Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
destiny2
Abh Academy Abh Alliance
131
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 11:56:00 -
[91] - Quote
not sure what drugs the thread starter is doing, nor why is he/she not shareing. but if anything the loki is the weakest T3 cruiser. Legion is actually one of the strongest, you must be fitting it wrong.
Loves the 100mn Ham Legion |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
863
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 12:03:00 -
[92] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Schmata Bastanold wrote:Am I the only one who didn't get the memo with details of T3 balancing? Subject of the thread and OP suggest Fozzie & Rise already started to hammer some nerfs into strategic cruisers but no sticky on F&I forums seems to exist?
So, how do you know what to whine about? They know a nerf is on the way because they are simply far too powerful for cruisers. So they are getting the whining about their FOTM being nerfed early.
They're not too powerful for T3 cruisers, there's only bad players unable to deal with them, unable to use EFT/Pyfa, unable to train their characters correctly, who want things handed to them accordingly to their will, this should remind you something.
T3's will require a very good thinking when we get at the rebalanced point of those, not because of carebear tears but because of logic and well thinking. Someone this week talked about the initial Eve programmers/developers, how much those were "aliens" and had visionary ideas for this game, then you start reading nerf threads and buff threads all over the years and you understand so much better why races and specifics or tools to help them achieve their task are nerf&thrown down the toilets for many years, maybe they don't have the talent the vision or will to make it so.
We're far from those "alliens" talent, reading your guys hate and tears just makes me think how bad comments and threads like this one nerf Gallente deeper then the ground for years. That's the result you get with no talented people touching masters work to stick to some community part or personal opinion but care less about basics, the intended purpose of each thing, the cause to effect.
ATM frigs/cruisers T1 are pretty much correct, not perfectly balanced but correct, BC's armor rep bonus on 2 Gallente hulls is still the proof of bad decisions and thinking, not willing to take decisions or not listen to players, and god dammit Gallente thread was probably the one with greater number of posts pages and with least to no trolling.
HM's are totally harmless and actually worthless, this has been discussed in hundreds of posts the nerf was way too big and will stay like for years until another one watches HAM's on his screen and messes with like HM's just because he can.
All this wall of text to say, when you touch something you should do it considering all aspects of the game including modules fitting possibilities, the purpose, the point and why, not because a bunch of nerds with a huge loud mouth said so. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
863
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 12:09:00 -
[93] - Quote
destiny2 wrote:not sure what drugs the thread starter is doing, nor why is he/she not shareing. but if anything the loki is the weakest T3 cruiser. Legion is actually one of the strongest, you must be fitting it wrong. Loves the 100mn Ham Legion
Loki the weakest T3 Cruiser??
You don't fly them that's why you're saying such thing. Anyone flying those on a daily basis including explorers can tell you differently. Why don't you ask to null sec nullified/cloak Loki pilots cleaning exploration sites and managing to kill lots of ships including other T3's?
You're doing it wrong with Loki, doesn't take anything from Ham Legion which is really awesome after the HAMs buff. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
101
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 12:17:00 -
[94] - Quote
Having now had a bit more experience with different T3 fits I'd say they are *fairly* even. I used to think the Tengu was by far the best, followed by the Prot. But when you look beyond paper dps and tank you realise that the Loki and Legion are definitely up there. Bar a few subsystems that are fairly even they're in a pretty good place against each other.
However T3s can absolutely not be rebalanced without HACs and Command Ships in particular being rebalanced first. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
133
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 12:36:00 -
[95] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:The T3 rebalance shouldn't be until after the T2 rebalance has been done; it's meaningless to compare T3s to HACs and Recons before the T2 cruiser rebalance has been completed.
I personally will be very intensively engaged on this, because any slip up in T3 balancing will have extremely severe repercussions (eg: the economy of W-space), and I think it's fair to say that quite a few of the other CSMs are going to be heavily involved on this subject too.
The summary of my current position on T3s is:
(1) We shouldn't let the hate for T3 link boosters overshadow the other things T3s can do. T3 ships need to be effective to justify the cost and risk of using them, and they need to be effective in a wide enough range of roles that they are popular or W-space is screwed.
(2) Rebalance Command Ships, HACs & Recons first, so we have a valid field of ships to compare them to.
(3) It's OK for T3s to be a better platform than a given T2 ship, as long as it can't exceed the T2 ship in it's specialized role. So it's OK for a Loki to do more DPS and have more EHP than a Vagabond, but it shouldn't be nearly as fast or small as a Vaga, for instance, because speed and evasion are the Vaga's T2 speciality.
