Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Kirjava
EVE Protection Agency Intrepid Crossing
261
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 21:16:00 -
[31] - Quote
As long as I get my tech 3 mining barge. I want to **** belts and rats at the same time.
Then we can go get Pizza and Margarita Shooters
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. Cardinal Kirjava - Redeclaring the Crusade in the name of the Goddess since 2012. |
Opertone
Aurora Empire Fuzzy Nut Attack Squirrels
235
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 21:39:00 -
[32] - Quote
I expect tier 3 battlecruisers... basically T3 cruisers, but bigger and better.
I want them to have 100 EHP from start adn 90 90 90 resists.
Yeah and I wish for 1300 DPS and covops cloak |
|
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1729
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 21:44:00 -
[33] - Quote
Moved to the appropriate forum.
I want T3 Frigates too! ISD Suvetar Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
fukier
RISE of LEGION
421
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 21:45:00 -
[34] - Quote
FluffyDice wrote:You sure do have a similar writing style to the OP.
do i? he must be from Toronto too... and border line illiterate... At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
Glathull
Suicidal Panda Tears of Love and Death
25
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 21:53:00 -
[35] - Quote
What an incredible bunch of humbugs. Does anyone in this game ever actually have fun? Or are you all too busy whinging on the forums about nerfbats and balancebeams and crying alone at the corner of your homes because someone, somewhere, somehow, might be making more Internet spaceship dollars than you are?
Good giant Jesus' ****. You people are amazing. |
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire
23
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 22:39:00 -
[36] - Quote
Fully supporting a non-combat t3 frigate that does a little bit of noctis, transport ship in size xs and with a full rack of analyzer, codebreaker, salvager and tractors... Taking a look at t1 exploration ships... Nah, no need for t3 frigates.
Really, they should fix balancing issues with current t3s first. Nerfbat till they don't need sp losses anymore. From the point of a loki-pilot: at least the loki is way overpowered. Considering a regular battleship cries like a girl when shot compared to a loki/prot/legion. Excuse this, but it's annoying that you can't 'stop' t3s unless you jam them. |
Griffin Omanid
Knights of the Zodiac
18
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 23:13:00 -
[37] - Quote
I would only except them if all of the tech 3 are nerfed so far that it is impossible for them to be stronger then any tech2 ship in the same size and their specialised role. This includes nerfing dps and tank further then it is already. And of course the coast should stay the same cause you normally get more ship bonis then with any other ship.
whix wrote: with tech 3 frigates, it would be possible to have PvP tournaments that involve hundreds of players. where tech 3 cruisers are too expensive for most players to be interested using them for that.
Who the f... use a T3 in a mass pvp. This is obviously a reason why they should get nerfed. Because a ordered fleet of assault, logi and ewar ships should easily **** a fleet of T3 with the same size. Proposal T2 BS Class Juggernaut |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1266
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 23:49:00 -
[38] - Quote
Glathull wrote:What an incredible bunch of humbugs. Does anyone in this game ever actually have fun? Or are you all too busy whinging on the forums about nerfbats and balancebeams and crying alone at the corner of your homes because someone, somewhere, somehow, might be making more Internet spaceship dollars than you are?
Good giant Jesus' ****. You people are amazing. Confirming that imbalance = fun. 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. |
Tsobai Hashimoto
FATAL Warfare Hopeless Addiction
49
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 09:30:00 -
[39] - Quote
De'Veldrin wrote:I wouldn't expect any new ship classes (especially T3 ships) until the tiericide and rebalance are done for the existing ships.
Following that, I would like to see faction Battlecruisers - the rats have them, why can't we?
My vote would be along these lines, when they rebalanced BC throw in Faction BC!
Only a handful of BC anyways so whats 4 more ships?
They did every t1 frig, t1 destroyer and t1 cruiser in a big blob |
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Heavy Industries Sick N' Twisted
178
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 11:27:00 -
[40] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Tarvos Telesto wrote:Sorry but nope.
T3 cruisers was a mistake, they cool, but they kill roles and usage of other ships, since t3 cruisers relase, here less recons-heavy assault ships usage on pvp and battleships - commands on pve, believe me or not people stop using normal and tech 2 frigates if CCP relase all in one tech 3 lillte ships.
Im not against good ideas but i sceptic about this.
