Where did CCP point out they were nerfing T3s? There hasn't been anything released about it. How did this become a threadnaught with no information and a whiny OP?

FC: T3s switch to gang mode
inset transformer sound here...

OMG you have to do it now CCP.

Dear god...a T3 Voltron? O_O

So it would transform into Megatron.

Did we establish that cost is not a balance?

I' fairly sure you can find some dev post after battleships balance saying something about increasing build COST to match and reflect their new performances.


But yep...lets keep this going on, makes something interesting to debate on GD for once.

So speaking of nerf at this point is just plain premature. When we get to them we'll discuss the changes through the proper channels, like the CSM and the Features & Ideas Discussion sub-forum section, so you'll have plenty of time to see them coming and voice your concerns.

No, no, actually that's not true. We have a "trolling" contest going on between CCP Fozzie, Rise, Tallest and myself to see who can create the biggest rage threadnought on the forums, while we keep scores on a whiteboard.

The TL;DR version. Currently T3 is not anywhere near the position what that picture implies. So either there will be massive boosts to all cruisers or alterations and nerfs to some T3 abilities/combinations. It'll propably be a bit of both, but there is no way T3's can retain all the advantages they currently have.

Dear god...a T3 Voltron? O_O

Fear us for we are legion....

Wait, what's this about Legions being under-powered? They have approximately half the neut capability of a Bhaalgorn in a much smaller / cheaper hull that's easier to keep repaired, or can be setup to do very nice DPS with HAMs. They don't get the same DPS figures as the Proteus of course, but their range is actually respectable.

Tengus are great in PvE (either self-rep or RR gangs), but I'd hardly call them over-powered in PvP based upon my experiences; you can't fit DPS, significant ewar and a solid buffer / resist tank all at once like you can with the armor-tanked ones.

The T1 hauler thread was a suprise high scorer, btw

My missile thread from Retribution still has a commanding lead.

...
Oh well, hope that helps a bit.

Making the cost of a ship appropriate to its performance doesn't mean ships are balanced around their cost.

The T1 hauler thread was a suprise high scorer, btw

For many applications they are literally the only choice that results in an ISK to Risk ratio that is acceptable and still achieves the required level of performance. That seems like the thing that has to change

Making the cost of a ship appropriate to its performance doesn't mean ships are balanced around their cost.

My missile thread from Retribution still has a commanding lead.

And up is not up since it is really down? Or left is not left but really right? Your comment doesn't make any sense.

If the ships are less useful than their cost implies, people won't buy them. When people don't buy them, they don't get made. When ships don't get made, minerals don't get used. When minerals don't get used, they pile up. When minerals pile up, prices start to drop as people compete to try to offload. This would be far more prevalent in T3s than any other ship type as well, because T3s are the only ships that require the most expensive things used to build them.

You forgot that there is the optiont hat people simply farm less wormholes and the price doe snto balance itself. IN eve peopel are not stuck for their lives in a single specialization as most peopel feel they are in real life. In eve, if your current work is notpaying enough.. you change it.. in 10 minutes.