EVE Search - Why is the LEGION getting nerfed? (SMARTER T3 rebalances please)

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Why is the LEGION getting nerfed? (SMARTER T3 rebalances please)

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 741	Posted - 2013.06.25 07:21:00 - [1] - Quote What is the problem here. Are there entities out there that use T3s for PVP and consistently dominate everyone else? 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 741	Posted - 2013.06.25 08:51:00 - [2] - Quote What do you mean by "versatility". Give it an average tank, average dps and average ewar ability? Why would anyone fly an average ship that costs a lot of isk and sp if you lose one? A blanket nerf would be a huge mistake for CCP. T2 ships are the problem. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 741	Posted - 2013.06.25 10:14:00 - [3] - Quote http://themittani.com/features/csm-8-first-town-hall 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 741	Posted - 2013.06.25 14:49:00 - [4] - Quote Xolve wrote: Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote: ...large entities like Goonswarm PL or [enter whoever] would take out 8000 T3's with 2000 Logis and from north to south kick everyone to high sec . T3's are pretty strong for what they are currently capable of doing, I wouldn't say they are the be-all-end-all for doctrine ships, but they are pretty damn good at killing much larger battleship fleets. . Is that a problem though? Are PL fielding T3 fleet comps that are unbeatable? If not then how can they be OP? I think the only people who say this are the ones that try and take on a proteus in their drake without understanding what the ship is capable of. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 741	Posted - 2013.06.26 13:57:00 - [5] - Quote De'Veldrin wrote: Acacia Eden wrote: T3 are also expensive. I'll say it again, since people seem to have missed it the first (dozen) time(s). Production costs of ships are not fixed, and thus cost is not a balancing factor. You can say it until you are blue in the face but you will still be wrong. If T3 hulls were cheaper than T1 & T2, they would be OP. The high price creates a barrier to entry and a much bigger investment risk when flying them. So price is a balancing factor, otherwise people would be flying nothing but T3's and super caps. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 741	Posted - 2013.06.26 14:01:00 - [6] - Quote Malcanis wrote: It's interesting to note that CCP thought that T3s would be slightly cheaper than HACs. That is interesting as it suggests that CCPs plan was to make HACs completely obsolete. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 742	Posted - 2013.06.26 14:37:00 - [7] - Quote Riot Girl wrote: I couldn't make any sense out of what he was saying with that one. It's pretty simple. If money was no object and every one could afford to throw their T3 into a fight with reckless abandon, then T3s could render almost every other ship in the game obsolete but this is not the case. Price is a balancing factor because CCP can change the drop rate of sleeper salvage to increase or decrease the price of the hull, which directly affects a players decision to fly one or not. That it a form of balance. If price is not an issue, why don't people consider the vindicator OP in comparison to the megathron? It is accepted that the Vindi performs better because of the higher price and skill requirement. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 742	Posted - 2013.06.26 14:51:00 - [8] - Quote Do you have trouble reading? I explained my point clearly, if you have a counterpoint, please, fire away. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 742	Posted - 2013.06.26 14:54:00 - [9] - Quote Riot Girl wrote: Xolve wrote: While the Legion and Loki can boast pretty good Armor Tanks, in doing so, they each perform sub-500 dps. I don't know about Loki, but my Legion has 112k EHP and exceeds 600 DPS with both lasers and missiles. The new navy BC's can get around 700 dps with an 80k - 90k tank and probably cost half the price of your legion... Which ship is OP here? 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 742	Posted - 2013.06.26 14:59:00 - [10] - Quote Oh i see you are on of those moronic trolls people talk about. Since you have nothing valuable to contribute i won't waste my time any further. Blocked. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 743	Posted - 2013.06.26 21:25:00 - [11] - Quote Grimpak wrote: it's quite more easy to get a T1 blueprint that won't run out and you can improve upon, than a limited run blueprint that you need to use time (in form of LP). thus, the availability of the item is the balance factor here. cost is the consequence, mostly because of a combination of availability and market supply/demand rules. I think price is a balance factor but help me understand your logic here... If you could get a navy cruiser BPO for the same cost as a T1 BPO, would people still fly the T1 hulls and how do you create "balance" with such a system? 