abilities.
Did you check the skills in-game and on Skills and learning - EVE University Wiki (in the latter case you can click the skill category to see the specific skills and their intended effect) to see if they might apply to your ship and its fit?
I shouldnât have to do that every time I set up a new character. For example, I have a basic Gnosis fit that all my new chars get. I give a noob the shipâŚbut then I have to work out all over again what the heck the skills were that allow it to be flown with the specific parameters I want. The basic untrained skills are there in fittingsâŚbut thereâs nothing that says âcreate a skills plan that allows noob to get to the level of Character Xâ. That part is entirely trial and error.
- Didnât say you should have to do it.
- Also didnât say there shouldnât be a tool to make it easier.
Was just commenting on your specific example and you labeling it being an unknown unknown and lack of obviousness, which to me seem to be exaggeration (in that very specific case, though cumbersome and uncomfortable, sure).
1 Like
Tbh, I believe the Magic14 skills and the Attribute System should be completely removed. It only slows down new players and does not serve any gameplay purpose for advanced or veteran players. At least none that I am aware of.
Let players skill towards the activities they like and enjoy in the game, and not spending months to skill just to be able to use most of the standard fittings in the game, or rely on special ânoobfitsâ that are completely downgraded and equipped with fitting crutches, just to let them board the ship. Setting them at a further disadvantage to the veterans in addition to their lack of performance-skills, knowledge and experienceâŚ
3 Likes
I can see them removing the attribute system but for actual skills, that just removes CCPâs ability to bribe their players (especially new ones) with SP handouts and tempt them with skill bundles and whatnot. So not sure if they would be willing to let that go.
2 Likes
I think they should exist for a couple of reasons:
- itâs good to have some basic easy-to-learn skills with 1x multiplier for a couple of general quick wins at the start
- instead of letting newbies immediately choose some 2x or even 3x specializations that not only take longer to train, these general skills allow a player to postpone their specialization choice and still feel good about progressing
- itâs good that we have some powergrid and CPU skills that allow players to eventually fit the more demanding T2 modules, which require not only higher skills but also more powergrid and CPU than a T1 ship delivers. These fitting skills and T2 requirements go hand in hand
- the âmagic 14â is rather arbitrary, what makes targeting speed or targeting range relevant for a miner or hauler? Even as explorer I wouldnât even miss flying with lower versions of these skills. And warp drive operation, who even added that? Yes, itâs a very generic skill but not necessary at all for new players to start with.
- itâs good to have skills for all sorts of ship improvements. Weâve got skills to improve agility, resistances, hull hp, shield hp, targeting speed⌠but why should the existence of all those skills be deleted like you propose? How would that improve the game? I think it adds not only flavour, but also consistency as we also have skills that improve other aspects of our ships. It would feel lacking if we couldnât improve our agility or CPU âbecause people disliked those skillsâ.
I agree that newbies shouldnât be at too much a disadvantage compared to veterans, but I donât see a problem with having some skill differences so that new players can quickly feel improvements with their skills, with emphasis on âquicklyâ. These basic skills are very quick trains and there arenât many, so I think theyâre in a good spot.
I wouldnât expand the magic 14, but I wouldnât remove them either.
2 Likes
Hmm, canât agree here. Your argumentation sounds to me like intentionally throwing some waste on the floor, so the Janitor âhas something to doâ.
If they were removed and all shipâs basic stats adjusted to the values they were with the current Magic14 skilled at V, new players could focus on the activities they actually like to do. And there will be a lot of basic skills to learn as well. Nobody will even remotely get the feeling of ânot making progressâ. They would just skill Drones, Missile Launcher Operation or Gunnery or Small Guns, which are also all very low-multiplier skills. Quite the opposite, the current system gives people the feeling of not making progress for weeks because they are told to skill some âMagic14â things that allow them little to no really new activities.
I already explained that. Above. They serve no purpose for advanced and veteran players and only hold new players who donât (yet) have them (probably for months) back behind an arbitrary fitting wall that prevents them from participating in content because they canât use the fits or have to use âspecial noob fitsâ for lowskillers that are weaker and put them unnessessarily behind the other players just from the worse fit they have to use - ON TOP of all their other disadvantages they already have.
I personally think the game would be better if newbros wouldnât explicitly need ânewbro fitsâ that makes them even weaker.
1 Like