Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear Limitless Inc.
155
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 12:36:00 -
[61] - Quote
What do I want from the tech 3 rebalance? A subtle change, (if we really have to even have one), please.
My DPS/TANK T3 has double the tank of my Faction Battlecruiser - plus it gets lower sig, longer range guns, more speed, and a 35 KM web. Nice. The same DPS/TANK T3 - does slightly less DPS than my HAC - it has 50% more tank - the same velocity, sig, etc - but also the 35 KM Web.
So - yeah - I'd take the T3 over the new super expensive old-battlecruisers - and probably over a HAC - for DPS/Tank roles. Maybe it needs calmed down a bit. . . . maybe. . . But . . .
What I don't want is for the T3 to become configurable to be - a HAC but less good - Or a Recon but less good - Or a Command Ship but less good - Or a something else but less good. Because for the cost - you'd obviously just by the good versions.
I guess CCP will balance the "HAC" T3's down to be only as good as the racial HACs but try and find a different angle for them. They'll do the same with the "command ship" version, and the same with the "recon" configuration. We'll probably end up with the T3s being only slightly better/different from the existing racial T2 ships if configured to be them - or worse than them - with the "Extra" feature. I imagine that in the furture my T3 will be both worse than the HAC in terms of gank and tank, but might have a reduced but still longer web range.
And then I wouldn't bother with it. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1162
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 12:46:00 -
[62] - Quote
Can I have your T3 then ;)
They are supposed to be configurable to do many roles just not as good as the T2 versions. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1954
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 20:56:00 -
[63] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Buff T2s, they're ridiculously weak at the moment. T3s are where they should be. Flatly buffing T2s from their current level would completely undermine the T1 rebalances that took place over the last couple of expansions. What does "flatly" buffing mean? Do you mean buff everything by equal amounts? Well who said anything about that?
"Buff T2's, they're ridiculously weak" sounds pretty much like an across-the-board 'buff everything' statement to me.
Quote: Clearly some HACs need less work than others, e.g. zealot probably only needs a speed buff, but the cerberus? That thing needs a lot of love. Why does the zealot need a speed buff? It already out DPS's, outranges, and out tanks the T1 version. In case you hadn't been paying attention, the point of T2 come the rebalance is that it's more specialised than T1, not better at everything..
The zealot is fine as it is, and depending how tightly CCP applies the 'more specialised, not better' doctrine might even be due a slight nerfing.
Quote:Tiericide was meant to eliminate tiers, not make T2 obsolete. Interceptors are in dire need of rework. HACs needed work even before tiericide. If you object to this then I think you haven't undocked in a very long time. HACs need work, yes. What they don't need is to consign the T1s back to the 'outright inferior, only fly this if you're too new or too poor for a T2' status they were a year ago. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
1449
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 21:03:00 -
[64] - Quote
Sigras wrote:It is my contention that Eve doesnt allow for a ship that is "more generalized" than T1 and less powerful than T2
What does more generalized even mean? That it can fill multiple roles/lines? Thats useless if your ship has to dock to do it. Why not just have another ship in the station? especially if you have to carry around all of the subsystems/fittings to refit your ship anyway.
Scripts for everything! Versatility achieved.
|
Allandri
Liandri Industrial Liandri Covenant
35
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 00:07:00 -
[65] - Quote
They should have roughly 10% more EHP than a Navy cruiser. |
MisterAl tt1
Pretenders Inc W-Space
111
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 00:35:00 -
[66] - Quote
T3 is a ship of wormholes. CCP won't listen to what changes we want them to do, but I hope they will hear that T3s should not be nerfed to the oblivion, for only those ships are useful in wormholes on a large scale. Simple example: you find someone farming a site with capitals. You drop them. You've got an enemy capital fleet + sleepers burning names on your armors in random. What other fleet composition but T3s+logis can handle that OK? BS maybe, but you can't bring a BS-fleet for the mass factor. Other option is blob, not really wh's specialization. |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
53
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 01:08:00 -
[67] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:"Buff T2's, they're ridiculously weak" sounds pretty much like an across-the-board 'buff everything' statement to me. No it means exactly what it says, they're weak and need to be buffed. There's no implication of "Buff everything by the exact same amount".
Scatim Helicon wrote:Why does the zealot need a speed buff? It already out DPS's, outranges, and out tanks the T1 version. In case you hadn't been paying attention, the point of T2 come the rebalance is that it's more specialised than T1, not better at everything..
The zealot is fine as it is, and depending how tightly CCP applies the 'more specialised, not better' doctrine might even be due a slight nerfing. Navy omen projects damage just the same with similar DPS. The only thing the Zealot has better is tank. Is the Zealot's specialisation tanking? Because I thought that was the for the Sacrilege. The Zealot's lack of drones already make it more vulnerable to frigate/dessies tackle and therefore it's less viable as a solo boat. Its role is already narrowed. Speed is relevant to controlling range and damage application. And if that's not what the Zealot is specialised for I don't know what is.
Scatim Helicon wrote:HACs need work, yes. What they don't need is to consign the T1s back to the 'outright inferior, only fly this if you're too new or too poor for a T2' status they were a year ago. T1 Cruisers were used before, but it was primarily the Rupture/Thorax/Caracal because they outclassed the other t1 cruisers tremendously. The Broadsword didn't stop people flying the Rupture, nor did the Deimos for the Thorax. And the Cerb was never that great so people just flew the Caracal (especially in FW as frig killers).
The primary aim was to make the T1s balanced with each other. No one flew the Omen because other t1 Cruisers were better, not even counting the T2s. T2 should be able to do roughly what the T1s can with the exception of being better at 1 particular thing, so that the only reason you have to fly the T2 is when you want to be able to do that 1 thing. The Zealot projects damage better than the Omen, for like what 3-5 seconds before the Omen's speed catches up? And the Noman projects damage the same as the Zealot with the added bonus of having drones for when light tackle get under its guns. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1167
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 01:39:00 -
[68] - Quote
The reality is, we will have to wait till all other ships are rebalanced to see where T3 can fit. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Hennrik
J-CORP
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.29 21:55:00 -
[69] - Quote
I would like to see the ability to switch subsystems and modules in-space, on-the-fly, on-its-own. That would be real versatility like no other ship class has to offer. Then it would be okay if the performance was brought down a bit to compensate.
Scan with your nullified scanner, change into dps+ specific tank to run the site you found, switch to combat as someone appears on dscan/local. That's basically the idea. It would also make for great tactical combat. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
168
|
Posted - 2013.06.29 22:55:00 -
[70] - Quote
Hennrik wrote:I would like to see the ability to switch subsystems and modules in-space, on-the-fly, on-its-own. That would be real versatility like no other ship class has to offer. Then it would be okay if the performance was brought down a bit to compensate.
Scan with your nullified scanner, change into dps+ specific tank to run the site you found, switch to combat as someone appears on dscan/local. That's basically the idea. It would also make for great tactical combat.
No. If you think more in-depth, you will see why. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
756
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 04:22:00 -
[71] - Quote
I would like it so that there aren't only a small handful of viable fits despite being millions of subsystem combinations.
I would like it so a t3 isn't the ultimate ship at everything.
Like CCP says it should be a ship capable of multiple roles at once but not capable of doing any of them as well as a hac.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1221
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 06:18:00 -
[72] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Like CCP says it should be a ship capable of multiple roles at once but not capable of doing any of them as well as a hac.
I never recall them saying they should be able to full multiple roles at the same time.
They are supposed to be able to fill multiple roles, but not as well as there T2 counterparts. They can be a logistic ship, though that subsystem needs a lot of work before it can eve come close to reaching T1 levels. They can be E-War ships, though the Tengu is the only one that has the ability to come close to the effectiveness its T2 counterpart. They can be HAC, they all out class these but that is mostly because HAC need a lot of work. They can be covert exploration ships, they do this quite well. There is no cruiser counterpart to this configuration. They can be a Command Ship, this configuration is OP and needs to be redone like their plan. +2%/level to 3 link types.
Then they can also be mild mixes of many of these configurations as well, but will never perform up to the mimicked configuration of the T2 ship. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Morene Darkstar
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 06:57:00 -
[73] - Quote
I would love for the Logi aspect of T3's to be buffed. In my opinion they should rep more with worse range (they really need a range bonus) while the T2 Logi stay the same. It's a shame they almost never get used. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
756
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 13:15:00 -
[74] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote: I never recall them saying they should be able to full multiple roles at the same time.
They are supposed to be able to fill multiple roles, but not as well as there T2 counterparts. They can be a logistic ship, though that subsystem needs a lot of work before it can eve come close to reaching T1 levels. They can be E-War ships, though the Tengu is the only one that has the ability to come close to the effectiveness its T2 counterpart. They can be HAC, they all out class these but that is mostly because HAC need a lot of work. They can be covert exploration ships, they do this quite well. There is no cruiser counterpart to this configuration. They can be a Command Ship, this configuration is OP and needs to be redone like their plan. +2%/level to 3 link types.
Then they can also be mild mixes of many of these configurations as well, but will never perform up to the mimicked configuration of the T2 ship.
CCP said tech 3 ships should be capable of generalization, being locked in to the role of a billion isk falcon is specialization. Then what is the point of a tech 3 ship? A billion isk for a hull that is better served by buying a falcon, basilisk, and hac all at the same time?
The reason it outclasses a hac right now is because T3s can get battleship dps and tank on a cruisers hull, or still remain an effective combat ship with covert ops capability. HACS should NEVER come close to the current t3 capabilities. When HACS are rebalanced there abilties will probably all fall near where the best hacs are with maybe a few unique bonuses to MWD sig or something. None of those subsystems should be as good as there specialized counterparts, thats the point! I should be able to do multiple things at once.
If link fitted T3s are simply weaker than command ships then what the hell is the point of a link fitted t3? If it is a covert ops fitted link ship then it has a purpose.
What is the point of a T3 if in combat it is weaker than a hac and able to do nothing else? Well if it is capable of being an active tanked missile brawler then there is a point. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1221
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 13:43:00 -
[75] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:CCP said tech 3 ships should be capable of generalization, being locked in to the role of a billion isk falcon is specialization. Then what is the point of a tech 3 ship? They are only a billion if you chose to faction fit them, a t2 fit costs about 500m. The great thing about T3 is that they are not locked into any role, when was the last time you put RR on your falcon? What about a full rack of missiles on your Basilisk? How about trying to use your HAC as a cloaky E-war ship?
A single T3 can do all these roles without needing to buy a new hull. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
756
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 13:45:00 -
[76] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Commander Ted wrote:CCP said tech 3 ships should be capable of generalization, being locked in to the role of a billion isk falcon is specialization. Then what is the point of a tech 3 ship? They are only a billion if you chose to faction fit them, a t2 fit costs about 500m. The great thing about T3 is that they are not locked into any role, when was the last time you put RR on your falcon? What about a full rack of missiles on your Basilisk? How about trying to use your HAC as a cloaky E-war ship? A single T3 can do all these roles without needing to buy a new hull. To bad I still save money by just buying the hacs. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1221
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 18:38:00 -
[77] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Commander Ted wrote:CCP said tech 3 ships should be capable of generalization, being locked in to the role of a billion isk falcon is specialization. Then what is the point of a tech 3 ship? They are only a billion if you chose to faction fit them, a t2 fit costs about 500m. The great thing about T3 is that they are not locked into any role, when was the last time you put RR on your falcon? What about a full rack of missiles on your Basilisk? How about trying to use your HAC as a cloaky E-war ship? A single T3 can do all these roles without needing to buy a new hull. To bad that is as much isk as 3 t2 cruisers, and I need to buy new subsystems for every refit putting the price way higher up. So tell me again why the **** I would want to fly one? It would seem you shouldn't, as you don't seem to see the usefulness of them. I will to continue to fly them unless the balance pass makes them horrible. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Scuzzy Logic
Midnight Elites United Federation of Commerce
27
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 20:10:00 -
[78] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Quote:I want the Legion to not suck compared to the other T3s. This. Balance this **** out, it's like the Legion got the leftovers of what the other T3s ended up with, especially the Tengu. Someone else mentioned that only a few of their platform have EWAR. This is also a problem. Basically, I suggest that we take out a lot of the under used (that being, the useless) subsystems, and turn them into more specialized options. But, the thing with T3s is, that they are an interesting dichotomy with regards to their performance. If they aren't tip top in performance, no one will use them in comparison to T2 cruisers, because if T3s aren't awesome, then they are just T2s that you lose skillpoints for dying in. No one will fly them if that happens. Conversely, you have to make sure that the T3s do not outright invalidate the T2s at any role the T2 is supposed to excel at. To this end, I would suggest that T3s not be permitted to fire Interdiction effects of any kind. They should be able to duck them, with their superior technology, but they should not be able to use them. The entire point of Interdiction vessels is their ability to use these mods, let them keep that ability.
The sheer fact they CAN be interdiction nullified makes your point moot. They will be flown. Besides, they're the only ship that get a scanning bonus with half a tank, making them the only option for WH-Hacking unless you're in a blob (CCP loves blobs, look at loot spew). |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
1352
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 02:44:00 -
[79] - Quote
It would be cool if Legions had enough powergrid to actually fit modules on them. Also it might be a good idea to give utility highslots to a ship that gets Ewar bonuses to highslot modules, just sayin. |
raawe
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
38
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 09:49:00 -
[80] - Quote
You know what, they will probably end up just plain nerfing everything to the ground, cutting stats for 50% and be done with it. On a serious note now, tengu is mostly used and really OP compared to other T3's. |
|
Ellendras Silver
The Scope Gallente Federation
52
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 10:56:00 -
[81] - Quote
what i want out of the T3 rebalance
I would like all T3s be more close to eachother in options not that the Tengu is supreme in every way as it is now. I also think its better for the game if the T2 variants are better in their specialty then the T3 this can be archieved with a boost on T2 ships and or nerf on T3s or a combination on both.
also i would love to see some industrial/mining sub systems and maybe even some new rigs
this way the T3s are still good for a lot of things
1. do everything ok and if needed can be covert ops and or nullified 2. scan with good tank and have more options in modules and ofc can be covert ops and or nullified 3. be an asset to miners/indutrialists aswell |
Ellendras Silver
The Scope Gallente Federation
52
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 11:22:00 -
[82] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:Ahhhh! Stay away from my Tengu!
tengu is highly overpowered and that needs to be fixed (not nerfed but fixed) i love the ship myself dont get me wrong its just too good in everything as the other T3s are not. enjoy your tengu while you can because it will be fixed with the rebalance i am sure |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10472
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 11:43:00 -
[83] - Quote
Ellendras Silver wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:Ahhhh! Stay away from my Tengu! tengu is highly overpowered and that needs to be fixed (not nerfed but fixed) i love the ship myself dont get me wrong its just too good in everything as the other T3s are not. enjoy your tengu while you can because it will be fixed with the rebalance i am sure
Specifically: the Accelerated Ejection Bay needs the RoF bonus bringing down to 5%.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
169
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 12:36:00 -
[84] - Quote
Ellendras Silver wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:Ahhhh! Stay away from my Tengu! tengu is highly overpowered and that needs to be fixed (not nerfed but fixed) i love the ship myself dont get me wrong its just too good in everything as the other T3s are not. enjoy your tengu while you can because it will be fixed with the rebalance i am sure
Experience shows this isn't true. Maybe for solo exploration? maybe in Null sec? Maybe for most PVE? Not seeing it in gang PVP for sure. |
Ellendras Silver
The Scope Gallente Federation
52
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 13:58:00 -
[85] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Ellendras Silver wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:Ahhhh! Stay away from my Tengu! tengu is highly overpowered and that needs to be fixed (not nerfed but fixed) i love the ship myself dont get me wrong its just too good in everything as the other T3s are not. enjoy your tengu while you can because it will be fixed with the rebalance i am sure Experience shows this isn't true. Maybe for solo exploration? maybe in Null sec? Maybe for most PVE? Not seeing it in gang PVP for sure.
so we agree its overpowered |
Phoenix Jones
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
38
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 14:53:00 -
[86] - Quote
T3's were really the experiment of CCP. It suceeded in some ways (creating a T2 type ship, not requiring T2 materials/moongoop to build, that is customizable). It failed in other ways (overshadowed T2 ships, DPS based cloak type vessels, etc).
Well you could just go nuts and universally nerf all T3's by removing their ability to fit normal T1 and T2 rigs, and create a set of Sleeper Rigs that are fittable on T3's. They can be balanced between the T1 and T2 rigs, but can be restricted to just 1 style (meaning no T1 and T2 sleeper rig). They would be removable unlike Normal Rigs. The reason for the removal ability of the T3 rigs would be that T3's are modular, the subsystems can be swapped out for different (sometimes Dramatically different) setups, the rigs should be able to follow suit.
That would probably be the fastest way to both nerf and "balance" T3's. New BPC's can be reversed engineered off the sleepers which allow the creation of sleeper rigs that can now be fit on T3's, the T3's are balanced inbetween the T1 and T2 Rigs.
It makes more sense that the T3's use sleeper materials to build the T3 ship, then sleeper materials to build the T3 subsystems, but Kspace crap to build the Rigs for the ship. The guns, modules, etc I see as fine. The T3's could get a new set of T3 only rigs. The ships would now be able to be dynamically balanced based off of the rigs, instead of trying to change the hulls, modules and bonuses themselves. |
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
222
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 15:21:00 -
[87] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Then whats the point? You have to dock up to switch to a new config, so you can just as easily get a new ship, and it can be a ship that is better, costs less and doesnt cost skill points when you lose it. IF you have achieved bittervet nirvana with all5 on all T2 subcaps, then sure. For everyone else, there are (or could be) T3s. If each T3 hull had eight possible fits, and each of those fits can do what a particular T2 ship can do at 90% of the performance level of the equivalent T2 hull, then that is a valid balance.
If you only want to max out one role, then the T2 hull is the obvious choice. It will do the job better and probably take about as long or not much longer to train. If you want to do two or three or eight things reasonably well, then the T3 is attractive because you can get 9/10ths of the performance for every role with 1/10th the training time.
That makes the T3 ideal for noobs in general and for any case where you want to be able to train one hull and one weapon line and do several different things on demand. Plenty of people "will bother" to fly T3s if this is the reason to fly them. People also "will bother" to fly T2s again either because they want the best performance for one role or just because they can, when they have been around long enough to join the 100m SP club.
The problem right now is that the T3 does everything better than anything else you might fly, which makes it the only choice for anyone, and makes T2s look like a total waste of SP except for the niche roles that T3s cannot fill at all. That is not balance, it's an iWin button.
|
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
161
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 15:50:00 -
[88] - Quote
Being able to use the fitting window in space, to swap sub systems or modules You happen to have in cargo would be cool.
Or something like that. Something that actually lets You facilitate on the much complimented versatility of the T3 ships. There's nothing a million chinese guys can't do cheaper. |
Ellendras Silver
The Scope Gallente Federation
52
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 17:25:00 -
[89] - Quote
Freighdee Katt wrote:Michael Harari wrote:Then whats the point? You have to dock up to switch to a new config, so you can just as easily get a new ship, and it can be a ship that is better, costs less and doesnt cost skill points when you lose it. IF you have achieved bittervet nirvana with all5 on all T2 subcaps, then sure. For everyone else, there are (or could be) T3s. If each T3 hull had eight possible fits, and each of those fits can do what a particular T2 ship can do at 90% of the performance level of the equivalent T2 hull, then that is a valid balance. If you only want to max out one role, then the T2 hull is the obvious choice. It will do the job better and probably take about as long or not much longer to train. If you want to do two or three or eight things reasonably well, then the T3 is attractive because you can get 9/10ths of the performance for every role with 1/10th the training time. That makes the T3 ideal for noobs in general and for any case where you want to be able to train one hull and one weapon line and do several different things on demand. Plenty of people "will bother" to fly T3s if this is the reason to fly them. People also "will bother" to fly T2s again either because they want the best performance for one role or just because they can, when they have been around long enough to join the 100m SP club. The problem right now is that the T3 does everything better than anything else you might fly, which makes it the only choice for anyone, and makes T2s look like a total waste of SP except for the niche roles that T3s cannot fill at all. That is not balance, it's an iWin button.
QFT
also you got a small advantage that you cant see what the ships "role" is just by the hull |
Ellendras Silver
The Scope Gallente Federation
52
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 17:29:00 -
[90] - Quote
Debora Tsung wrote:Being able to use the fitting window in space, to swap sub systems or modules You happen to have in cargo would be cool.
Or something like that. Something that actually lets You facilitate on the much complimented versatility of the T3 ships.
no you NEED fitting service to be able to refit in space that is a task for capitals, because they have support as role being able to refit a T3 in space without anything like that is way too powerfull |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |