This whine about T3 obsolete T2 Ships is simply groundless. One only needs to look at the ships to see it is so.

Have you ever seen a

T3 Hictor or a T3 Logistic?

Hictor option does not exist and the Logistic is mostly bad that its not worth using(except for maybe pve - which is not a balance factor for pvp)

Do T3 recons obsolete T2 recon ships? Look at the bonuses and you can clearly see that it does not.

T2 recon ships have superior ewar capability over T3. e.g. Falcon vs Tengu jams, Pilgrim vs Legion Neut, Rapier vs Loki Web, and Arazu vs Proteus scram.

T2 field command ships typical are superior to T3 cruiser in firepower. (Except the Nighthawk which is a lulzy and problematic ship.) The Astarte, Absolution, and Sleipnir kicks T3 ass the dps department.

T2 HACs typically have better mobility, smaller sig radius, and longer range capabilities than T3. HAC's are mobile, tanky RR gang cruisers with good firepower.

I believe the main argument and complaint is that T3 beat HAC's overall, but if you really think about it, most HAC's see little use even without T3 ships around.

The Fact is that most HAC's are pretty awful. The Eagle out of all is the worst ship and the Cerberus is a joke. The sacrilege is a slow armor ships with short range missiles. The ishtar is a decent drone boat, but suffers from fitting issues and drones are a bit lame. The deimos is well diemost. The Muninn is pointless with the Tornado and Hurricane around.

Out of all 8 HAC's, 2 HAC's see regular use. The zealot and the vagabond, the only decent and worthy of the bunch. The Vagabond is the bread and butter nano ship. The Zealot is the ARMOR HAC.

I ask of CCP to be reasonable and not listen to rabid blabbering people who say things without any real backup.

I'm going to come back to this topic properly tomorrow, because there's something in my last post i'd like to build on (though it's likely to be yet another monologue ).

In the meantime though, i'd like to remind you: be careful using the word "obsoleted" as it assumes prior use or role. The Cerb never had the role or use the Tengu maintain (though maybe it should have) nore did the NH really (even if that is closer in concept) while the Raven hulls are way off (though i presume you're mostly referring to PvE in that regard - even there it's a stretch calling it obscurity as those hulls still profile there, and not only because of cost-effect).

So wether you talk use (torp changes, probing changes, damp changes, falcon changes and tiered slot allocation and bonuses [of BC to CS]) or role ("blap" scenarios with missile snipers, mobile true-sniping, tank-projection or range-counter) it's a bit of a shoehorning issue. The Tengu have never done any of that. If it slightly overlap some ships, the one that come to mind is the Drake, and in that regard i don't think you'll get most people to align with you and call that bad.

So in essence, the roles of the Ravens and the Cerb were already dwindled by the time Tengus profiled (Cerbs may still have seen certain use as Tengus were introduced, but not as prices came down and they profiled).

The odd sheep out is the NH, but it already had obscurity issues both with the Drake and with the lack of bonus-to-role power of the other CS (eliminate the Drake from the equation and the NH doesn't stand it's particular ground well enough compared to BS [ie., you wouldn't want to fight Baddons with them]; while the Minmatar platforms held their more unique ground - as is very well illustrated by the traditional use of the Claymore). Fon's old movies did alot to play with that relation and shift oppinion a fair bit (which is why they are generally so well regarded) but that doesn't make discourse inaccurate. Fon's movies just added some dimension to it and took off some extremities (similar to the Deimos ruffle).

It could probably be argued that even with BC-BS in mind, the NH isn't completely without potential in capable hands - but it's definately wrong to say that the Tengu took that away from it. Similar to a Deimos-Proteus argument.

Anyway, tomorrow evening i'll try to expand a bit on the "layering" perspective i sort of fleshed out in my last post. I'll try to tie that back i bit to this topic of Battlecruisers and new ships. I see i kind of already started when rounding off this .