Form other perspective ok lets do it... balance is a lie. I think the problems you describe with the current T3 cruisers are going to be fully resolved when the rebalancing is done. I hope this is true. They are trying to narrow the power gap between tech levels some. That to me says they will also be giving themselves room to maneuver with the current tech levels. I know I'm not expecting T4 any time.
From what I have seen of what CCP have been putting forward for their view in how each tech level should be, you have the T1 baseline, a T2 specialist and then there's the T3 multipurpose ships.
T3 hulls, at this time, put out the DPS of a command ship with the tank of a BS and the maneuverability of a cruiser. They also have access to specialist gear and can combine this to amazing effect. Realistically, they are comparable to sooped up Command ships. What would a T3 frigate equate to? a souped up hac?
I expect CCP to reduce the overall effectiveness of T3s, making them a jack of all trades but masters of none.
MODULAR DRONES
MORE ORE SHIPS |
|
Seranova Farreach
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
397
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 11:32:00 -
[41] - Quote
tech 3 frigs are a good idea but i would love tech 3 dessys too :P |
To mare
Advanced Technology
79
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 12:55:00 -
[42] - Quote
they still have to find a way to balance current T3 cruiser and you want them to add more T3? also T3 frigs would be relatively cheap to make pretty much all the other frigs useless |
Doc Severide
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 13:26:00 -
[43] - Quote
Glathull wrote:What an incredible bunch of humbugs. Does anyone in this game ever actually have fun? Or are you all too busy whinging on the forums about nerfbats and balancebeams and crying alone at the corner of your homes because someone, somewhere, somehow, might be making more Internet spaceship dollars than you are?
Good giant Jesus' ****. You people are amazing. I looked up lug nut in the dictionary and saw your name...
|
Eternal Montage
Frontier Explorer's League Sadistica Alliance
52
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 16:32:00 -
[44] - Quote
Lexmana wrote:Eternal Montage wrote:Imagine a frigate that could probe and do sites and has a low skill requirement. It might actually give high sec exploration more of a purpose and more of a draw. I think you have difficulties thinking outside the box. What you describe is not a Tech 3 frigate - it is an assaultship with a probe launcher.
Just spit-balling here man. Think outside of the box that I've incidentally created.... A t3 frigate doesn't exist yet but if it did it would have to follow three criteria:
1. It's something new 2. It doesn't ruin old **** 3. It's a frigate
I'm not even sure if it is possible, but the point I'm trying to make is that if we can agree on these simple implied criteria, the possibilities are pretty broad. It doesn't have to be an overpowered frigate. It doesn't have to cloak/interdiction nullified boat, it doesn't necessarily have to have subsystems. The idea that it should have subsystems is an assumption. What if they WERE just assault frigates with probing bonuses? What if they were were just frigates that you could alter the slot layout. What if they were frigates that could use heavy drones? What if they did something completely new and unexpected? I don't know... all I'm trying to say is people immediately think "t3 frigate; 3 subsystems, interdiction nullifier, covert cloak, overpowered in pve and pvp..." They immediately create a smaller t3 cruiser in their head and I say, **** that, it could be something revolutionary! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=169738 |
whix
Aliastra Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 17:53:00 -
[45] - Quote
i try not to share my thoughts with people, who possess toxic levels of auto-pessemism.
that mindset mostly just ruins what potential "is" available in the world. and destroys reasonable accomplishments, before they even have a chance to begin.
not that i am condemning you. but it would be gainful, if you stopped poisoning yourselves.
despite my hesitation to get involved with the wrong kind of attitudes, i feel that i must further contribute to the subject, of some of my hopes and dreams.
1: i mainly want ships with interchangible subsystems.
as an incomplete substitute, for deeper/broader options, of leverage customization, of a ships skills and mechanical values. which is something that i am disappointed, was not a larger part of the game, a long time ago.
what can be done with equiped modules, is not as complex as i could want. especially since skills are not equipable, outside of a subsystem.
i am less interested in having a larger total pool of leverage/tankability/DPS, and more interested in having more choices, towards my ships exact set of skills/attributes.
2: the developers would have to change the balance of tech 3 cruisers at some point, no matter what else they change about the game.
the current implementation of tech 3 cruisers, was to provide a starting point for player testing. it was a step one, that will eventually be followed by a step two.
3: the developers may "have" to release further tech 3 ships, to form a better idea, of how to balance tech 3 ships in geneal. such that tech 3 cruisers might stay stuck in their current implementation, "unless" further tech 3 ships are released. even if other tech 3 ships get released, before tech 3 cruisers are rebalanced.
and not releasing a smaller number of tech 3 ships, could unconstructively inhibit the further development, of a larger number of tech 3 ship releases.
in other words, if the ball is not kept rolling, the ball might get stuck or forgotten.
such that releasing a few more temporarily watered down tech 3 ships, might be a lesser evil, than doing nothing, due to uncertainty.
and due to mighty unwaivering pessemism. which is just one aspect, of the wrong kind of attitude.
4: tech 3 ships are supposed to have overall more power, than tech 2 ships. but nobody said "how much" more power they have to possess.
tech 3 ships do not have to be so much more powerful, that people associate them, with eve onlines equivalent of munchkin-ism
it would be bad for people to permanantly disagree with each other, over this concept, when the tech 3 ships that are currently released, are just a beta of tech 3 ships in general.
nobody said that all future tech 3 ships have to be, like current tech 3 cruisers are now.
5: the developers might have to release many more tech 3 ships, before it is reasonable to release tech 3 equipment, on a general level.
nobody can agree on everything. but unconstructive unending dispute, does not deserve to badly stall the march of progress.
they likely could not release the jove at all, until tech 3 stuff is far more distributed. because the jove appear to be what tech 4 was long ago meant to be based off of.
please do not hate the jove, just because tech 3 cruisers are beta.
6: it is important to remember, that since the game is mainly made of computer code, that hundreds of thousand of different design decisions, could be made.
the only implementations that are patched into the game, are not required, to be your personal nightmare come true.
i don't even want most of you to have nightmare game experiences. i just want more ship customization options. instead of just more ships.
7: this last one was added as a freebie, to get you addicted.
when you stop trying to get ingrates to see you as being a dignified person, your life becomes several times easier.
i am mainly here because NCsoft closed city of heroes, instead of aion.
if you want someone to punish, punish the release of guid wars 2. in order to further drive down their stocks.
i call amarr/caldari side the axis of evil. and i call gallente/minmatar side the axis of frenchbread and malt liquer.
|
masternerdguy
Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E.
1102
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 18:33:00 -
[46] - Quote
Why? So we can obsolete all the assault frigates, electronic attack frigates, interceptors, covops, and stealth bombers with one ship?
I can see it now: a frigate that is interdiction nullified, warps cloaked, can fire torps to 50km, has an ECM bonus, and a good buffer tank. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket Swamp Bucket Empire
147
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 18:55:00 -
[47] - Quote
i would have thought T3 smalls would have been a natural (and inevitable) progression, but i doubt we will see them anytime soon and nagging for them will just get u shouted down in every thread u make.
u may not care about balance or the specifics of the ships capabilities but a lot of ppl do. when the time comes to start thinking about T3's they'll likely be the most scrutinised changes/additions of all the ships in Eve.
this is the what ppl are trying to get across to u. ur jumping the gun simply because u want a ship, but neglecting to address what impact that ship may have on the rest of the sandbox.
Quote:i try not to share my thoughts with people, who possess toxic levels of auto-pessemism.
that mindset mostly just ruins what potential "is" available in the world. and destroys reasonable accomplishments, before they even have a chance to begin.
not that i am condemning you. but it would be gainful, if you stopped poisoning yourselves.
wtf? did u basically just say 'i'm not wrong, the world is wrong'? it could be argued more 'ruin' has come from ppl who rush into ideas without thinking them through.
1. fine, but it needs to be balanced 2. fine, but it needs to be balanced, and current T3's are beyond a testing stage 3. ships are balanced against ships that do the same or similar jobs. so T3 cruisers would need to be balanced against the cruisers and command cruisers they perform against, as well as up scaling against future T3's. it makes much more sense (to me) to balance them against existing ships first and then create the new ships. that way we wont be balancing things twice or even three times. 4. Tech 3 ships are supposed to be the most versatile/customizable. to make them the best at every job all at once just makes an overpowered all in one i-win ship. this is what i would say needs to change. 5. What would tech 3 modules even be like? and what would tech 4 even be? are ppl talking about just making more and more powerful equipment? i dnt think that is the intention of CCP, and why would they ever release jove ships of any value? 6. fine, but it needs to be balanced 7. i dnt even... |
Griffin Omanid
Knights of the Zodiac
18
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 21:12:00 -
[48] - Quote
The main problem with T3 cruisers is in my opinion that they are hard to balance. First they have the size of cruisers so they should bes strictly balanced araound cruisers without exception. But on the other hand they are nearly as expensive as a T2 BS and one loose SP if you loose a ship, those make most players think they are something really good and highly valuable.
I think that their high value should only be in the option that you can do many task with one ship, f.e. remote rep, scout, cov op and assault ship, without switching the ship. At the moment I personally think that the HAC-¦s are a bit to weak in comparison to a t3 cruiser in raw attack options. I hope that now after the nice buff of the Caracal the Cerberus will become a much stronger assault ship then the Tengu. But I predict that then again some T3-lover will be whining around that their ships are to weak...
In one point you are right, I think T3 Frigs are a bad idea at the moment cause i doubt they will be balanced well around the T2 frigs. Proposal T2 BS Class Juggernaut |
Ines Tegator
Towels R Us
191
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 21:46:00 -
[49] - Quote
CCP is officially against this, although I can't find the statement atm. Between t3 already being out of balance, and frigates not being a suitable hull class for an expensive-toy type of thing, they think it's a bad idea.
Personally I think there's room for them, but t3 frigs have to be kept out of PVP at all costs. How to do that I don't know. An all-in-one exploration platform that's easier to get into the strat cruisers is great place for these, and various other forms of PVE. Running l3s, or ninja ratting in nullsec would be good roles for a ship like this. 50-75m for the hull and 10m per sub, with 3 subs I think is a good price point to go for. It'd be a cool shiny toy. However, as long as there's any chance of them entering PVP and obsoleting the many, excellent existing hulls that we've all put so much work into getting rebalanced, I don't want t3 frigs. |
Octoven
Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming
32
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 04:11:00 -
[50] - Quote
Tarvos Telesto wrote:Sorry but nope.
T3 cruisers was a mistake, they cool, but they kill roles and usage of other ships, since t3 cruisers relase, here less recons-heavy assault ships usage on pvp and battleships - commands on pve, believe me or not people stop using normal and tech 2 frigates if CCP relase all in one tech 3 lillte ships.
Im not against good ideas but i sceptic about this.
Form other perspective ok lets do it... balance is a lie.
By your own logic, people also stopped using T1 ships as much since the release of the T2 variants. Ultimately the thing that keeps people from using T3 over T2 is cost. Not only are you losing SP when you get blown up, but due to the fitting requirements of most T3s, you lose a ton more ISK from a T3 loss than a T2 crusier loss.
I think T3 ships should be available for any class of vessel. T1s are cheap and more renewable and thus if you don't want to shell out the money you can use them. T2 is for a more specialized role and shells out a bit more money. T3 is slowly moving from the specialized strategic role to a more versilte and generalized role.
With T3s you can change the fitting and subsystem to fit any purpose which does offer a specific purpose, but also it is the ability to change said subsystems to fill almost any role that makes them for more generalized usage. |
|
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket Swamp Bucket Empire
476
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 11:24:00 -
[51] - Quote
i like the idea of a multi purpose ship. but i dnt think they need assault ship resists, dual damage bonuses, ridiculous grid and cpu and other extreme characteristics.
i'd like to think thats where ccp are heading after seeing what future command ships vs T3's w/ command subs looks like |
Nur AlHuda
Callide Vulpis Curatores Veritatis Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 17:25:00 -
[52] - Quote
Eve need bigger isk sinks so definitely yes as the economy doesnt work anyway. Making T3 frigs aviable to all would provide people with opportunity to spend more isk. And yes people should loose levels. |
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket Swamp Bucket Empire
476
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 01:50:00 -
[53] - Quote
ships arent isk sinks...if anything, losing them is an isk source thanks to insurance. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
824
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 04:43:00 -
[54] - Quote
No we don't. |
To mare
Advanced Technology
152
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 09:18:00 -
[55] - Quote
whix wrote: 4: tech 3 ships are supposed to have overall more power, than tech 2 ships. but nobody said "how much" more power they have to possess.
tech 3 ships do not have to be so much more powerful, that people associate them, with eve onlines equivalent of munchkin-ism
it would be bad for people to permanantly disagree with each other, over this concept, when the tech 3 ships that are currently released, are just a beta of tech 3 ships in general.
nobody said that all future tech 3 ships have to be, like current tech 3 cruisers are now.
tech3 ship are not supposed to be more powerful, they are supposed to be more flexible. tech2 are supposed to be the top on their small niche, CCP already said they gonna fix this somehow they also said they dont like the idea of T3 frigs |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |