ITT we pretend T3 doesn't cost 5x as much as a HAC and doesnt cost you 5 days of training if it pops.

Why does it matter? If you can fly a T3, you can fly a HAC.

Eerm no, check the requirements next time you log in? The Proteus requires neither Weapon Upgrades V nor Energy Grid Upgrades V, for example.

As for the OP: Tom Gerard may usually be a shiptoasting loon, but this is a topic very dear to me and he has my complete support. The idea of "flexibility" in a ship is ludicrous; for the cost of a T3 you can buy a fleet of every T2 cruiser. Nor does a T2 require the skill investment to reach the same level of performance. The subsystems we swap out with have to remain in a station anyway and we cannot remove rigs. The only feasible role of a T3, therefore, is to be top of the food chain for that cost. They're fine as they are, besides usurping command ships.

Well I'll be happy to see the change. PvP will be much better when there are 12 great combat cruisers to choose from instead of just one.


So train them? To be honest Energy Grid Upgrades V is a weird requirement to have for HACs. I thought the whole point of changing skill requirements was so that players wouldn't have to train irrelevant skills to fly the ships they want.

http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/8742/1/Shiptech_1920.jpg

This chart seems to have a huge error on it. If you look at it, from a certain perspective it looks like Tech 2 ships will deal more damage than Tech 3 ships, which is ludicrous and is clearly a misrepresentation.

In a game of role-based combat, having a ship that can fill multiple roles is a huge boon. Right now, T3s are OP. If they brought them back in line to, say, be able to fill two roles at once, and did just as well as some dedicated ships, and then brought their cost a bit more in line, it'd give an advantage to T3, promote customization and varying fits, and prevent it from being over-the-top any longer.

T3s are balanced by the fact that they cost an arm and a leg in both ISK and skillpoints

areas vulnerable as their T2 counterparts if not more.

Cost is irrelevant to balance.

Which areas?

The laser-Legion is totally outclassed by the Zealot

T3s today are only used as gunboats because that is the only thing they do well. If they had the pricetag they currently had and couldn't beat T2s, I doubt you'd see them used as anything more than cloaky haulers that ignore bubbles in nullsec.

Is it not? Feel free to go out into lowsec in your supposedly OP T3. You should easily be able to kill everything right? Risk-free PVP, totally.

Proteus moves slow like walrus. Loki cannot tank. Tengu has the sig radius of god. Legion is just legion.

Not at all.

T3s are yet to be rebalanced. I doubt CCP are going to let them become useless.

What does that have to do with ship balance?

So they're not universally immortal, that doesn't mean they're balanced.

Go on out and find me a legion fit with lasers that is as pragmatic and powerful as the Zealot or ONI.

It costs at least 6x as much as a T2 ship. It costs skillpoints. It should be better than T2.

I just spent 5 minutes in EFT and came up with a fit that outperforms Zealot in every way. I'm not sure what you're doing wrong.

the point is they're not nearly as expendable as T2, thus they're not nearly as commonplace in combat

When you say "balanced", do you mean "dies to my ships because I can't afford it"?

It's a T3. It costs at least 6x as much as a T2 ship. It costs skillpoints. It should be better than T2.

Oh and FYI cost plays a factor in balance. Just look at the Hurricane/Fleet Hurricane.

Oh and FYI cost plays a factor in balance. Just look at the Hurricane/Fleet Hurricane.