(4) Give subsystems a calibration cost, and have them share a common pool of calibration with rigs. This allows us to assign an opportunity cost to picking the "cookie cutter" OP combinations: if you want a 1k DPS tengu that can trivially tank the toughest L4s, then you don't get to have 3x T2 missile rigs as well. In the other hand, careful choice of less-used subs will allow rig combinations that other ships can't attain.
Some good basic thoughts. We should vote this guy for CSM? ;)
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10234
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 12:50:00 -
[96] - Quote
pft what kind of chump would take a job like that?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1210
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 13:04:00 -
[97] - Quote
Cannibal Kane wrote:Soldarius wrote:
A Legion fit with T2 trimark armor pumps can exceed 333kEHP, sigRad of only 99.5 meters, and still put out 400dps with HAMs. Or you can drop a 1600m plate and fit lasers for better damage projection but much less tank (only 218k EHP). Oh, did I mention it still has 3 spare midslots after a prop mod for EWAR, cap booster, whatever?
Yes that is true... If you have links and your head is plugged in with 3 - 4 Billion isk worth of Implants. And a Double Plated HAM legion can get over 600dps.
It amazes me that people are using extreme cases where people are blinging their ships into cap cost territory to use as examples for nerfs. It's ridiculous.
HTFU!...for the children! |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
2223
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 13:04:00 -
[98] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: (4) Give subsystems a calibration cost, and have them share a common pool of calibration with rigs. This allows us to assign an opportunity cost to picking the "cookie cutter" OP combinations: if you want a 1k DPS tengu that can trivially tank the toughest L4s, then you don't get to have 3x T2 missile rigs as well. In the other hand, careful choice of less-used subs will allow rig combinations that other ships can't attain.
Or consider making T3s unriggable. I've always though rigs on Tech3s don't make sense because rigs are a semi-permenant feature on what's supposed to be a "flexible" ship. The combination of rigs and subsystems is imo just too much. |
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
326
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 16:10:00 -
[99] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Cannibal Kane wrote:Soldarius wrote:
A Legion fit with T2 trimark armor pumps can exceed 333kEHP, sigRad of only 99.5 meters, and still put out 400dps with HAMs. Or you can drop a 1600m plate and fit lasers for better damage projection but much less tank (only 218k EHP). Oh, did I mention it still has 3 spare midslots after a prop mod for EWAR, cap booster, whatever?
Yes that is true... If you have links and your head is plugged in with 3 - 4 Billion isk worth of Implants. And a Double Plated HAM legion can get over 600dps. It amazes me that people are using extreme cases where people are blinging their ships into cap cost territory to use as examples for nerfs. It's ridiculous. This, and people who have too much ISK to dump everywhere saying that "cost is not a balancing factor"... |
Baren
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
18
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 16:36:00 -
[100] - Quote
I really hope they dont nerf the EHP... I mean for a ship that costs over 1billion isk with fit, requires all those skills and has risk when flown.... a nerf to EHP would really make it like a even tastier target... and would be less attractive to fly
Making them more squishy by lowering the EHP is the Dumbest Idea ever. |
|
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
133
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 17:34:00 -
[101] - Quote
Baren wrote:I really hope they dont nerf the EHP... I mean for a ship that costs over 1billion isk with fit, requires all those skills and has risk when flown.... a nerf to EHP would really make it like a even tastier target... and would be less attractive to fly
Making them more squishy by lowering the EHP is the Dumbest Idea ever.
Actually lowering EHP might be a good place to start with at least 2 of them: Legion and Proteus.
|
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
133
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 17:35:00 -
[102] - Quote
Nyancat Audeles wrote:This, and people who have too much ISK to dump everywhere saying that "cost is not a balancing factor"...
Agreed... cost is not a balancing factor? Really?
|
Grimpak
Midnight Elites United Federation of Commerce
934
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 17:45:00 -
[103] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Cannibal Kane wrote:Soldarius wrote:
A Legion fit with T2 trimark armor pumps can exceed 333kEHP, sigRad of only 99.5 meters, and still put out 400dps with HAMs. Or you can drop a 1600m plate and fit lasers for better damage projection but much less tank (only 218k EHP). Oh, did I mention it still has 3 spare midslots after a prop mod for EWAR, cap booster, whatever?
Yes that is true... If you have links and your head is plugged in with 3 - 4 Billion isk worth of Implants. And a Double Plated HAM legion can get over 600dps. It amazes me that people are using extreme cases where people are blinging their ships into cap cost territory to use as examples for nerfs. It's ridiculous. yet it's what people are saying when they also imply that since the T3 hulls cost that much then they should be better than T2's.
hey, if cost was a balancing factor.. ah **** it I'll just quote myself here:
Grimpak wrote:Nyancat Audeles wrote: Cost IS a balancing factor. Deal with it.
then I expect my multi-trillion fully officer fitted rifter to kill at the very least 2 titans by itself by just sneezing at them. since cost is a balancing factor and all that. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
326
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 17:51:00 -
[104] - Quote
Quote: hey, if cost was a balancing factor.. ah **** it I'll just quote myself here: Grimpak wrote:Nyancat Audeles wrote: Cost IS a balancing factor. Deal with it.
then I expect my multi-trillion fully officer fitted rifter to kill at the very least 2 titans by itself by just sneezing at them. since cost is a balancing factor and all that.
A Rifted does not need much money invested in it to perform well for what it is. The comparison is invalid. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites United Federation of Commerce
934
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 17:56:00 -
[105] - Quote
Nyancat Audeles wrote:Quote: hey, if cost was a balancing factor.. ah **** it I'll just quote myself here: Grimpak wrote:Nyancat Audeles wrote: Cost IS a balancing factor. Deal with it.
then I expect my multi-trillion fully officer fitted rifter to kill at the very least 2 titans by itself by just sneezing at them. since cost is a balancing factor and all that. A Rifted does not need much money invested in it to perform well for what it is. The comparison is invalid. yes, but "cost is a balance factor" ergo "multi-trillion *anything* kills multi-billion *anything*", or so people are touting. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
326
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 18:04:00 -
[106] - Quote
I mean that cost is a balancing factor, with limits. Some ships naturally are more costly, whether it is seed rates in WH or DED complexes, or mineral costs. I never said cost is the ULTIMATE balancing factor. If cost was not a balancing factor, everyone would be flying DED Machariels or full officer fit Aeons or completely faction fit Dramiels... |
Toriessian
Helion Production Labs Mildly Intoxicated
132
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 18:28:00 -
[107] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Baren wrote:I really hope they dont nerf the EHP... I mean for a ship that costs over 1billion isk with fit, requires all those skills and has risk when flown.... a nerf to EHP would really make it like a even tastier target... and would be less attractive to fly
Making them more squishy by lowering the EHP is the Dumbest Idea ever. Actually lowering EHP might be a good place to start with at least 2 of them: Legion and Proteus.
If you lower the EHP on the Legion and don't give it more DPS it'll remove what little value the Legion has over the other T3s. |
Laserak
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 18:30:00 -
[108] - Quote
Buff my legion please, fitted with an adequate tank it has the dps of a Caracal |
Bolow Santosi
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
118
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 18:33:00 -
[109] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Nyancat Audeles wrote:This, and people who have too much ISK to dump everywhere saying that "cost is not a balancing factor"... Agreed... cost is not a balancing factor? Really?
If cost was a balancing factor Marauders would be half the cost of faction battleships. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites United Federation of Commerce
935
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 18:47:00 -
[110] - Quote
Nyancat Audeles wrote:I mean that cost is a balancing factor, with limits. Some ships naturally are more costly, whether it is seed rates in WH or DED complexes, or mineral costs. I never said cost is the ULTIMATE balancing factor. If cost was not a balancing factor, everyone would be flying DED Machariels or full officer fit Aeons or completely faction fit Dramiels... no no no, you're looking at it in a wrong way. Cost is not a factor, it's a consequence. Availability is a balancing factor, of wich when you add market economics, cost shows up as a consequence of the high demand versus low availability.
taking RL into comparision, you could compare this to copper. a century ago there wasn't a quite high demand on it, but with evolution of metallurgics and electronics, copper started to rise in demand quite sharply, while maintaining a certain limit on supply, thus the cost of it went up the roof.
replace the word "century", "copper", "metallurgics" "electronics" with "year", your FOTM ship, and "changes" and balance" respectively, and you'll have the same example to EVE. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
|
baltec1
Bat Country
6960
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 18:50:00 -
[111] - Quote
Toriessian wrote:
If you lower the EHP on the Legion and don't give it more DPS it'll remove what little value the Legion has over the other T3s.
Good news, the other t3s are also going to be nerfed. |
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
327
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 19:11:00 -
[112] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Toriessian wrote:
If you lower the EHP on the Legion and don't give it more DPS it'll remove what little value the Legion has over the other T3s.
Good news, the other t3s are also going to be nerfed. Then that would ruin the value of getting ANY T3...
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
667
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 19:14:00 -
[113] - Quote
Nyancat Audeles wrote:baltec1 wrote:Toriessian wrote:
If you lower the EHP on the Legion and don't give it more DPS it'll remove what little value the Legion has over the other T3s.
Good news, the other t3s are also going to be nerfed. Then that would ruin the value of getting ANY T3... Then prices will fall as demand is too low to sustain current costs, ending with T3's approaching prices more suitable to their performance. |
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
327
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 19:18:00 -
[114] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Nyancat Audeles wrote:baltec1 wrote:Toriessian wrote:
If you lower the EHP on the Legion and don't give it more DPS it'll remove what little value the Legion has over the other T3s.
Good news, the other t3s are also going to be nerfed. Then that would ruin the value of getting ANY T3... Then prices will fall as demand is too low to sustain current costs, ending with T3's approaching prices more suitable to their performance. I don't see how this is beneficial in any way... |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
133
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 19:20:00 -
[115] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Nyancat Audeles wrote:baltec1 wrote:Toriessian wrote:
If you lower the EHP on the Legion and don't give it more DPS it'll remove what little value the Legion has over the other T3s.
Good news, the other t3s are also going to be nerfed. Then that would ruin the value of getting ANY T3... Then prices will fall as demand is too low to sustain current costs, ending with T3's approaching prices more suitable to their performance.
But you would also have to lower the cost to make them. While supply and demand help determine prices, cost to make it also has a factor on price.
Each T3 seems to do a slightly different 'thing' best. Depending on what you are trying to do, pick the T3 of choice. It seems balancing to some people means that all T3s should be fairly equal at all roles. If that is the case, why have different races, weapons, etc.? |
baltec1
Bat Country
6962
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 19:23:00 -
[116] - Quote
Nyancat Audeles wrote: I don't see how this is beneficial in any way...
They will be correctly balanced with the other cruisers. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
667
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 19:28:00 -
[117] - Quote
Onomerous wrote: But you would also have to lower the cost to make them. While supply and demand help determine prices, cost to make it also has a factor on price.
Each T3 seems to do a slightly different 'thing' best. Depending on what you are trying to do, pick the T3 of choice. It seems balancing to some people means that all T3s should be fairly equal at all roles. If that is the case, why have different races, weapons, etc.?
Cost to make them results from demand on the parts to make them, which is driven by demand for the final product. I'm not an expert on the matter but as I recall some components used in T3 manufacture exist only for that purpose. Those materials will have to adjust downwards as people decide T3 aren't worth the price and hulls and subs stop selling, producers stop producing and supplies of raw materials stop being consumed causing oversupply.
T3's aren't and won't be clones of each other as they still have racial lines to follow and will be distict in their respective racial traits. Same with all other ship types. |
bloodknight2
Talledega Knights PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
81
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 19:30:00 -
[118] - Quote
This thread is a real joke. T3 should and must be nerfed a bit. Remove 25% of their EHP and they will still be viable in pvp and even sometime, still overpowered VS t2.
And stop whining about the cost. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites United Federation of Commerce
935
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 19:38:00 -
[119] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Each T3 seems to do a slightly different 'thing' best. Depending on what you are trying to do, pick the T3 of choice. It seems balancing to some people means that all T3s should be fairly equal at all roles. If that is the case, why have different races, weapons, etc.? and thus we arrived to the crux of the problem: how to make T3's useable and attractive while maintaining them balanced vs other ships, keeping the (apparent) flexibility of T3's, while maintaining them exotic enough between themselves and all the other ship classes. Caveat:
- they are, in the end, cruisers and thus should be balanced around that paradigm.
- no, cost is not a damn balance factor.
- yes, they are an important (the main) factor on the wormhole economy viability, so better not screw this up.
altho hard, considering the fact that T2's are next, and then only CCP will touch T3's, there will be some time to fix them. perhaps next year's summer expansion only, altho I wish they would be fixed together with the entire T2 cruiser class, as to keep things a bit more coherent. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
133
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 19:47:00 -
[120] - Quote
bloodknight2 wrote:This thread is a real joke. T3 should and must be nerfed a bit. Remove 25% of their EHP and they will still be viable in pvp and even sometime, still overpowered VS t2.
And stop whining about the cost.
lol... just lol |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |