Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
110
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 00:32:00 -
[31] - Quote
It's amazing people will nitpick to the tiniest of details instead of taking the sentiment from a post as its intended.... |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
902
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 00:45:00 -
[32] - Quote
Azrin Stella Oerndotte wrote:Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:Harvey James wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Tech 3 is awesome too awesome to the detriment of every other ship which is unfortunate because they have great potential to add something unique to the game of being a true multi-purpose ship. Hopefully the re-balance will do this they should be a support ship at its heart not some uber battleship in a cruiser disguise. However i feel in order for this to happen and still remain viable the cost of the ship must be brought in line with T2 cruisers or thereabout. Versatility, let me repeat it to you: VERSATILITY Negative points: Command sub ->quite ridiculous this sub does not limit fittings and slots so they are not better than Command ships and still profit from some ridiculous sign radius still making them IMPROBABLE when you put the money for. From expensive to extremely expensive if you want to get the best out of those SP loss Extra SP training For the last part "uber battleship in a cruiser desguise" you clearly haven't flown battleships these days. Show me the T2 fitted Tengu with over 1K dps hands down and please explain me the mechanics and sign radius influence on applied dps. You have about 1h and I want at least 10 pages. If you're good you'll get cookies. Because a battleship can totally apply full "1000" DPS on almost any ship and zip around at a couple of km/s with a tiny sig and a +80km range. Most complaints I have seen about tech 3's is that killing them is bloody hard and that one of the best ways to kill another tech 3 is by using another tech 3.
No they are not hard to kill. As long as you understand strong and weak point of each they're not. Eatch and every one of them is extremely fragile to neuts, they loose all their tank or dps/both, mobility, and have thin skins. Now for sure if we're talking about the carebear faction/officer fit BS that got caught at that random sanctum with a passive shield tank, no neuts no webs and no ecm drones...
Neuts.
Drones
Dead T3
And if you keep trying to stay on grid with some T3 shooting at you from 80km then I'm sorry to tell you it's and idiots idea to do so. You can also shoot a battleship from 140K with a battlecruiser (+ if you fit it specifically for) Why would you run away from some T3 at the gate if you fit at least one heavy neut, and have decent skills?-the only reason I see to do so is if he lights a cyno. Again, it's just an opinion. brb |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
250
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 00:47:00 -
[33] - Quote
I'm glad Falcon isn't going to balance T3 ships because that statement doesn't seem to reflect 10 years of experience with pvp... |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
47
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 00:51:00 -
[34] - Quote
The problem of some people here is a misunderstanding of a basic metaphysical concept : There is always something that is above everything. And when you make it dissapear, the second becomes the first... You can continue like this until you've entierly wiped the concept of existence.
T3 is balanced, as said by CCP Falcon. Because they are expensive you know what you risk when you fly one. The fact that big alliances are flying fleets of them shouldn't surprise you... After all, they are big alliances, rather than having another titan they decided to buy a T3 fleet. What's the matter ? If T3 were suddenly deleted they would simply faction-fit something else. So, outside of this little exception (because huge faction-fitted T3 fleet fights ARE an exception), T3 is working the way it was supposed to be, with enough money involved to make it's abilities "fair". Eventually, versatility is somehow disturbed in wormhole because you can't switch subsystems, that's the only thing I could complain about.
So, back to my first statement, I prefer to see at the top something that was designed to be slightly better than the rest, rather than some unexpected popular ship with a balancing issue.. As said : T1 I guess the reason for so much agressive tears (that are not including everyone in this topic) is more a lack of skills than a lack of balance in EvE... *Yelling "Manticooore !" on teamspeak* |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
902
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 00:58:00 -
[35] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:I'm glad Falcon isn't going to balance T3 ships because that statement doesn't seem to reflect 10 years of experience with pvp...
Not sure what to understand, T3's 10 years ago? Or so many changes after 10 years that T3's with OGB and billions in fit makes them a little bit OP? Sorry I stil do not see the problem with T3's, but a serious one with OGB. But then I have to think about double XL-ASB/750DPS sleipnir or eventually, really eventually, ASB Vagabons, ASB Cyclones, ASB Talos, ASB Cynabals that are well known for being underpowered etc.
