Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Rek Seven
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized.
736
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 11:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
The last bit of consequence was the T3 rebalance. Citing a post CCP made about looking into a nerf, someone asked the CSM what they thought. Ripard and Chitsa agreed that cloaky T3s are overpowered in their present configuration, and Chitsa added that boosting T3s are unbalanced as well. I said I'd like it if they scaled worse, so they were a good small gang option but HAMgus were less attractive. James said that he thought the T2 cruiser balancing should come before any serious T3 rebalance, as the big issue for k-space is how the two ship classes interact. Chitsa lamented the potential effect on W-space income if T3 demand was nerfed, and mynnna suggested that the T3s would fit better in the utility role they were advertised for. We could have gone on for longer (and the conversation continued after), but the time demanded we move on. Link: http://themittani.com/features/csm-8-first-town-hall
Can someone explain to me why our representatives think cloaky T3's are OP?
Also, i see very little activity from Chitsa and James on these forums. Does anyone know if either of these two have a list somewhere, of features/changes that they are trying to get CCP to implement? 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP? |
stup idity
21
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 12:10:00 -
[2] - Quote
I think it's because they simple have no equal in what they can do.
You get a heavy tackler with 400 - 500 dps or nullified scan ship (which still can have some dps) with a very heavy tank. High resists and the ability for most of them to fit into armor fleet doctrines let them stay on field when the battle escalates - something that is much harder to do with Arazus or Rapiers.
I think the whole "t3 is op" discussion has to do with the immense tanks they can fit that overshine those of most other sub-caps (and of course the obvious boosting capabilities, but I guess nobody is questioning that). Much too blame is the ability to fit dual 1600mm plates on some fittings and the high hitpoint gain with the defensive buffer subs. Fix those things and bring tech2 cruisers up a little and all will be good - hopefully.
I reign supreme. |
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
90
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 12:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
cloaky T3s might be OP because they can be cloaky and have both higher dps and tank than a HAC...
Hopefully T3s will get rebalanced only after HACs and CSs are done. Until then it seems pointless and silly to me. W-Space Realtor |
Rek Seven
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized.
736
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 12:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
I see what you are saying but i don't buy that argument. Yeah it's a good heavy tackler but without the support of a fleet a cloaky T3 can't do much. Two drakes could probably kill a solo cloaky Proteus in under 2 mins. 3 years 6 expansions: incursions, the venture, 3 BCGÇÖs and 3 destroyers... Is this all you are capable of CCP? |
Talon Reese
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
5
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 13:19:00 -
[5] - Quote
Also, a T3 costs 3-5 times what a HAC costs, and you risk some skill loss. It ought to be at least a bit better than a HAC. But I agree that the t2 changes should be made 1st, it wouldn't make sense to try and balance the t3's without knowing what the t2 changes will be. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
276
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 13:33:00 -
[6] - Quote
Bit confused about the desire to nerf cloaky t3s thats gonna hit some of the more pro-active wormholers who like to hunt solo or in very small numbers when the rest of the corp isn't active, etc.
Also think any changes to T3s other than bugfixes is a bit silly when T2s are still in need of considerably attention and T3s mostly work. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1460
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:08:00 -
[7] - Quote
First off I have to say I am extremely disappointed with our WH CSM members on this topic. There is already lots of public outcry over the "OP T3" situation and that they have to be nerfed into the ground. Some may be justified, much of it is not. Part of this problem is that many who are screaming nerf often do not even fly T3's. And many who do seem to understand that for HAC's as an example, the bigger issue is the T2 HAC's and not just the T3's
By having our CSM members basically agreeing publicly on this subject so early on, it lends more weight than it should to the nerf idea. It's one thing to have the uneducated masses crying out, but another when our "elected officials" agreeing with them.
At the very least I think the appropriate answer should be "yes there are balance issues, but we should all hold judgement until the T2 balance pass and go from there"
As to the actual issue, it is a tough call. As a cloaky HAC, the T3 has nothing to compare it to, as there is no T2 HAC variant.
As to the cloaky T3 "recon" vs T2 recons, I honestly haven't played around to feel comfortable comparing. I will say as an example at all 5, a cloaky tengu "falcon" gets a longer jam range, but the jam strength is half that of a falcon. So while there may be an imbalance, I'm sure in time those can be adjusted appropriately. |
Jack Miton
Aperture Harmonics K162
2032
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:11:00 -
[8] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Can someone explain to me why our representatives think cloaky T3's are OP? cos zomg, T3s cant be better than T2!!!! in all seriousness though, the probe bonus on a T3 should be less than on a covops.
To the CSM, I highly urge you to take an exaggerated 'do not nerf' stance because CCP are very clearly taking an exaggerated 'T3s are LOL op stance'.
basically, T3s are not op, T2s are just junk atm. compare t2 to any and all other shipe, including t1, and they are severely under performing as they are. when the whole class needs a buff, it's not hard to see the T3s are op by comparison. T3s need balancing among themselves, T2s need a buff. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
276
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:16:00 -
[9] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote: As to the cloaky T3 "recon" vs T2 recons, I honestly haven't played around to feel comfortable comparing. I will say as an example at all 5, a cloaky tengu "falcon" gets a longer jam range, but the jam strength is half that of a falcon. So while there may be an imbalance, I'm sure in time those can be adjusted appropriately.
You can't even make a proper T3 version of the falcon as the jam strength sub-system is the same slot as the cloaky one.
The prot doesn't have as long point range bonus as an arazu and neither does the loki get the web range of a rapier, can't remember the legion v pilgrim off the top of my head.
Unless the price of the ships drops hugely (and I don't think thats a good thing at all) then any significant nerf to their survivability will reduce their useage a lot also which isn't a good thing either. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1460
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:19:00 -
[10] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote: As to the cloaky T3 "recon" vs T2 recons, I honestly haven't played around to feel comfortable comparing. I will say as an example at all 5, a cloaky tengu "falcon" gets a longer jam range, but the jam strength is half that of a falcon. So while there may be an imbalance, I'm sure in time those can be adjusted appropriately.
You can't even make a proper T3 version of the falcon as the jam strength sub-system is the same slot as the cloaky one. The prot doesn't have as long point range bonus as an arazu and neither does the loki get the web range of a rapier, can't remember the legion v pilgrim off the top of my head. Unless the price of the ships drops hugely (and I don't think thats a good thing at all) then any significant nerf to their survivability will reduce their useage a lot also which isn't a good thing either.
Legion can have a much bigger tank, but cannot field any drones, so while it can neut well it cannot apply any DPS. |
|
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
91
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:26:00 -
[11] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:First off I have to say I am extremely disappointed with our WH CSM members on this topic... ...At the very least I think the appropriate answer should be "yes there are balance issues, but we should all hold judgement until the T2 balance pass and go from there" "James said that he thought the T2 cruiser balancing should come before any serious T3 rebalance"
Have you unplugged your Reading hardwiring or what just happened there? W-Space Realtor |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1460
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:29:00 -
[12] - Quote
Axloth Okiah wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:First off I have to say I am extremely disappointed with our WH CSM members on this topic... ...At the very least I think the appropriate answer should be "yes there are balance issues, but we should all hold judgement until the T2 balance pass and go from there" "James said that he thought the T2 cruiser balancing should come before any serious T3 rebalance" Have you unplugged your Reading hardwiring or what just happened there?
