Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nexus Day
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
96
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 17:48:00 -
[31] - Quote
MadMuppet wrote:I would much rather see the T3-type modular technology be thrown at the industrial/POS side of things next. Since faction battleships can solo L4s with frightening ease, a T3 battleship would almost need to end low/null only as they bridge the gap between Cap and sub-cap ships.
It would be cool, but for what purpose? For me to spend my ISK. And for me to twirl in my CQ. |
Tarvos Telesto
Blood Fanatics
44
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 18:06:00 -
[32] - Quote
What wrong with you people, more ships with specific roles and spetial bonuses is good for industry and choises depend pilots needs, but (all in one suck hard) imagine tech 3 with 10 modiefied subsystem slots, its like removing all existed ships in game.
I like t3 cruisers but form other perspective i hate them. |
Demolishar
United Aggression
402
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 18:54:00 -
[33] - Quote
Let's compare a T3 cruiser to a T1 cruiser. Tengu vs Caracal.
24k EHP vs 123k EHP 220 DPS vs 602 DPS
So that's a 500% increase and a 200% increase, roughly. Let's consider stats now for a Tier 3 BS compared to a Raven!
Raven: 110k EHP, 1000 dps (torps) So our T3 BS has roughly:
550k EHP and 3000 dps! BEFORE faction fit or ganglinks!
And as for cost, well a Tengu costs 500m with subs while a Caracal costs 5M. That's a 10000% increase! So our T3 BS could cost around 15-20bil.
SOUND GOOD? |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
22
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 19:50:00 -
[34] - Quote
Cost is never relevant for game balance. If it's an OP ship, people will grind the isk using whatever means they have, then in Eve, use the OP ship to grind more isk faster for their next one. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1720
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 20:10:00 -
[35] - Quote
Demolishar wrote:Let's compare a T3 cruiser to a T1 cruiser. Tengu vs Caracal.
24k EHP vs 123k EHP 220 DPS vs 602 DPS
So that's a 500% increase and a 200% increase, roughly. Let's consider stats now for a Tier 3 BS compared to a Raven!
Raven: 110k EHP, 1000 dps (torps) So our T3 BS has roughly:
550k EHP and 3000 dps! BEFORE faction fit or ganglinks!
And as for cost, well a Tengu costs 500m with subs while a Caracal costs 5M. That's a 10000% increase! So our T3 BS could cost around 15-20bil.
SOUND GOOD? Interesting. Might as well save for a supercarrier.
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
987
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 20:27:00 -
[36] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Demolishar wrote:Let's compare a T3 cruiser to a T1 cruiser. Tengu vs Caracal.
24k EHP vs 123k EHP 220 DPS vs 602 DPS
So that's a 500% increase and a 200% increase, roughly. Let's consider stats now for a Tier 3 BS compared to a Raven!
Raven: 110k EHP, 1000 dps (torps) So our T3 BS has roughly:
550k EHP and 3000 dps! BEFORE faction fit or ganglinks!
And as for cost, well a Tengu costs 500m with subs while a Caracal costs 5M. That's a 10000% increase! So our T3 BS could cost around 15-20bil.
SOUND GOOD? Interesting. Might as well save for a supercarrier.
I'm hoping that for this years SASS that my Santa is an EVE player, because I'd like a Nyx as opposed to the random sports crap I've received the past few years. Crimewatch 2.0: Protecting stupid people & rewarding lazy people. This hurts the smart & industrious people by making their intelligence & industry provide them with less benefit over the stupid & lazy people. ~ Ruby Porto |
Tiger Armani
Mialto Corp The Last Chancers.
13
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 20:28:00 -
[37] - Quote
I think the best option would make all ships to use submodules.
That way we would have fewer basic ship hulls but they could be fitted to serve different purposes. That way you wouldn't now exactly how a ship you will attack would response.
Naturally it would need huge work to be done by CCP, but in the end future ship balancing would be easier |
Bernard 2007
The Scarlet Storm
16
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 20:33:00 -
[38] - Quote
Demolishar wrote:Let's compare a T3 cruiser to a T1 cruiser. Tengu vs Caracal.