Whatever, this thread is going places brb |
Inquisitor Kitchner
Galaxy Punks Executive Outcomes
391
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 01:22:00 -
[36] - Quote
Fix Lag wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:My job isn't to balance ships, so that's my personal opinion after having been a PvPer for best part of 10 years As soon as you log in to Eve Online, you engage in the mythical "Pee Vee Pee" that everyone so desperately seeks, so calling yourself a "PvPer" is entirely redundant and inherently a part of being a player in this game.
What a ridiculous notion.
You're not automatically a "PvPer" if you undock. Likewise you can easily be in the game without being a "PvP" player. Not being a PvP player does not = unable to have players kill you.
In real life I'm not a mugger, but someone can still mug me (orami?) "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
903
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 01:25:00 -
[37] - Quote
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:Fix Lag wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:My job isn't to balance ships, so that's my personal opinion after having been a PvPer for best part of 10 years As soon as you log in to Eve Online, you engage in the mythical "Pee Vee Pee" that everyone so desperately seeks, so calling yourself a "PvPer" is entirely redundant and inherently a part of being a player in this game. What a ridiculous notion. You're not automatically a "PvPer" if you undock. Likewise you can easily be in the game without being a "PvP" player. Not being a PvP player does not = unable to have players kill you. In real life I'm not a mugger, but someone can still mug me (orami?)
Incorrect.
you're automatically a "PVPer" the moment you log in in eve, because everything in eve is about competition between players, therefore every single activity in game is PVP, be it at the undock or while you're trading in your CQ's.
brb |
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
1201
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 01:45:00 -
[38] - Quote
Azrin Stella Oerndotte wrote:Because a battleship can totally apply full "1000" DPS on almost any ship and zip around at a couple of km/s with a tiny sig and a +80km range.
Most complaints I have seen about tech 3's is that killing them is bloody hard and that one of the best ways to kill another tech 3 is by using another tech 3. I'm sure you would think so if you actually believed the numbers you're posting. However they're way, way off the mark, as is your assessment. Try again with some actual figures this time. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
73
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 01:51:00 -
[39] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Pohbis wrote:Harvey James wrote:
wow considering your CCP and CCP say balancing ships isn't based on cost....
They do, but that is a scaling thing coupled with diminishing returns. The higher you go up the power ladder, the less power additional ISK buys you. It's not a no-questions-asked-design-religion, or every ship in EVE would cost the same and they could just throw out faction ships, since they are all about raw power increase at extra cost. Anyway, you are hinting at things they mostly talk about when we discuss multi-billion ISK supercaps. When we are talking sub-caps, risk vs. reward is just as significant. no i'm not talking about caps at all CCP have said that ship balancing isn't based on isk at all Not on ISK alone. It factors in tho.
Please feel free to dig up the CCP quotes that state that ISK plays no role what so ever in balancing GÇô they don't exist.
The closest you get is that ISK shouldn't be able to buy you more and more power. Should be quite evident looking at building costs for ships, that CCP is indeed fine with power vs ISK. As long as it is kept on a reasonable level.
T3 is far from unreasonable. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1878
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 02:47:00 -
[40] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Tech 3 is awesome
OK there you have it. Now somewhere there are drinks to consume.... |
|
Name Family Name
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
81
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 02:58:00 -
[41] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Tech 3 is awesome
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house.
Interesting. |
Arsedestroyer
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
56
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 03:03:00 -
[42] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:
My job isn't to balance ships.
Thank God! |
Obsidian Hawk
Aliastra Gallente Federation
851
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 03:04:00 -
[43] - Quote
FIrst on the CCP Ytterbium - sauce please .
Second CCP loves to troll CCP
And third - if you have a problem with t3 and killing them let me help you with that. First step one Get Falcon and friends. Step 2 ????? step 3 profit.
Also there is nothing wrong with them. Tech 3 is tech 3 for a reason and you get what you pay for, ship that can do a lot and make you rage quit after losing 5 days worth of skill points for getting blown up. |
Anna Liebert
Thunders Claw Fleet Pangu Coalition
3
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 03:18:00 -
[44] - Quote
The mistake does not mean these ships influence the balancing, but it causes other troubles. Tech 1s and Tech 2s is enough after the ship balancing. And now, many Tech 2s still haven't been built, it includes 4 frigates, 4 destoryers, 8 battle cruisers and 4 battle ships at lest. If it finished, do you feel the ship's number is too large? EVE's future can't be built on more and more new ships. Tech 3s add the game's complication and can't improve EVE system's integrity. It's the problem. |
Flurk Hellbron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
157
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 03:19:00 -
[45] - Quote
Meh, T III cruisers...... I want T IV Frigates........... |
|
CCP Falcon
644
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 03:55:00 -
[46] - Quote
Tbh there's some good discussion going on here, and some valid points raised.
(Including the fact it would be a bad idea for me to balance ships, because the Megathron would be horridly overpowered, able to fit 600 neutron blaster cannons, and to hell with everything else )
The fact of the matter is that you can argue the point that a lot of hulls are overpowered in EVE. Sometimes you just find that sweet spot, with an awesome fitting and it makes a hull feel imbalanced.
For example, for a long time back in the day the Domi was overpowered as hell, but it wasn't due to the ship, it was due to the combination of NOS + ECM, then more recently we've had a FOTM (more like FOTY) with the Hurricane, because it's very versatile, and now the Tornado, because of the same fundamental benefits to the hull.
I think the main problem right now lies not with the T3 hulls or subsystems themselves, but what people can fit to them and the way some modules work. I suppose the interaction of certain subsystems with eachother could be looked into as well too.
T3 itself doesn't seem to bad to me personally, but when you combine that with, just for example, gang links that work off grid and a covert ops subsystem, plus the ability to make it nigh on unprobeable by screwing with sensor strength, it makes for a really off balance fitting, not due to the hull itself, but due to what can be fitted to the hull with a certain arrangement of subsystems.
Personally I'm all for T3, and I'm all for more T3 in various classes of ships, not just cruisers. I'd love to see frigates, battleships and battle cruisers too, but they'd need to fill a useful niche that isn't already catered for.
I'd also love to see Tech 3 industrials with modular cargo holds too, so you could choose what size hauler you wanted by adding compartments, and could even have unscannable smuggling compartments, and specific compartments for hauling assembled ships.
There are so many potential options for T3, and so many things we could do with them, but then again, this whole post is just my personal opinion and in no way a reflection of what might be in the pipeline, just to be clear.
CCP Falcon -á-á||-á-áEVE Community Team -á|| -á-áEVE Illuminati -á || -á-á@CCP_Falcon -á || -á-á@EVE_LiveEvents
-á-- Disciple Of The Delicious Tea -- |
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1880
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 04:41:00 -
[47] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Personally I'm all for T3, and I'm all for more T3 in various classes of ships, not just cruisers. I'd love to see frigates, battleships and battle cruisers too, but they'd need to fill a useful niche that isn't already catered for.
I'd also love to see Tech 3 industrials with modular cargo holds too, so you could choose what size hauler you wanted by adding compartments, and could even have unscannable smuggling compartments, and specific compartments for hauling assembled ships.
Can of worms in 3...2....1
This thread is now about what kind new NEW T3 ships we want.
I seriously think it's time for T3 frigates at least, and T3 RIGS - yes, T3 rigs for T1 and T2 ships. Oh the humanity!!!!1!!!! |
BinaryData
Kleinrock Heavy Industries Kleinrock Group
6
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 04:46:00 -
[48] - Quote
I would like to point out that , T3 Boosting ships + Racial boost from a titan, is overpowered out the yahoo..
Let's take an Armor Fleet for instance...
Erebus as Fleet command with Level 5 skills, including Titan 5. Thats 7.5% more armor per level of Gallente Titan. So in total, the titan gives out 37.5% More armor. Throw in T3 6 Link Tech 3 booster, and oh my god, you're stats go up the yingyang. I've seen Abaddons, Zealots get up to 200k eHP or higher, and thats with gank/buffer fits.
I think Tech 3 ships should have a more defined role.
Also, tech 3's have a disadvantage to them: You can't put subsystems on in a POS Hangar, I believe you can swap them out, but fitting a new Tech 3 HAS to be done in a station. Also the loss of a Level 5 skill sucks, trust me, I've lost my fair share of tengus. Warped into a C5 Anomaly, and my cloak was deactivated by accident. That's a 3 - 6 day skill train if you lose one. It isn't fun.
I believe there are many things that need to be balanced, and I wish CCP would balance them altogether.
So in retrospect, Tech 3's do have their place, and as EVE evolves, so should the mechanics, roles, and what not. I believe CCP should balance all the Frigates at once.
They should balance T1/T2 at the same time, ignore Faction ships until a later date, after T1/T2 + capitals have been balanced.
But to sum this up; Tech 3's have their advantages, and disadvantages. I don't agree with some, i.e. lasers having an instant reload time, while the other 3 races have to have reload times. I don't agree with the nerfing of Heavy Missiles. The Tengu is fairly well balanced, you can get some mean dps (My WH Fit gives me 600 dps with a 2.1k dps tank, but its worth a bit of isk). I don't agree with Tech 3's having interdiction nullifiers. I don't agree with any Covert Ops ship having their cloaking device active 24/7. There should be probes, module, pos module or station module that decloaks you for 2 minutes. There is a lot to be done, and expanded upon, and CCP knows this. Not to mention, EVE is a sandbox game. CCP only steps in when a bug is found, or something is broken. Though, they do have a nasty tendency to nerf the f*** out of something till it is useless. |
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 05:26:00 -
[49] - Quote
I think T3s are nice. They are expensive as hell, and cost SP on death. T3 might perform a ton of roles, but a well-fitted T3 costs more than a fitted HAC and Recon cruiser put together. The Legion seems pretty underpowered when compared to other Tech 3, especially the Tengu. |
Anna Liebert
Thunders Claw Fleet Pangu Coalition
5
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 05:33:00 -
[50] - Quote
In EVE, now you can produce 240+ types of ship. The number does not including present and award ships. If the number continuously increases, I feel terrible. It's too complicated. |
|
Xpaulusx
Naari LLC
94
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 08:35:00 -
[51] - Quote
Posting in a steath " Knife to a gunfight' argument thread |
Ghazu
269
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 08:37:00 -
[52] - Quote
Anna Liebert wrote:In EVE, now you can produce 240+ types of ship. The number does not including present and award ships. If the number continuously increases, I feel terrible. It's too complicated. You just need to make decisions. http://www.minerbumping.com/ |
Isbariya
The Dancer. Initiative Mercenaries
17
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 09:55:00 -
[53] - Quote
TheBreadMuncher wrote:Rico Minali wrote:They need to be lowered so that they arnt better than a specialised ship that is designed entirely with that role in mind.
They are nice, and teh fact you can go out and do great things in them is superb, tehy are expensive and rightly so, but they shouldnt boost better than a CS, they shoudlnt recon better than a recon, they shouldnt tank better than a battleship with teh sig of a cruiser.. They need changing so that they stay great and worth teh price, BUT dont make other ships irrelevant. The swiss army knife after all can do a great many things, but it doesnt do them better than tools designed exactly for that role. Let's be honest here - for 3x the price of a specialised ship they can bloody well do what they want. Tech 3s freshened up PVP by bringing power in a tiny package! Even a battleship will think twice before going mono a mono with a tech 3. Why shouldn't they be better than their T2 counterparts? "Oh specialisation > Generalisation" but, let's face it, apart from maybe swapping to a dictor-nullified fit occasionally, my proteus doesn't change. It'd still be cheaper to buy multiple specialised ships than have one generalised one and have subsystems and fits for all roles, and the fact that rigs can't be swapped out also adds to this. T3 should be > T2, much as T2 already is > T1.
So because I spent about 30 billion isk for my supercarrier it should rightfully be more powerful then anything else except a titan ? sounds good to me, maybe it should be able to dock and have a larger drone bay like it should as well as the ability to field all kind of drones as it's a carrier, it should be able to.
But it doesn't work that way, just because something is more expensive it doesn't and in most cases should not mean that it's more powerful then something else that costs less (generally speaking). That would lead to a game where everyone would just fly the most expensive ship available and we all would not have the fun we are experiencing right now.
But while we have some dev responding in this thread, I might as well take this opportunity to write down my wishes for Christmas ;-P
How about granting ships with a jump drive/ jump portal generator the ability to jump on their own. This could work like the micro jump drive , they would have to power up a module for a fixed amount of time ( maybe in relation to how far the destination is away, like 5 secs per LJ) and then would land in the targeted destination at a random place, maybe even unable to cloak for a reasonable amount of time. This would make traveling easier as well as stealthed operations and would open up a hole new play stile.
another thing, any idea of an eta for the V3-ing of capitals ?
|
Vilnius Zar
Ordo Ardish
218
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 10:30:00 -
[54] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Tech 3 is awesome
If they would be you'd have balanced them decently by now instead of waiting 2 years (and counting). Amat victoria curam. |
Borascus
Red Core Paradigm Shift Alliance
95
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 11:11:00 -
[55] - Quote
Tech 3 SC's are the right move for CCP, except ofc for that role reversal when 50+ Tech 3's fly round.
A bait ball where each of the fish on the outside can take down a shark is the new predator at the top of the pile, and 50+ T3 are exactly that, plus you never know which is logi, unless you scan them all before starting.
|
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
108
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 11:15:00 -
[56] - Quote
T3 is what happened when a CCP developer started playing Battletech and said "Omnimechs... we should have these in EvE!" EvE Forum Bingo |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
468
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 11:18:00 -
[57] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Harvey James wrote:wow considering your CCP and CCP say balancing ships isn't based on cost.... My job isn't to balance ships, so that's my personal opinion after having been a PvPer for best part of 10 years Then its lucky for me it isn't your job but you do accept T3's are OP in nearly every way especially its amazing resists that only belong on CS?
OP compared to what? All ships have a counter in eve.
Do you honestly think T3 ships shouldn't have the edge, in some way, over t1 and t2 but still cost around a billion? They see me trolling, they hating... |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
2908
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 11:24:00 -
[58] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Harvey James wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Harvey James wrote:wow considering your CCP and CCP say balancing ships isn't based on cost.... My job isn't to balance ships, so that's my personal opinion after having been a PvPer for best part of 10 years Then its lucky for me it isn't your job but you do accept T3's are OP in nearly every way especially its amazing resists that only belong on CS? OP compared to what? All ships have a counter in eve. Do you honestly think T3 ships shouldn't have the edge, in some way, over t1 and t2 but still cost around a billion?
Just highlighting those parts, since your reading comprehension seems to be slightly malfunctioning and it made you think he said something completely different to what he actually said.
You're welcome. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
468
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 11:25:00 -
[59] - Quote
Azrin Stella Oerndotte wrote: Most complaints I have seen about tech 3's is that killing them is bloody hard and that one of the best ways to kill another tech 3 is by using another tech 3.
Stop listening to the complaints of fools then. They see me trolling, they hating... |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
468
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 11:35:00 -
[60] - Quote
Destination SkillQueue wrote:Just highlighting those parts, since your reading comprehension seems to be slightly malfunctioning and it made you think he said something completely different to what he actually said. You're welcome.
wow that's one heck of a convoluted insult. 7/10 for trying to make your self sound intelligent
But i suggestive you read what was said again as you appear to have misunderstood. Basically, i was asking if t3 isn't better than t2, what's the point?
T3's are just as easy to kill as any other ship providing you use the right tool for the job. They see me trolling, they hating... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |