NO. You should not have to carry all the stuff you might need in your hold. That's my entire point. The loss of the ship goes up because of it. Fit in space is not a good idea. The people who want this are the solo PVE peeps. It is and shall remain a terrible idea and you should feel terrible.

NO. You should not have to carry all the stuff you might need in your hold. That's my entire point. The loss of the ship goes up because of it. Fit in space is not a good idea. The people who want this are the solo PVE peeps. It is and shall remain a terrible idea and you should feel terrible.

That's my whole frigging point!!! It is overpriced and to boot I have to carry more expensive loot in it to even give it a chance to be worth flying. Guess what that does? Makes my overpriced, under-performing ship even more expensive when I lose it. That's great trade off to me!!!

And when T3s are given there nerf to where they are supposed to be then what? You have an overpriced novelity ship than will be outperformed by T2 (as they should be) and more expensive than a pirate faction ship but with the role quality of a navy ship.
Without a gimmic of there own they will collect dust like many ships have in the past.

nd when T3s are given there nerf to where they are supposed to be then what? You have an overpriced novelity ship than will be outperformed by T2 (as they should be) and more expensive than a pirate faction ship but with the role quality of a navy ship.
Without a gimmic of there own they will collect dust like many ships have in the past.

I think you're not factoring in the re-balance will also affect price .. i can't imagine they will expect you to pay 500 mil for T3 cruiser when it will only perform at 80% of a T2 cruiser... so maybe 80% of the price so 120mil ish...

Greater risk greater reward, if you bring the stuff to refit to do higher complexes you risk losing more but your potential for greater reward is higher, if they could be allowed to refit and re sub in space.

As it stands now they will be put in the area I stated before but without the ability to refit.

They won't perform 80% of one ship they perform 80% of 4 ships.
So 120mill 4 ships = 480mill * 80% = 384mill

They won't perform 80% of one ship they perform 80% of 4 ships.
So 120mill 4 ships = 480mill * 80% = 384mill

i think it will be close to 90% that is not bad and they can fullfill more then 4 roles

90% is way too high and no way it could do more than 4 roles properly

not at once but they are highly adaptive so much options that is a big advantage they can be

black ops fleets
they can do EWAR
recon
ahac
commandship
covert ops

So T3 ships are flexible? I thought T3 ships were supposed to be flexible but they aren't currently? You mean one hull can be fit out several different, viable ways? Well now I am confused... all the 'nerf T3' ships comments because the big draw of T3 ships is supposed to be they are flexible. Either they are flexible or they aren't. Which is it? ;)

I think you're not factoring in the re-balance will also affect price .. i can't imagine they will expect you to pay 500 mil for T3 cruiser when it will only perform at 80% of a T2 cruiser... so maybe 80% of the price so 120mil ish...

Versatility, not simply in changing out subsystems, but in battlefield roles.

I believe that is what CCP intends to do.

no you have a ship that performs a lot of tasks good just no i win button so a specialized ship does the job little bit better so its still usefull! the prices will drop a bit and its fixed. you act like a ship that can fullfill a ton of diffrent roles almost as good as the specialized ship isnt good

Versatility doesn't make a ship good.

If another ship will do it better, than why the heck would anyone put money down on the lesser ship?

"Hmm, I can purchase a 200+ million isk slightly beefed up Vexor... or a 120 mil Ishtar."

Not to mention the horrifically devaluing that would do to wormhole space. Because there's no point in keeping them around if a cheaper cruiser will do their jobs better, so price goes down from 500 mil to 150-180 mil. Suddenly, C3s are less valueble than nullsec space. Sounds like a swell idea.



Right now, the whole shtick of the T3 is Battleship like power cruiser for a lot of isk and skill training loss on death.

Nerfing them, they would be decent at a lot of things, but other ships do it better, so buy something else.

Along with the links and HAC rebalancing, not much needs to be done.

+ small range bonus to all RR subsystems
- one rig slot from all T3s

Proteus-specific, others may have similar minor issues:

+ 25m3 drone bay and 25mbit/s bandwidth to Dissonic Encoding Platform (it's a Gallente ship ffs)
+ 50m3 drone more to Proteus Drone Synthesis Projector
+ Proteus Dissolution Sequencer graphics swapped with CPU Efficiency Gate graphics

Well you could just go nuts and universally nerf all T3's by removing their ability to fit normal T1 and T2 rigs, and create a set of Sleeper Rigs that are fittable on T3's. They can be balanced between the T1 and T2 rigs, but can be restricted to just 1 style (meaning no T1 and T2 sleeper rig). They would be removable unlike Normal Rigs. The reason for the removal ability of the T3 rigs would be that T3's are modular, the subsystems can be swapped out for different (sometimes Dramatically different) setups, the rigs should be able to follow suit.

The title of the thread asks what I want from the T3 rebalance. I'll reply to that, since my thoughts on the matter aren't specific enough for OP's post.

I want the Legion to not suck compared to the other T3s.

I want the T2-fitted Loki to not have the tank of a T1 cruiser.

I want the Tengu to stop being a ridiculous, ubiquitous, overpowered beast that makes all T3s look ridiculous and overpowered even though every single other T3 pales in comparison to it.

I want the cloaking subsystem on the Proteus to not be strange and beyond bizzarre, resulting in truly hideous ships that I cannot even force myself to consider flying, let alone actually fly. Don't even start with me on aesthetics being important or not, your ship is right there in the middle of your screen all the time and some of us don't fly in full zoom-out mode. There are some things I'd like to be able to cloak and have drones for.

I suppose the Proteus being able to reach EHP levels on par with an unfitted carrier might be a bit wildly, ridiculously and completely out of line as well.

If so then you would have to lower the damage the guns do. I fly Proteus on 2 different characters but it would OP with the drone changes by themselves.

I think, in the HAC vs HAC configured T3 it might be interesting to separate the application of both a little bit.

If T3s were to loose quite a bit of resistances but gained raw armor hp, whereas HACs should gain more resistances and less raw armor hp.
In that way, you can still have a massive buffer on the T3, but it scales worse with logis so in large fleet battles with lots of logi, you would want a HAC with better resistances but a little less buffer, whereas for smaller gang stuff with less/no logi, the bigger buffer might be still preferable.
It would also fit lorewise, that T2 cruisers that are produced with 0.0 moon materials are supposed to scale well into large fleets whereas the wormhole produced T3s are better at small and medium gang engagements.

Obviously this would also require a buff to (addition of) an active tank bonus so you can still use T3s for PVE the same as before.

well, they can be caught if the pilot is an idiot or at bad luck but too hard still. want it to be nerfed.