24k EHP vs 123k EHP 220 DPS vs 602 DPS
So that's a 500% increase and a 200% increase, roughly. Let's consider stats now for a Tier 3 BS compared to a Raven!
Raven: 110k EHP, 1000 dps (torps) So our T3 BS has roughly:
550k EHP and 3000 dps! BEFORE faction fit or ganglinks!
And as for cost, well a Tengu costs 500m with subs while a Caracal costs 5M. That's a 10000% increase! So our T3 BS could cost around 15-20bil.
SOUND GOOD?
I'd fly that. |
Vex Killswitch
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 20:50:00 -
[39] - Quote
I must rather have them balance and fix problems, though if i had to chose between T3 frigs or BS, i'd pick frigs.
They'd have much value in eve atm |
Mars Theran
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
391
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 20:57:00 -
[40] - Quote
I'm good with Tech 3 everything. Think of it as the advancement of technology, making things better than before. Would you rather drive a 1989 Toyota Corolla, or would you prefer a 2010 Hybrid? Most people will go for the 2010 model.
I think the current balancing initiative will actually help with this. Getting rid of the Tier system and setting up solid roles for all the ships, then rethinking and balancing the Tech 3 ships will help make everything viable. Once that is done, I think the introduction of new Tech 3 ships will be much simpler, with a clear idea of the role they are intended to fill.
Either way though, there is no reason to stop them from overlapping roles entirely, or even being better in some ways. They cost more, are more difficult to make, and involve more risk. Nobody ever complained about Tech 2 taking over roles for Tech 1 ships. Sure, they are specialized rather than versatile, but they still cover some of the same roles as the Tech 1 ships, while doing it better.
Primary difference is, you have to buy all of them to cover most of the potential roles of the more generalized Tech 1s. Tech 3, you just need to buy more Subs, although that is made awkward by the need to rebuild them in stations, so the benefit is marginal at best. ..and still, the Tech 3 ships have been almost completely limited to 2 variations each, being Covert Ops and Combat.
I don't see much difference personally, as there is a scaling cost with some individual Subs costing as much as different Tech 2 Cruisers, and the ships are not so much better as to be worth that extra expense to everyone. Certainly, they die just as fast in many cases.
That said, I'd go for Tech 3 Frigs and Battleships, even Destroyers, but I'd like to see the Indy ships get Tech 3 variations too, and probably sooner, or even first. Not a big Indy flyer, but I think everyone uses them from time to time, and it would be fun to have some configurable designs to play with. zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub |
|
Mars Theran
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
391
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 21:12:00 -
[41] - Quote
..actually, it just occurred to me, you could make Tech 3 Industrial ships with the ability to function as Tech 3 refitting ships. Maybe just one Sub that gives this ability, or the entire line that allows it. Specifically, it would allow Tech 3 ships to have their Subs to be swapped out in Space, instead of requiring a Station hangar, as well as being able to refit other ships.
Functionally, the ship could also do other things. A more expensive Cov Ops Transport, a super transport, a tank transport, or a gun transport. Maybe a Gas Miner. Role options would have to be reasonable of course, and it would probably be better if the option was limited to a special Sub that allowed refitting of Tech 3 ships, and was made more effective in combination with another Sub.
Just an idea, but it might be cool, and I'm sure many would find it very useful. Probably a very practical step in the evolution of T3s. zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub |
Kashmyta
Predominant Dynamics
40
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 21:17:00 -
[42] - Quote
Sounds interesting, although I personally would not use such a ship it keeps the continuity of the T3 technology theme going, which is what I'm afraid will not happen.. |
bloodknight2
Talledega Knights
25
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 23:02:00 -
[43] - Quote
Tech 3 BS doesn't need to be overpowered.
An abaddon tech 3 using the legion subs could gives something like this :
-5% to max velocity per level -10% bonus to medium energy turret capacitor, damage, optimal range per level -5% bonus to max capacitor per level -10% bonus to armor hitpoints per level -15% bonus to scan resolution per level
1b without the subs |
fukier
Flatline.
124
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 00:47:00 -
[44] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Demolishar wrote:Let's compare a T3 cruiser to a T1 cruiser. Tengu vs Caracal.
24k EHP vs 123k EHP 220 DPS vs 602 DPS
So that's a 500% increase and a 200% increase, roughly. Let's consider stats now for a Tier 3 BS compared to a Raven!
Raven: 110k EHP, 1000 dps (torps) So our T3 BS has roughly:
550k EHP and 3000 dps! BEFORE faction fit or ganglinks!
And as for cost, well a Tengu costs 500m with subs while a Caracal costs 5M. That's a 10000% increase! So our T3 BS could cost around 15-20bil.
SOUND GOOD? Interesting. Might as well save for a supercarrier.
super caps can dock now? At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
903
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 01:30:00 -
[45] - Quote
Bobmon wrote:I want to see T3 Frigs Because they wil be awesome
CCP already stated they have no plans on adding Tech 3 frigate anywhere soon or years to come but definitively thinking about battleship sized Tech3 hulls which would be an excellent addition. brb |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5514
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 02:22:00 -
[46] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:I'm hoping that for this years SASS that my Santa is an EVE player, because I'd like a Nyx as opposed to the random sports crap I've received the past few years.
Sounds like you don't keep up with TWR? ~*a-áproud belligerent undesirable*~
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. |
stoicfaux
1756
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 02:44:00 -
[47] - Quote
Demolishar wrote:Let's compare a T3 cruiser to a T1 cruiser. Tengu vs Caracal.
24k EHP vs 123k EHP 220 DPS vs 602 DPS
So that's a 500% increase and a 200% increase, roughly. Let's consider stats now for a Tier 3 BS compared to a Raven!
Raven: 110k EHP, 1000 dps (torps) So our T3 BS has roughly:
550k EHP and 3000 dps! BEFORE faction fit or ganglinks!
And as for cost, well a Tengu costs 500m with subs while a Caracal costs 5M. That's a 10000% increase! So our T3 BS could cost around 15-20bil.
SOUND GOOD?
Still not as good as a Machariel though. Color me shocked. You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head. Feature Request: -áDamnation Ship Codpiece-áfor the NeX store.
|
Nexus Day
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
98
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 02:48:00 -
[48] - Quote
Logically there should be a T3 variant for every type of sleeper vessel found in WH space. |
Mars Theran
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
391
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 06:07:00 -
[49] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Demolishar wrote:Let's compare a T3 cruiser to a T1 cruiser. Tengu vs Caracal.
24k EHP vs 123k EHP 220 DPS vs 602 DPS
So that's a 500% increase and a 200% increase, roughly. Let's consider stats now for a Tier 3 BS compared to a Raven!
Raven: 110k EHP, 1000 dps (torps) So our T3 BS has roughly:
550k EHP and 3000 dps! BEFORE faction fit or ganglinks!
And as for cost, well a Tengu costs 500m with subs while a Caracal costs 5M. That's a 10000% increase! So our T3 BS could cost around 15-20bil.
SOUND GOOD? Still not as good as a Machariel though. Color me shocked.
Since when could you get both 123K EHP and 602 DPS out of a Tech 3; for me it was always one or the other as I recall. Oh.. someone mentioned Faction and Officer mods... nvm.
edit.. btw, the T3 BS would cost around 1.2 Billion ISK in all likelihood. The cost scales with the materials required, not the comparison between a Caracal and a Tengu. The main cost increase is the Tech 3 materials and steps toward using them; once they are in use, the cost should scale based on quantities used, as with anything else.
A HAC cost around 120 Million right? ..and a Widow, reasonably priced around 4-500 Million? Been awhile since I looked, but I think that was around the price last I checked. Seems to scale much more appropriately compared to the 200 Million ISK difference between a Caracal and a Hyperion. zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub |
Johan Civire
Dirty Curse inc.
185
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 08:08:00 -
[50] - Quote
Blake Gates Heleneto wrote:There should be a T3 version of everything.
T3 titan o yah |
|
Mars Theran
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
392
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 08:15:00 -
[51] - Quote
Johan Civire wrote:Blake Gates Heleneto wrote:There should be a T3 version of everything. T3 titan o yah
Why not; we have a Sansha Mothership? j/k of course. Nothing above a Cap ship as far as I am concerned, and that means no T3 Dreads, Super Carriers, or Titans. That would be beyond ridiculous. Even your standard Cap, which doesn't even yet have a Tech 2 variant, would be absurd--in most respects--at this point in time. zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub |
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
825
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 08:15:00 -
[52] - Quote
if they nerf t3 cruisers maybe, but think about this, if a t3 cruiser can run level 4 missions, how strong would a battleship be?
|
Gulboy
Uncharted Frontiers Severasse Militarized Mining Union
5
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 08:30:00 -
[53] - Quote
Johan Civire wrote:Blake Gates Heleneto wrote:There should be a T3 version of everything. T3 titan o yah THIS is the reason why there shouldn't be everything of tech 3. I bet it can have a smaller damaging type of the old doomsday, covert ops cloaking device, or something that would make it have over 50 million ehp. Would cost like 200 billion though. |
Mars Theran
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
392
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 08:42:00 -
[54] - Quote
Herping yourDerp wrote:if they nerf t3 cruisers maybe, but think about this, if a t3 cruiser can run level 4 missions, how strong would a battleship be?
You can run level 4s in a Hurricane or Drake too iirc. I saw a post earlier today that mentions trying to run them in a Vengeance but not quite having the necessary DPS. I should also point out, that a Tengu and a CNR Raven can, (or could back when I did this), both effectively run c6 Sleeper sites with a fleet using very similar fits and results. That was a Faction and Complex fit Tengu vs a partial Faction fit CNR iirc. zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub |
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
183
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 08:48:00 -
[55] - Quote
T3 Cruisers are fine. Please no T3 Frigs.....frigs are already versatile enough...would only lead to a lot of dead t3-¦frighs with people loosing skillpoints and whining until the nerfbat hits... T3 BC-¦s or Battleships would be interesting within a well planed frame. I guess some erxplorers would spend a considerable amount of ISK for a Expedition/Exploration Battleship-sized Vessel that can be adjusted to their needs. With plenty of High-Mid and Lowslots for utuility gadets but only limited amount of turret or launcher points (similar to a Marauder). They should be able to dish out enough damage for PVE stuff and probably be able to play a supporter Role in PVP.
Price for such versatility: 2-3 Billion ISK You would need to have T3 cruisers and subsystems up to 5 (so that skill cruiser skill gets a purpose finally...)
Call it a spitball... /discuss
"Also, your boobs " -á CCP Eterne, 2012
|
Irya Boone
Escadron leader
60
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 09:01:00 -
[56] - Quote
nice idea and most of all be able to change subsytem In space not only in station ( or maybe in a POS) Improve C2 class WH More anos more signs ...RENAME null sec system With the name Of REAL Universe Stellar Name like KOI-730 etc etc It xill be awesome-á |
Aramatheia
European Nuthouse
56
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 09:53:00 -
[57] - Quote
Hyperion Navy Issue
why did this not happen years and years ago?
correct this oversight please CCP |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
903
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 10:45:00 -
[58] - Quote
Aramatheia wrote:Hyperion Navy Issue
why did this not happen years and years ago?
correct this oversight please CCP
Would get more EHP CPU/PG some drones and ... another mid. CCP hates Gallente. brb |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
468
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 11:45:00 -
[59] - Quote
I would rather see T3 frigates (so i have a reason to fly a frigate hull again) and T3 industrial ships. The T2 battle ships need to be fixed/buffed before CCP even think about introducing another dps platform. They see me trolling, they hating... |
Aramatheia
European Nuthouse
57
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 16:19:00 -
[60] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:Aramatheia wrote:Hyperion Navy Issue
why did this not happen years and years ago?
correct this oversight please CCP Would get more EHP CPU/PG some drones and ... another mid. CCP hates Gallente.
I agree, and the proof is in the navy version of the space slug.. blehhh. I guess at least the mega looks ok i guess |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |