| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lloyd Roses
Risk-Averse
PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
57
   |
Posted - 2013.04.30 09:37:00 -
[1] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:[...]st long range webber, you take the T2 rapier, because it does long range webs far better than anything else.
now, if you need it to also survive under heavy dps? well, you sacrifice 37.5% of your web range (which is a metric sh*t ton in eve terms) and gain the tank of a loki for a more generalized role.
this is a perfect case of working as intended by what youre saying.
This is how it works. Investing another half-bill in an actual tank and some dps while sacrificing sensor strength, lockrange and a good chunk of webrange sounds fair to me atleast.
A bit unhappy that rr-t3s and lokis will be a tad inferior after those resistance changes, since no other ship to my knowledge really depends on the +5% resist sub. Already was the squishiest armor-t3 to start with, but whaever, just a tiny change afterall.
T3s really don't need nerfs, they need fixes. Rebalancing of the T1 and T2 ships alltogether is exactly the 'nerf' they need, what's left are the underperforming subsystems. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
93
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 08:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Don't use faction and dead space mods for the purpose of balancing ships.
That nails it pretty much. Can get a 100k EHP Cane I assume, given you'd fit the same mods on it you'd fit on a loki. (getting 94k EHP using meta 8 membranes and t2 rigs, INCLUDING FLEETED Boni [not links]) Resists are far crappier, but ye.
And for the price of most anom-running T3-setups, you could also just get a rattlesnkae or nightmare. Seems to be the same pricerange. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
104
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 21:20:00 -
[3] - Quote
SMT008 wrote:How to fix T3s :
(lots of good stuff)
- WH balancing special change : Find a way to cut Battleship mass by 50/60/70% while changing other values so that their ingame behavior doesn't change. Or add a hidden bonus like -50/-60/-70% mass when jumping in wormholes.
T3s are overused in wormholes because of their mass. No other sub-BS platform can compete with them, and rightly so. If you allow battleships to be used effectively in wormholes, you'll make Battleship-based doctrines possible. Yes, that's a big change, and that WILL yield great results for WHs as a whole.
I'm sure that battleships' overuse in wormholes won't ever be a problem. T3s are still superior to battleships in every way. But at least it will bring some diversity.
[...]
A thousand times this! |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
105
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 22:05:00 -
[4] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Okay. Which cruisers can beat a Tengu in either tank or DPS?
Can't follow that either. Either the tengu has more dps or more tank than any comparable cruiser. (should be using missiles)
On a sidenote, if that tengu were to have more tank, it surely still had more dps. And more mobility. And better sensors and lockrange. And way better caplife. It also had a similiar sig and can overheat longer.
Comparing it to any similiar working t1/t2/faction/pirate cruiser that shoots missiles. Navy osprey aside.
Edit: Ohohohohoh! HAM-Legion! Potentially more damage due to selectable HAM damage. And most likely comparable tank! |
| |
|