Quote:Chitsa agreed that cloaky T3s are overpowered in their present configuration,
So sorry. I forgot the word "some". |
stup idity
21
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:29:00 -
[13] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:
Legion can have a much bigger tank, but cannot field any drones, so while it can neut well it cannot apply any DPS.
Of course it can. Neuting-sub is electronic and can be combined with the drone offensive sub or the cloaky one.
I reign supreme. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
276
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:31:00 -
[14] - Quote
stup idity wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:
Legion can have a much bigger tank, but cannot field any drones, so while it can neut well it cannot apply any DPS.
Of course it can. Neuting-sub is electronic and can be combined with the drone offensive sub or the cloaky one.
The comparison was of the cloaky recons so the cloaky sub-system takes the slot of the drone offensive one. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
136
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:32:00 -
[15] - Quote
Axloth Okiah wrote:
Hopefully T3s will get rebalanced only after HACs and CSs are done. Until then it seems pointless and silly to me.
+1 |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1460
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:33:00 -
[16] - Quote
stup idity wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:
Legion can have a much bigger tank, but cannot field any drones, so while it can neut well it cannot apply any DPS.
Of course it can. Neuting-sub is electronic and can be combined with the drone offensive sub or the cloaky one.
OMG REALLY!
Quote:Chitsa agreed that cloaky T3s are overpowered in their present configuration
Rroff wrote:You can't even make a proper T3 version of the falcon as the jam strength sub-system is the same slot as the cloaky one.
The prot doesn't have as long point range bonus as an arazu and neither does the loki get the web range of a rapier, can't remember the legion v pilgrim off the top of my head.
We are talking about cloaky here. Rroff wasn't talking about Legion vs Curse. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
276
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 14:52:00 -
[17] - Quote
From looking at more general posts on the subject of cloaky T3s it seems a lot of the reason people are asking for a wholesale nerf to cloaky T3s is due to small areas of the game where they are overpowered, just that small area of the game makes up a large part of those people's day to day life in Eve. i.e. people who like to camp null entry gates see dozens of cloaky nullified t3s escape them daily and are bitter about it. |
Icarus Able
Pheonix Corp Selectus
28
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 15:36:00 -
[18] - Quote
Only T3 that needs a bit of balancing is the Tengu imo. Its DPS output and its potential to tank seems to outweigh the other T3s. |
chris elliot
EG CORP Mass Overload
191
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 16:46:00 -
[19] - Quote
Seems James is the only one over there with his head not inside his anus, while chitsa has joined ytterbium in a rectal tea party of sorts.
This does not bode well for anything other than complete fail should the tea party grow larger. |
Nathan Jameson
Grumpy Bastards Mass Overload
1365
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 17:19:00 -
[20] - Quote
chris elliot wrote:Seems James is the only one over there with his head not inside his anus, while chitsa has joined ytterbium in a rectal tea party of sorts.
This does not bode well for anything other than complete fail should the tea party grow larger.
Zed! You're back! http://www.wormholes.info |
|
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
150
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 19:29:00 -
[21] - Quote
Icarus Able wrote:Only T3 that needs a bit of balancing is the Tengu imo. Its DPS output and its potential to tank seems to outweigh the other T3s. Not really, no, especially not in cloaky form. A cloaky Proteus will do ~100dps more than a cloaky Tengu. The Tengu also can't fit anywhere near as obscene a buffer tank as the armor T3s can. |
Nix Anteris
Bite Me inc Bitten.
57
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 20:00:00 -
[22] - Quote
The goal with T3 was versatility - the ability to change subsystems depending on the situation encountered.
They were introduced at the same time as wormholes.
CCP never expected people to live in wormholes permanently.
T3s are not versatile for many wormholers because subsystems cannot be changed at a POS.
Before any nerfs can occur (and I agree there should be some), refitting at a POS must be implemented first.
Otherwise they will be sub-par to T2 and not versatile. |
Svodola Darkfury
Heaven's End League of Infamy
197
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 20:21:00 -
[23] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Can someone explain to me why our representatives think cloaky T3's are OP? cos zomg, T3s cant be better than T2!!!! in all seriousness though, the probe bonus on a T3 should be less than on a covops. To the CSM, I highly urge you to take an exaggerated 'do not nerf' stance because CCP are very clearly taking an exaggerated 'T3s are LOL op stance'. basically, T3s are not op, T2s are just junk atm. compare t2 to any and all other shipe, including t1, and they are severely under performing as they are. when the whole class needs a buff, it's not hard to see the T3s are op by comparison. T3s need balancing among themselves, T2s need a buff.
Agreed. I think that to call a cloaky Legion or Tengu "OP" is a hilarious misuderstanding of how wormhole cloaky warfare is actually played. What they're REALLY concerned about is Cloaky Proteus' and Lokis, because they can do 400-575 damage with a 200k+ buffer tank (or a nice shield tank in the Loki's case).
T1: Very powerful right now due to rebalancing T2: Resists are great, but they're out-dated by 6 years. T3: Very strong in several areas that I think is slightly unnecessary.
Reasonable T3 nerfing? Bring the DPS in line on non-cloaky subsystems so that they're a little under par on a command ship of their race (the 700-900 dps range). Maybe consider removing some of the bonus from the pure buffer fits (7.5% instead of a full 10% to armor/shields).
Currently in cloaky warfare T3 so heavily out-weighs recon that not flying a T3 makes you a joke to deal with. Legion and Tengu both suffer from poor bonuses in their Cloaky fits, Legion much more so. Legion can supplement this by being a cloaky neut legion, but really that shouldn't be their only choice.
I don't think any of those changes would be game-breaking to T3s unless T2s turned into monsters again. 7.5% bonus change would net 2.5%x5 (12.5%) change in total armor/shield. While significant, my current Proteus fit has more armor than my triple plated Dominix, which is silly.
And as several others have said, command ships should be 5% boosting, T3s should be 3% boosting.
Svo. CEO of Heaven's End; Seller of Wormholes. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
137
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 20:27:00 -
[24] - Quote
chris elliot wrote:Seems James is the only one over there with his head not inside his anus, while chitsa has joined ytterbium in a rectal tea party of sorts.
This does not bode well for anything other than complete fail should the tea party grow larger.
Ahhh, another person who thinks their fair share is in my wallet. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
117
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 20:37:00 -
[25] - Quote
What Axloth said.
In addition: Would love to see a revamp, pushing them from tanking nightmares that they are right now together with logistics to those jack-of-all-trades and complement of your wormhole-smallscale-fleet. In my opinion, the resistances of a T3 are the smaller problem, but 1-2 LSE / 1-2 1600 plates AND 50% buffer bonus AND CDFEs or trimarks is just nuts. |
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
106
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 22:44:00 -
[26] - Quote
Any sane person surely has to agree that T3s cannot be balanced until T2 ships have been balanced. (oh and ogb...) HACs in particularly are rubbish on the whole.
I'm happy for T3s to be rebalanced between themselves, but they cannot have fundamental changes in relation to lower tech ships until everything else has been balanced from the ground up.
The thing I'd love to see most is some subsystem tweaks, some subs are just absolute no brainers, whilst there are others I cannot fathom a use for. |
chris elliot
EG CORP Mass Overload
191
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 23:01:00 -
[27] - Quote
Nathan Jameson wrote:chris elliot wrote:Seems James is the only one over there with his head not inside his anus, while chitsa has joined ytterbium in a rectal tea party of sorts.
This does not bode well for anything other than complete fail should the tea party grow larger. Zed! You're back!
I'm sure zed would be insulted.
But in all seriousness, asking people how they want to nerf T3's without telling them how HAC's will be redone is beyond asinine and borders on levels of incompetence only seen when examining real life governments.... or when examining the inner workings of ytterbiums head.
Of course the cloaky t3 subsystems are going to be OP you insipid morons. The recon ships that can cloak are terrible for anything other than.... well, actually they are just terrible. They lack slot layouts, CPU, powergrid ect ect.
And of course they are going to dominate the small and large scale metas. Its either shell out tons of isk and hope you do not die or fly a hac. And lets be honest, all of the hacs are so monumentally terrible that the shift to tons and tons of t3's is like wondering why everyone picks the Klondike bar over the sh*t sandwich.
Lets examine shall we,
Loki: Only minmatar ship that can armor tank worth a damn that is not a battleship. Add in a web bonus and of course people are going to fly it out the nose.
Proteus: Well the diemos is absolutely terrible beyond reason. And the ishtar is so bad that even the old navy vexor was better at its job in an armor configuration than it was. Add in how useless and terrible the bonus's on the old and new brutix are and you are only left with the new navy brutix, and the astarte as decent stuff to fly.
Legion: A sacralige that does not suck, a zealot that can actually survive being hit, and a mini bhaalgorn at not bhaalgorn prices. Yes please!
Tengu: Well its either tengu or drake really because the cerberus and eagle might as well be noobships when compared to even the drake... never mind comparing them to the tengu.
Hell, even the new navy cruisers can pop a squat on the current HAC's that's how bad they are.
Now if the CSM was told, hey here is what we are planning to do with HAC's, how do you think we can rework t3's around this so they are both viable options. And chitsa said, yeah that could work but t3's would still be too strong, and James replyed that more flushing out would be needed before he would comment further. Then I would stand and applaud you for taking the time and initiative to do it right.
This whole backasswards way they are going about it and one of our two CSM's falling for it like a sucker is just full on stupid.
|
Quinn Corvez
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized.
9
|
Posted - 2013.06.22 01:05:00 -
[28] - Quote
I hate the word "nerf", especially when we are talking about the class of ship that I have sunk a lot of sp into.
I would be more welcoming of the idea to reinvent the T3 line to give them stronger bonuses in some area and perhaps some new abilities in exchange for less dps, for example. What I will never be okay with is a simple reduction in dps and tank.
The new navey BC are pretty close to T3s in terms of dps and tank and I'd assume that when the command ships are rebalanced, they will be even better. |
Nix Anteris
Bite Me inc Bitten.
58
|
Posted - 2013.06.22 07:26:00 -
[29] - Quote
chris elliot wrote:Loki: Only minmatar ship that can armor tank worth a damn that is not a battleship. Old cane / new navy cane does very well in this department. Rupture also used to do it well, haven't tried since the T1 tweaks.
|
TurboX3
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized.
21
|
Posted - 2013.06.22 08:08:00 -
[30] - Quote
Chitsa & James, maybe speak with your community before you go and purpose T3 nerf's as you shouldn't encourage CCP dev team for any excuse to downgrade us WH-dwellers... They are all 0.0 carebears in the Reykjavik office from my personal experience! ;-) |
|
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
244
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 14:30:00 -
[31] - Quote
Rroff wrote:From looking at more general posts on the subject of cloaky T3s it seems a lot of the reason people are asking for a wholesale nerf to cloaky T3s is due to small areas of the game where they are overpowered, just that small area of the game makes up a large part of those people's day to day life in Eve. i.e. people who like to camp null entry gates see dozens of cloaky nullified t3s escape them daily and are bitter about it. If they can't catch cloaky nullified T3s, they need to set up a better camp. While you can't guarantee a kill, if done right, it can be difficult for even a CovOps (to say nothing for a cloaky T3) to get away.
"Wahh, I'm not good enough to do something. Make it so that I don't have to do that!" "Okay!"
Icarus Able wrote:Only T3 that needs a bit of balancing is the Tengu imo. Its DPS output and its potential to tank seems to outweigh the other T3s. One thing I will agree about a Tengu that needs nerfing is that there is little reason to use any sub other than the Dissolution Sequencer unless you are flying jams. That's basically a free Sensor Strength boost to Tengu pilots.
The Tengu, like the others, is capable of good (not earth-shattering) DPS or admittedly amazing tank, but not both at the same time. With most other ships, you either get tank or you get DPS; Tengu, like other T3s, you can choose your poison. The rest of sub-BS Caldari just sucks so badly that the Tengu seems grossly out of place. Fix that problem, and then re-compare the Tengu.
The cost and drawback difference between the T3 and T2 basically means that T2 is disposable and T3 is not. When this changes, then T3 can be more inline with T2.
TurboX3 wrote:Chitsa & James, maybe speak with your community before you go and purpose T3 nerf's as you shouldn't encourage CCP dev team for any excuse to downgrade us WH-dwellers... They are all 0.0 carebears in the Reykjavik office from my personal experience! ;-) Very true. Nullsec is CCP's baby, and without stiff opposition from CSM and a sizeable portion of the playerbase, CCP will more than happily stomp all over WH, High, and Low to benefit Null.
|
Casirio
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized.
476
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 16:51:00 -
[32] - Quote
Yea our wh csm were elected to help keep us wspace ppl represnted. surpised this is the first discussion brought up in the wh forum about the changes. I would like to see chitsa and james start these discussions themselves and discuss them with tour community.
And to be a broken record for god sakes ******* fix t2 before you nerf t3 to ****. hence why they started with the t1 ships and have moved up. its just fuckin stupid to do this out of order. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1469
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 17:27:00 -
[33] - Quote
Casirio wrote:Yea our wh csm were elected to help keep us wspace ppl represnted. surpised this is the first discussion brought up in the wh forum about the changes. I would like to see chitsa and james start these discussions themselves and discuss them with tour community.
Pushing close to Page 3 and not a peep yet from our elected representatives.
|
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
153
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 17:29:00 -
[34] - Quote
A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.
It's funny reading the different 'nerf T3' threads on the forums. According to posts, every T3 is OP and every T3 is underpowered. I'm really getting the feeling most of the people don't know much about T3 but hate them because they have to go against them.
** THIS JUST IN** You can fly a T3 without a cloak!!! Try it and see how well it works!! |
Elepherious
Dracos Dozen Trifectas Syndicate
12
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 17:34:00 -
[35] - Quote
The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.
Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.
You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.
... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens. |
stup idity
23
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 17:36:00 -
[36] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.
195k ehp with all 5 and passive boost; implants not included.
[Proteus, cov] Proteus Defensive - Augmented Plating Proteus Electronics - Friction Extension Processor Proteus Engineering - Power Core Multiplier Proteus Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration Proteus Propulsion - Wake Limiter
5x Heavy Neutron Blaster II (Void M) Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Warp Scrambler II Warp Disruptor II
1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II 2x Centum C-Type Energized Explosive Membrane Centum C-Type Energized EM Membrane Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I 2x Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
I reign supreme. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
153
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 17:40:00 -
[37] - Quote
Elepherious wrote:The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.
Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.
You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.
... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens.
A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please. |
stup idity
23
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 17:54:00 -
[38] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Elepherious wrote:The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.
Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.
You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.
... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens. A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.
this one has >200k ehp with passive boost, no implants, all 5:
[Loki, covops] Loki Defensive - Adaptive Augmenter Loki Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration Loki Electronics - Immobility Drivers Loki Engineering - Power Core Multiplier Loki Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II 5x Dual 180mm AutoCannon II (Hail M)
2x Stasis Webifier II Faint Warp Disruptor I Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
2x 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II 2x Centum C-Type Energized Explosive Membrane Centum C-Type Energized Kinetic Membrane Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
2x Medium Trimark Armor Pump II Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
I reign supreme. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
153
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 18:17:00 -
[39] - Quote
stup idity wrote:Onomerous wrote:Elepherious wrote:The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.
Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.
You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.
... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens. A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please. this one has >200k ehp with passive boost, no implants, all 5: [Loki, covops] Loki Defensive - Adaptive Augmenter Loki Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration Loki Electronics - Immobility Drivers Loki Engineering - Power Core Multiplier Loki Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst Covert Ops Cloaking Device II 5x Dual 180mm AutoCannon II (Hail M) 2x Stasis Webifier II Faint Warp Disruptor I Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I 2x 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II 2x Centum C-Type Energized Explosive Membrane Centum C-Type Energized Kinetic Membrane Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane 2x Medium Trimark Armor Pump II Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
nice fit... weak on DPS but I guess if this is your scouting guy. Wouldn't fly that as a normal line member though. Very interesting.
If that is your standard fleet fit... well I would say odd for a standard fit. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1215
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 18:42:00 -
[40] - Quote
Nix Anteris wrote:The goal with T3 was versatility - the ability to change subsystems depending on the situation encountered.
They were introduced at the same time as wormholes.
CCP never expected people to live in wormholes permanently.
T3s are not versatile for many wormholers because subsystems cannot be changed at a POS.
Before any nerfs can occur (and I agree there should be some), refitting at a POS must be implemented first.
Otherwise they will be sub-par to T2 and not versatile.
This is complete BS that came out 3 years after w-space was introduced and it's impact on null was being felt. Tell me, how are you going to live a nomadic existence in deep w-space? Look at the assets you have to commit to do so. Carriers, dreads, sub-caps, POS's and multiples of them all with specific fits.
And were you expecting that you would have to spend days probing out a route to w-space or from it with your caravan of freighters carriers and dreads in tow waiting in w-space, lowsec or nullsec tying up half a dozen accounts or moredoing nothing for days? How were you ever expected to get your assets in and out intact with even the slimest of chance when that wh is crit massed in the middle of your exodus?
And how about all the ore/gas sites? Are you expected to haul all this stuff out daily as well at full volume?
CCP "nomadic" doctrine is riddled with so many hole that is doesn't serve to indicate what w-space should have been but what they want it to be.
The nails for w-space are starting to add up. The T3 nerf, to "remove overlap" and to balance them off their "overpowered" pedestal will crash the w-space economy since everything but ore depends upon the T3's current demand to support current price levels. But, CCP also put the nail in the coffin for ore sites in w-space as well when they made them anoms. The T3 nerf is the final nail if they're rebalanced to reflect CCP's current diagrams and dev-blogs.
HTFU!...for the children! |
|
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
244
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 18:54:00 -
[41] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:stup idity wrote:Onomerous wrote:A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please. [fit posted] nice fit... weak on DPS but I guess if this is your scouting guy. Wouldn't fly that as a normal line member though. Very interesting. So, you have to sacrifice DPS/etc to achieve a crazy tank. That sounds like it is working as intended to me.
|
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
153
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 19:05:00 -
[42] - Quote
Meytal wrote:Onomerous wrote:stup idity wrote:Onomerous wrote:A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please. [fit posted] nice fit... weak on DPS but I guess if this is your scouting guy. Wouldn't fly that as a normal line member though. Very interesting. So, you have to sacrifice DPS/etc to achieve a crazy tank. That sounds like it is working as intended to me.
Well, yes. I agree 100%. That's the thing with just about any ship (T3 especially)... you can do lots of things with them but there is a trade-off.
The fit is not something I would fly but I guess it is possible to get >200k tank on a cloaky loki. No offensive intended to anyone but that seems like an EFT warrior fit to me. Just my opinion. |
stup idity
24
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 19:30:00 -
[43] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Meytal wrote:Onomerous wrote:stup idity wrote:Onomerous wrote:A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please. [fit posted] nice fit... weak on DPS but I guess if this is your scouting guy. Wouldn't fly that as a normal line member though. Very interesting. So, you have to sacrifice DPS/etc to achieve a crazy tank. That sounds like it is working as intended to me. Well, yes. I agree 100%. That's the thing with just about any ship (T3 especially)... you can do lots of things with them but there is a trade-off. The fit is not something I would fly but I guess it is possible to get >200k tank on a cloaky loki. No offensive intended to anyone but that seems like an EFT warrior fit to me. Just my opinion.
just thrown together in a couple of minutes to see if it's possible. I doubt anybody would actually fly something like this. Either: cloaky + damage for the whole fleet (should still have 100k+ ehp) or: heavy tank + probes + tackle, no real need for dps and rest of fleet on standby.
I reign supreme. |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
128
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 02:15:00 -
[44] - Quote
stup idity wrote:Onomerous wrote:Elepherious wrote:The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.
Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.
You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.
... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens. A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please. this one has >200k ehp with passive boost, no implants, all 5: [Loki, covops] Loki Defensive - Adaptive Augmenter Loki Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration Loki Electronics - Immobility Drivers Loki Engineering - Power Core Multiplier Loki Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst Covert Ops Cloaking Device II 5x Dual 180mm AutoCannon II (Hail M) 2x Stasis Webifier II Faint Warp Disruptor I Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I 2x 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II 2x Centum C-Type Energized Explosive Membrane Centum C-Type Energized Kinetic Membrane Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane 2x Medium Trimark Armor Pump II Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Any good Cloaky Loki is shield tanked. There are some good armor fits, but for solo PVP in a Cloki a good pilot shield tanks.
Also, to achieve that 200k EHP, you had to sacrifice almost all of your DPS. Working as intended.
Elepherious wrote:The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.
Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.
You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.
... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens.
Proteus has a ridiculous tank, Loki has (compared to other T3s) a terrible tank.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Joan Greywind
Temnava Legion No Holes Barred
46
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 07:08:00 -
[45] - Quote
From a developer's perspective, when a ship, or class of ships become the go to choice for any real fight, they are considered overpowered. (I am here talking about t3's in general and not just clockies). T3's aren't horribly unbalanced but they are by far the most used ships in any serious capacity in WH space, hence the call for "nerfing". This is actually a valid point and a good reason to "rebalance t3". For me personally this change will hurt a lot (as I use t3 almost exclusively, other than logi of course), but t3 needs to stop being the all dominating force in WH's so we can get diversification in serious fleet comps and maybe some more useful doctrines, other than bring 2 bhaalgorns, 2 ecm tengues and the rest proteus and legions (not exactly but fleet doctrines are all centered around t3's in WH). I understand that their mass is the crucial factor here, nevertheless in EVE there shouldn't be a ship class or type that is that dominant in any kind of space.
Hopefully they won't make the ships ****** enough that we won't be able to use them anymore (Fozzie is actually good at "rebalancing").
Just one last thing, please note the word "serious fights", please don't link the kill mails where you killed retrievers with your vexor. |
Chitsa Jason
Infinity Explorers Exhale.
596
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 10:42:00 -
[46] - Quote
I have probably expressed myself in wrong manner on CSM Townhall. I think the cloaky T3s are OP due to the nullification subsystem.
Other than that I am against the T3 nerf in other areas. I think aHACs should never have more tank or DPS compared to properly fit T3. CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Nathan Jameson
Grumpy Bastards Mass Overload
1400
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 11:08:00 -
[47] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:I have probably expressed myself in wrong manner on CSM Townhall. I think the cloaky T3s are OP due to the nullification subsystem.
I disagree. It's not actually that hard to decloak and point a cloaky nulli t3 if you have ceptor pilots who know what they're doing.
The intercalated subsystem on the other hand...that one is bank. http://www.wormholes.info |
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
149
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 11:17:00 -
[48] - Quote
I hope i don't one day regret training every race T3 subs to V. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
774
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 11:24:00 -
[49] - Quote
Nathan Jameson wrote:Chitsa Jason wrote:I have probably expressed myself in wrong manner on CSM Townhall. I think the cloaky T3s are OP due to the nullification subsystem. I disagree. It's not actually that hard to decloak and point a cloaky nulli t3 if you have ceptor pilots who know what they're doing. The intercalated subsystem on the other hand...that one is bank.
It's more of a problem in Nul sec i think, because you spawn 15km away from a gate making it harder for an interceptor to catch you.
What now? |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2129
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 14:01:00 -
[50] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Nathan Jameson wrote:Chitsa Jason wrote:I have probably expressed myself in wrong manner on CSM Townhall. I think the cloaky T3s are OP due to the nullification subsystem. I disagree. It's not actually that hard to decloak and point a cloaky nulli t3 if you have ceptor pilots who know what they're doing. A simple fix would be to increase the align time. nah, the fix is to make the nullifier the same type of sub as the covops one. can have one or other, not both |
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
774
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 14:10:00 -
[51] - Quote
Why? It's very valuable to get cloaky eyes on a POS or enemy fleet without being dragged into a bubble.
I'm open minded though... If CCP made it like you suggested then they would have to give some additional benefit to using the nullifyer or it would end up being unused like 70% of the existing subsystem.
What do you think the current problem is? What now? |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
128
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 14:25:00 -
[52] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Nathan Jameson wrote:Chitsa Jason wrote:I have probably expressed myself in wrong manner on CSM Townhall. I think the cloaky T3s are OP due to the nullification subsystem. I disagree. It's not actually that hard to decloak and point a cloaky nulli t3 if you have ceptor pilots who know what they're doing. A simple fix would be to increase the align time. nah, the fix is to make the nullifier the same type of sub as the covops one. can have one or other, not both
Then nobody would use the Nullifier, since what good is being able to escape bubbles if you end up getting pointed by the interceptor instead?
I disagree about the Nullifer being OP, the only people complaining are the people who gatecamp systems like M-O where they see Cloaky/Nulli T3s escape their ridiculous swath of bubbles. They aren't breaking the game in any way, and a reasonably well balanced. Some minor rebalancing *may* be acceptable, but that depends on what the changes are. The Nullifer costs the pilot a low slot, which hurts the tank (or DPS) on a Proteus, and hurts the DPS of a Loki (lets face it, nobody flies cloaky Tengus/Legions. Honestly I think making the Cloaky Legion/Tengu is more relevant that nerfing the Nullifier subsystem).
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1512
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 14:33:00 -
[53] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:I have probably expressed myself in wrong manner on CSM Townhall. I think the cloaky T3s are OP due to the nullification subsystem.
Other than that I am against the T3 nerf in other areas. I think aHACs should never have more tank or DPS compared to properly fit T3.
Would you care to elaborate. What is it about the cloak + nullifier that is OP?
In a combat role, a cloaky already has reduced effectiveness. The nullifier sub hurts that even more without an extra low slot.
As a "safe transport" a cloaky nullified T3 is a VERY expensive blockade runner with a tiny cargohold.
Specifically in WH space, you are still vulnerable moving through wormholes. On a regular enough basis you will land too close to the WH to cloak. the slower speed and align of a cruiser vs covert ops frig still makes you vulnerable to being pointed.
Personally I find a nullified cloaky T3 useful in niche instances (scouting a bubbled POS for example) But given all of the other potential drawbacks, I don't find it over the top. I still prefer scouting in a Covert ops frigate due to their speed, align time and cost. |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
250
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 19:56:00 -
[54] - Quote
The nullified subsystem also isn't considered essential for a cloaky ship. Many people I know choose a non-nullified sub specifically because of that extra low slot; that's quite a bit of extra tank for your heavy tackle.
I could see a tiny adjustment to align time for the nullified sub being made, slightly more for Tengu than others, but beyond that it's not overpowered. Two or three people should not be able to successfully blockade a system. THAT is overpowered. |
Silas Shaw
Coffee Hub
42
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 22:12:00 -
[55] - Quote
Axloth Okiah wrote:cloaky T3s might be OP because they can be cloaky and have both higher dps and tank than a HAC...
Hopefully T3s will get rebalanced only after HACs and CSs are done. Until then it seems pointless and silly to me.
Anyone remember the old Phantasm? It was trash because it got "fixed" and then the other ships that it got compared to got rebuilt.
If they "fix" t3s and then rebuild t2, we're going to have a whole class of phantasms on our hands. no one wants that. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2134
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 22:32:00 -
[56] - Quote
Elepherious wrote:... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens. I'll bet you the contents of my wallet I could solo it in a T1 battlecruiser. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1513
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 22:53:00 -
[57] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Elepherious wrote:... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens. I'll bet you the contents of my wallet I could solo it in a T1 battlecruiser.
Brick meet kite |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2134
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 22:57:00 -
[58] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Elepherious wrote:... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens. I'll bet you the contents of my wallet I could solo it in a T1 battlecruiser. Brick meet kite well sure you could do that i guess. hell, I'll up it to a brawling T1 BC. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
165
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 11:29:00 -
[59] - Quote
We discussed with my member the possibility of an nerf of Tech 3 Ships. So most of them said, if Tech 3 ships get a signifcat nerf, it would be good also to nerf the SkillPoint loss. 4 Days lost only for a lost if a ship, what is nerfed. Sorry.
And for the posted fit.... if i put enought ISK in a T2 Command ship i could also have a realy pervers tank. So if you want to compare ships than use relativ equal ships. This should be a idea or ? Exemple T2 Field Command Ship HAM Nighthawk with a T3 HAM TENGU both passive Tank. Both with AB + Tech 2 Fit.
My resume is you get what ah nice PVP Nighthawk for about 260 mil without skills loss and a nice performance. 80k EHP and 590 DPS without drones with Faction HAMs
So Why should i use a 500 Millions ship for the fact i loss a lvl 5 Skills. Only to have 100k EHP and 600+ DPS
In the fact.. if someone see you in a T3 you never get a fair fight ......
So that my point of the hole thing.
greatings
Kira Hhllas Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1514
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 11:36:00 -
[60] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote:We discussed with my member the possibility of an nerf of Tech 3 Ships. So most of them said, if Tech 3 ships get a signifcat nerf, it would be good also to nerf the SkillPoint loss. 4 Days lost only for a lost if a ship, what is nerfed. Sorry.
And for the posted fit.... if i put enought ISK in a T2 Command ship i could also have a realy pervers tank. So if you want to compare ships than use relativ equal ships. This should be a idea or ? Exemple T2 Field Command Ship HAM Nighthawk with a T3 HAM TENGU both passive Tank. Both with AB + Tech 2 Fit.
My resume is you get what ah nice PVP Nighthawk for about 260 mil without skills loss and a nice performance. 80k EHP and 590 DPS without drones with Faction HAMs
So Why should i use a 500 Millions ship for the fact i loss a lvl 5 Skills. Only to have 100k EHP and 600+ DPS
In the fact.. if someone see you in a T3 you never get a fair fight ......
So that my point of the hole thing.
greatings
Kira Hhllas
Google translate?
And yes I have always said T3's should be able to have a larger tank given they are the only ships that impose an SP loss on death.
|
|
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
165
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 11:38:00 -
[61] - Quote
Nope,i am natural german speaking player. And not really time for overreading this stuff.... And it is not so easy to write in english, if you have no practice.
There is no german speaking CSM, so i have to write down my thoughts here.
And sorry for my english i try to do my best. Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1514
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 11:54:00 -
[62] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote:Nope,i am natural german speaking player. And not really time for overreading this stuff.... And it is not so easy to write in english, if you have no practice.
There is no german speaking CSM, so i have to write down my thoughts here.
And sorry for my english i try to do my best.
It's fine. English isn't so easy for native speakers either. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 12:35:00 -
[63] - Quote
Hopefully I don't mangle the original post. English is a weird language compared to most. Some people on these forums aren't real friendly when a post is difficult to understand. :(
Quote:My corpmates and I discussed the possibility of a nerf of Tech 3 Ships. Most of them said, if Tech 3 ships get a significant nerf then they should also nerf the SkillPoint loss. Losing 4 days of training for losing a ship is what should be nerfed. Sorry.
And for the posted fit.... if I put enough ISK in a T2 Command ship I could also have a really perverse (over powered?) tank. So if you want to compare ships than use relatively equal ships. Correct? Example T2 Field Command Ship HAM Nighthawk with a T3 HAM TENGU both passive Tank. Both with AB + Tech 2 Fit.
My point is you get a nice PVP Nighthawk for about 260 mil without skills loss and a nice performance. 80k EHP and 590 DPS without drones with Faction HAMs
So why should I use a 500 Million isk ship with the chance I could lose a lvl 5 Skill? I only get 100k EHP and 600+ DPS
In the fact.. if someone sees you in a T3 you never get a fair fight ......
So that is my whole point.
greatings
Kira Hhallas
I agree completely with the Kira. Why use a more expensive ship when a cheaper ship can do the same thing and I won't lose skill points?? |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
165
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 12:43:00 -
[64] - Quote
thank you for overworking it. Its the same thing in the german forum. And well german and english speaking people have also different ways to explain things. But i hope, the others can understand my point of view.
Kira Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
776
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 13:02:00 -
[65] - Quote
I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! Putting work in since 2010. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:07:00 -
[66] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW!
That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship. |
Nix Anteris
Bite Me inc Bitten.
96
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:22:00 -
[67] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote: We all now, that Tech3 were designed for the role to be a flexible ship. But it think, this role was missed. Because only a few pilots change there fit. I lived long enought in W-Space and i can say no one changed the fit. Before you change it, the ship would die in an fireball. And its easyer to put multible ships in an Hangar, than change the fitting self. (And much faster to reship in PVP situations)
Exactly. We can't refit subsystems so we end up owning a new ship for every situation instead of the replacement subsystems.
The cost of ownership justifies the current power and current risk in my opinion.
If there will be a nerf.
1) Remove skill point punishment for losing a ship 2) Allow refitting at a POS |
Archdaimon
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
208
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:53:00 -
[68] - Quote
I always believed that a t3 should be weaker than a t2 for the specifick task that the t2 was build for, but however the ability and customization options to combine two tasks of two different t2 (but again customization comes at a price).
It could cloaky logi, or scanning dps or whatever. But somehow a t2 should be better for what it was build. Wormholes have the best accoustics. It's known. - Sing it for me - |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
776
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:57:00 -
[69] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship.
Why do you assume that the T3 would be better than T2 logi?
I'm thinking the T3 logi sub should have slightly less rep power as it does now but it should get a bonus to range to enable it to rep at around 20-25km (i.e. point range). Putting work in since 2010. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 16:04:00 -
[70] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship. Why do you assume that the T3 would be better than T2 logi? I'm thinking the T3 logi sub should have slightly less rep power as it does now but it should get a bonus to range to enable it to rep at around 20-25km (i.e. point range).
Cloaky T3 with Logi range? You don't see a problem with that? No, it doesn't need a range boost. It is fine as it is right now. |
|
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1514
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 16:17:00 -
[71] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW!
Think of the Etana man! You would totally ruin VoC's lottery business. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
776
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 16:40:00 -
[72] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship. Why do you assume that the T3 would be better than T2 logi? I'm thinking the T3 logi sub should have slightly less rep power as it does now but it should get a bonus to range to enable it to rep at around 20-25km (i.e. point range). Cloaky T3 with Logi range? You don't see a problem with that? No, it doesn't need a range boost. It is fine as it is right now.
Yep your right it's perfectly fine, it's not like it's a completely underused sub or anything Putting work in since 2010. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1514
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 16:45:00 -
[73] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship. Why do you assume that the T3 would be better than T2 logi? I'm thinking the T3 logi sub should have slightly less rep power as it does now but it should get a bonus to range to enable it to rep at around 20-25km (i.e. point range). Cloaky T3 with Logi range? You don't see a problem with that? No, it doesn't need a range boost. It is fine as it is right now.
Pretty sure 20-25km isn't "logi range" I agree it would be nice if it were slightly longer range than currently. Even just 15km allows for a small gang to move around a little while staying in range. |
ROSSLINDEN0
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
111
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 17:36:00 -
[74] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! Think of the Etana man! You would totally ruin VoC's lottery business.
Cant be having that now can we! btw check this out |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
206
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 21:37:00 -
[75] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship. Why do you assume that the T3 would be better than T2 logi? I'm thinking the T3 logi sub should have slightly less rep power as it does now but it should get a bonus to range to enable it to rep at around 20-25km (i.e. point range). Cloaky T3 with Logi range? You don't see a problem with that? No, it doesn't need a range boost. It is fine as it is right now. Yep your right it's perfectly fine, it's not like it's a completely underused sub or anything
Well, tbh.. if you want logi then use logi.
You can use RR T3 ships if you really want . We use RR tengus to run sites from time to time. We have also done PVP where every ship had RR. Definitely not a problem. |
Sandslinger
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
91
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 22:31:00 -
[76] - Quote
Here is what I don't get.
At the present time 0,0 has more different doctrines going on then I have ever seen, truly there is Tier3 doctrine BS doctrine, talwars, T3 alpha. It really is a hop skotch of doctrines Which to me is CCP achieving a great balance already.
If T3 was so damn OP then you would ONLY see T3 used but you don't. Because they have balanced T3 in skill loss and in other drawbacks. The only ship that frankly isn't used much anymore are the Hacs. Which is kind of ironic seeing as they were all that was used for the longest time.
Anyhoo In wormholes you almost only see T3 used and for obvious reasons. they couple the kind of tank with superb DPS and tackling abilities that allow fleets to operate with effective logistics on the field.
With fights moving through wormholes you can forget about having effective sniper or range control fleets. So you need fleets that can withstand immense dps and be kept alive under guardians.
Remove this and what do you have in wormholes ? you have pure DPS fleets where whoever has enough peeps on field to alpha + more then the opposing side will win the fight every time. I'e true blob warfare.
In wormholes it has been showed time and time again that the side with the best ewar, best logistics and best tactics overall can go up versus a numerically superior enemy and win the day. This to me is what makes wormhole fights fun. It is tactics and not pure dps and numbers that wins, and this is only made possible by having ships that has both dps and such heavy tanks that they can withstand large amounts of dps without just falling apart.
And now CCP thinks that is OP and wants to remove it. which basically will just degenerate every wormhole fleet to uber dps fleet where numbers will win the day in every fight.
what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves.
|
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2138
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 23:04:00 -
[77] - Quote
Sandslinger wrote:Here is what I don't get.
At the present time 0,0 has more different doctrines going on then I have ever seen, truly there is Tier3 doctrine BS doctrine, talwars, T3 alpha. It really is a hop skotch of doctrines Which to me is CCP achieving a great balance already.
If T3 was so damn OP then you would ONLY see T3 used but you don't. Because they have balanced T3 in skill loss and in other drawbacks. The only ship that frankly isn't used much anymore are the Hacs. Which is kind of ironic seeing as they were all that was used for the longest time.
Anyhoo In wormholes you almost only see T3 used and for obvious reasons. they couple the kind of tank with superb DPS and tackling abilities that allow fleets to operate with effective logistics on the field.
With fights moving through wormholes you can forget about having effective sniper or range control fleets. So you need fleets that can withstand immense dps and be kept alive under guardians.
Remove this and what do you have in wormholes ? you have pure DPS fleets where whoever has enough peeps on field to alpha + more then the opposing side will win the fight every time. I'e true blob warfare.
In wormholes it has been showed time and time again that the side with the best ewar, best logistics and best tactics overall can go up versus a numerically superior enemy and win the day. This to me is what makes wormhole fights fun. It is tactics and not pure dps and numbers that wins, and this is only made possible by having ships that has both dps and such heavy tanks that they can withstand large amounts of dps without just falling apart.
And now CCP thinks that is OP and wants to remove it. which basically will just degenerate every wormhole fleet to uber dps fleet where numbers will win the day in every fight.
what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves. this is the best constructed post I have seen on the WH forum in months. youre spot on all points of the matter.
PS: Yes, in WHs everyone ends up using T3s. This is probably because T3s are made and designed specifically for and from WHs, makes sense they'd be good at WHs. Saying T3s are the best ship for WHs is kinda like saying Titans are the best ship for doomsdaying carriers with. Well, yes, and?
Quote:what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves. ^quoting this again in case anyone in CCP/CSM feel like addressing a real issue. |
chris elliot
EG CORP Mass Overload
212
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 23:11:00 -
[78] - Quote
Or it will force you to break your blobs into smaller units, since if you bring a blob of straight dps through I can sit back and alpha you back to highsec.
The reason nullsec is seeing so many shifts is twofold.
One is the power of the microjump drive on battleships. Since only a scram will prevent a warpout you either have to grab everybody at once or be forced to play ping pong games trying to grab one ship at a time while being shelled from range the entire time.
Second is the tierecide has buffed neut ranges on the geddons , ewar on the celestis which allows you to play two different types of alpha that will wreck a t3 fleet. The first is alpha cap/ewar. Enough range boosted geddons will zap the cap on anything nearby. And the celestises will ensure that unless your logistics stays in the danger zone they will never be able to lock further than the paint on their hulls. The second is a combination of the tracking bonus to the mega and the sentry bonus to the domis. The latter which allows for perfect alpha, since once the drones are assigned they follow the will of the FC at the speed of the FC, not individual knuckleheads trying to find targets on their poorly set up overviews. As for the tracking on the mega, since it is now prohibitively dangerous to stay in close with the exception of suicide goku fleets or doom portals, the buff to the tracking of the longest ranged weapon in the game makes it an obvious choice. There is still a very rock paper scissors meta here, until you start doing silly things with cap swarms and supers.
The availability of cynos and variable points of entry makes this work in nullsec so it seems all well and good. In wormholes however we only have the wormhole. Which makes every fight boring, since either you have to jump into me or me into you. Bringing all ranges to zero and concentrating everything into this little bitty sphere, where the do it all nature of the t3 makes it absurdly overpowered. Most of this is due to the nature of the terribleness of command ships and hacs in their current configurations, and the squishyness and inflexibility of recons. SInce the dangers to t3 fleets are removed by way of the limited mass of the wormhole they become overpowered because the only things that can beat them can't be used. Rendering them the one and only option out there. And that is both OP and boring at the same time.
|
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
408
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 00:17:00 -
[79] - Quote
DEATH TO TECH 3s.
Seriously, supers are easier to kill than a tech 3 blob. |
Casirio
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
480
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 00:27:00 -
[80] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:[quote=Sandslinger] Quote:what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves. ^quoting this again in case anyone in CCP/CSM feel like addressing a real issue.
but look at this corp desert pirates cartel. they have fewer numbers (44 man corp) and are able to use the tracking dreads and webs to fight outnumbered and come on top. Against us vs wspace and eventually overrun by VoC
I think this should be a legit counter for these guys who dont have the numbers like these bigger groups do to defend their hole and/or get some kills. |
|
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
155
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 01:19:00 -
[81] - Quote
Messoroz wrote:DEATH TO TECH 3s.
Seriously, supers are easier to kill than a tech 3 blob.
Geez enough of how much you love null already. Your like a broken record man. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2138
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 01:24:00 -
[82] - Quote
Casirio wrote:Jack Miton wrote:[quote=Sandslinger] Quote:what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves. ^quoting this again in case anyone in CCP/CSM feel like addressing a real issue. but look at this corp desert pirates cartel. they have fewer numbers (44 man corp) and are able to use the tracking dreads and webs to fight outnumbered and come on top. yeah... that's because it's over powered... you literally just proved my point, thanks. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
207
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 02:27:00 -
[83] - Quote
Quote:Or it will force you to break your blobs into smaller units, since if you bring a blob of straight dps through I can sit back and alpha you back to highsec.
Seen quite a few try that and it don't work quite like that.
Quote: The reason nullsec is seeing so many shifts is twofold.
Comparing null sex to WH doesn't really work well. See below:
Quote: One is the power of the microjump drive on battleships. Since only a scram will prevent a warpout you either have to grab everybody at once or be forced to play ping pong games trying to grab one ship at a time while being shelled from range the entire time.
Second is the tierecide has buffed neut ranges on the geddons , ewar on the celestis which allows you to play two different types of alpha that will wreck a t3 fleet. The first is alpha cap/ewar. Enough range boosted geddons will zap the cap on anything nearby. And the celestises will ensure that unless your logistics stays in the danger zone they will never be able to lock further than the paint on their hulls. The second is a combination of the tracking bonus to the mega and the sentry bonus to the domis. The latter which allows for perfect alpha, since once the drones are assigned they follow the will of the FC at the speed of the FC, not individual knuckleheads trying to find targets on their poorly set up overviews. As for the tracking on the mega, since it is now prohibitively dangerous to stay in close with the exception of suicide goku fleets or doom portals, the buff to the tracking of the longest ranged weapon in the game makes it an obvious choice. There is still a very rock paper scissors meta here, until you start doing silly things with cap swarms and supers.
The availability of cynos and variable points of entry makes this work in nullsec so it seems all well and good. In wormholes however we only have the wormhole. Which makes every fight boring, since either you have to jump into me or me into you. Bringing all ranges to zero and concentrating everything into this little bitty sphere, where the do it all nature of the t3 makes it absurdly overpowered. Most of this is due to the nature of the terribleness of command ships and hacs in their current configurations, and the squishyness and inflexibility of recons. SInce the dangers to t3 fleets are removed by way of the limited mass of the wormhole they become overpowered because the only things that can beat them can't be used. Rendering them the one and only option out there. And that is both OP and boring at the same time.