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 745	Posted - 2013.06.27 09:34:00 - [12] - Quote Recons are already better at their job than T3 but they could do with a slightly better tank. Many of the T1 ships have an advantage over their T2 variations. I don't think you naysayers really know what you're talking about do you.. At the end of the day, a lot of it is situational and down to player skill as a pilgrim can kill Proteus quite easily. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 745	Posted - 2013.06.27 10:15:00 - [13] - Quote baltec1 wrote: At the end of the day, T3s are getting three times the tank of that pilgrim and the same firepower but with the added benefit of ignoring bubbles when they warp cloaked and being able to probe down their targets. Why shouldn't T3's have a better tank than a pilgrim or a HAC for that matter? As i said, you clearly don't know what you are talking about. I don't know what kind of noobs are flying around null sec these days but only retards would fit a ship like that and if they did, the performance of that ship would be absolutely terrible. I seems that all you care about is being able to catch someone on a gate camp. CCP can get rid of the interdiction nulli for all i care as only clowns use it anyway. I just hope they listen to the people who have experience in flying and killing T3's instead of people whose idea of PVP is bubbleing a gate to **** and then insta blabbing anything that passes through. Edit: That sounds very hostile reading it over but i mean no great offence. I guess it's such an important issue for me because i live in a part of space (wormholes) where T3s are practically the only ship used and they are perfectly fine there. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 745	Posted - 2013.06.27 10:52:00 - [14] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Rek Seven wrote: Why shouldn't T3's have a better tank than a pilgrim or a HAC for that matter? When said tank is the same or bigger than a black ops battleship or megathrons there is everything wrong with it. These are cruisers not battleships, their tank should be in line with cruisers. Answer the question. You are just just stuck on a name. If T3 weren't classed as cruisers, you'd have no point to make. BCs can achieve a BS tank and dps but i don't see you crying about that. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 745	Posted - 2013.06.27 11:06:00 - [15] - Quote They are. Price is a factor of balance Balancing ships in the way you are suggesting results in every entity being forced to field massive numbers and rely on blob warfare to compete. But whatever dude. We have our own opinion and it doesn't look like either of us is going to convince the other... I just hope CCP don't **** it up. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 747	Posted - 2013.06.27 11:24:00 - [16] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Given the results so far its a safe bet CCP will not mess this up but you and other like you who don't want to lose their FOTM (speak English) ships are going to be very upset. Yeah probably to the point where i quit but so what, it's been a long time coming. You continue to talk as if you know everything but the fact is, CCP have not changed T2 ships yet so your arguments hold no weight. Come back after the HAC and Command ships have been buffed and we'll see if people still think T3's are op in the dps and tank role. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP?
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 750	Posted - 2013.07.01 10:43:00 - [17] - Quote I just hope CCP don't screw up wormhole space when they change T3s. T3s are the bread an butter of wormhole pvp and we can't use fleets of BSs because of mass limits and we need high tanks to engage hostile fleets with cap support or when we fight in a sleeper site. If the problem with T3s is to do with their use in K-space, then perhaps CCP could make it so T3s only perform as well as the do now, in wormhole space... but that may be unfair idk CCP IGÇÖm board! Please add/change some wormhole content to make things interesting.-á
Rek Seven DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized. 750	Posted - 2013.07.01 14:10:00 - [18] - Quote Robert Harrison wrote: Two step wrote: Now if you were talking about allowing T3s to switch configurations in the middle of a fight, that could be compelling... Confirming that I just pictured my Legion transforming, mid fight, into Optimus Prime. FC: T3s switch to gang mode inset transformer sound here... OMG you have to do it now CCP. CCP IGÇÖm board! Please add/change some wormhole content to make things interesting.-á

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.