Any discussion of battleships in WH is bascially mute. WH mass limitations can really create issues. Is it possible that since BS mass doesn't work well with WH that T3 reigns for that reason? (that is a rhetorical question btw)
Seems pretty obvious your basic issue is blobs. Most often used definition for blob in EVE is "any fleet which is larger than ours".
|
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
207
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 02:29:00 -
[84] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Messoroz wrote:DEATH TO TECH 3s.
Seriously, supers are easier to kill than a tech 3 blob. Geez enough of how much you love null already. Your like a broken record man.
He's a broken record with blob... blob this... blob that... blob over there... blob over here... blobs of blobs. If he hates blobs so much, why go to null sex? If you hate blobs then NS is the last place you should go. |
Royal Jedi
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
98
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 02:48:00 -
[85] - Quote
Sandslinger wrote: At the present time 0,0 has more different doctrines going on then I have ever seen, truly there is Tier3 doctrine BS doctrine, talwars, T3 alpha. It really is a hop skotch of doctrines Which to me is CCP achieving a great balance already.
Id like to see some of this in Wspace too and before someone wades in with another post like:
Jack Miton wrote: PS: Yes, in WHs everyone ends up using T3s. This is probably because T3s are made and designed specifically for and from WHs, makes sense they'd be good at WHs. Saying T3s are the best ship for WHs is kinda like saying Titans are the best ship for doomsdaying carriers with. Well, yes, and?
Somewhat agree, but right now its pretty much the ONLY viable tactic in wspace, it shouldnt be T3 or GTFO. It would be nice to add a different dimension to wspace pvp. |
Casirio
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
480
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 03:00:00 -
[86] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Casirio wrote:Jack Miton wrote:[quote=Sandslinger] Quote:what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves. ^quoting this again in case anyone in CCP/CSM feel like addressing a real issue. but look at this corp desert pirates cartel. they have fewer numbers (44 man corp) and are able to use the tracking dreads and webs to fight outnumbered and come on top. yeah... that's because it's over powered... you literally just proved my point, thanks.
like i said i think its a valid counter and obviously a 25 man t3 fleet can still steam roll them over as you see on the km. |
Quinn Corvez
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
36
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 06:14:00 -
[87] - Quote
If/when T3's get nerfed and people start using navy BCs and command ships instead, I wonder how long it will be before idiots like Messoroz starts screaming for those ships to be nerfed... |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
167
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 06:19:00 -
[88] - Quote
Okay i stopped reading this thread befor i went to the cinema.
And i overflow all posts. So well yes a Tech3 25 man Fleet ca steam roll a 40 man fleet. And why ? I know some WH Corps and Ally. DIE NASU , RWR, AZTEC, TALOCAN, TLC; TL,.... So what have this Corps together,... yes !!!! i know it. They are highly trained Corps. They can play together and they know what they do.
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17635787
they are fast, and well organized.
So what i want to say. If you give 25 T3 to a well trained and hogh Organized group they will bring hell on the battlefield. Give it to a random group you wiill have 25 wracks in short time.
So every one oversee the fact, if you loss a Tech3 Ship you will loos a skill. Most time its a Lvl 5 Skill. Because Tech3 Ships on lvl4 are chreapy. Please do me a favour, if you compare ships , use your / normal skills sets, not every time "all lvl 5". And think about that you will pay 500- 600 milions for a fitted T2 Tengu.... so Tech3 ships have there price.
What i see is, this thread allready goes the same way like the "i hate afk cloaky in NullSec" thing.
So its 08:20 am morning i need coffee Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2138
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 06:29:00 -
[89] - Quote
Royal Jedi wrote:Jack Miton wrote: PS: Yes, in WHs everyone ends up using T3s. This is probably because T3s are made and designed specifically for and from WHs, makes sense they'd be good at WHs. Saying T3s are the best ship for WHs is kinda like saying Titans are the best ship for doomsdaying carriers with. Well, yes, and?
Somewhat agree, but right now its pretty much the ONLY viable tactic in wspace, it shouldnt be T3 or GTFO. It would be nice to add a different dimension to wspace pvp. to use a somewhat ironic example... Aquila used to use a lot of nano fleet tactics to very good effect against many large WH groups and their T3s. they ended up joining in with the T3 blobs though unfortunately.
solo T3s can lose to BCs small scale T3s will lose to ewar even t3 blobs can lose to alpha fleets
there are other option, people dont use them very much though.
(dont get me wrong, t3s probably are the best pound for pound but you only need a little imagination to find alternatives if you want to.) |
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
259
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 09:04:00 -
[90] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:
Can someone explain to me why our representatives think cloaky T3's are OP?
In my opinion they're not. You can easily see if something is OP if the use of them extends past their intended role or if no other ship can fill the role. In the case of cloaky T3's their role is "booster", "scout", and heavy tackle.
In terms of scout or heavy tackle I don't see the T3's being over powered. They seem just right to me. In terms of booster they are prevalent but not the "only choice".
Quote: Also, i see very little activity from Chitsa and James on these forums. Does anyone know if either of these two have a list somewhere, of features/changes that they are trying to get CCP to implement?
who the **** are Chitsa and James? Surely they the only two eve online players worth listening to. |
|
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
122
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 09:05:00 -
[91] - Quote
Wonder what would happen if strat cruiser were to receive a massnerf. Afterall the models are mostly bigger than bc/cs and either or both dps and tank are at about BS level. I only correct my own spelling. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
792
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 09:17:00 -
[92] - Quote
Tinu Moorhsum wrote:
who the **** are Chitsa and James? Surely they the only two eve online players worth listening to.
The nominated CSM wormhole representatives... They're not the authority on everything wormhole related but their opinion and activity certainly matters. Putting work in since 2010. |
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
259
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 10:51:00 -
[93] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Tinu Moorhsum wrote:
who the **** are Chitsa and James? Surely they the only two eve online players worth listening to.
The nominated CSM wormhole representatives... They're not the authority on everything wormhole related but their opinion and activity certainly matters.
Ah. I see.
|
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1527
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 11:20:00 -
[94] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Quote:Or it will force you to break your blobs into smaller units, since if you bring a blob of straight dps through I can sit back and alpha you back to highsec. Seen quite a few try that and it don't work quite like that. Quote: The reason nullsec is seeing so many shifts is twofold.
Comparing null sex to WH doesn't really work well. See below: Quote: One is the power of the microjump drive on battleships. Since only a scram will prevent a warpout you either have to grab everybody at once or be forced to play ping pong games trying to grab one ship at a time while being shelled from range the entire time.
Second is the tierecide has buffed neut ranges on the geddons , ewar on the celestis which allows you to play two different types of alpha that will wreck a t3 fleet. The first is alpha cap/ewar. Enough range boosted geddons will zap the cap on anything nearby. And the celestises will ensure that unless your logistics stays in the danger zone they will never be able to lock further than the paint on their hulls. The second is a combination of the tracking bonus to the mega and the sentry bonus to the domis. The latter which allows for perfect alpha, since once the drones are assigned they follow the will of the FC at the speed of the FC, not individual knuckleheads trying to find targets on their poorly set up overviews. As for the tracking on the mega, since it is now prohibitively dangerous to stay in close with the exception of suicide goku fleets or doom portals, the buff to the tracking of the longest ranged weapon in the game makes it an obvious choice. There is still a very rock paper scissors meta here, until you start doing silly things with cap swarms and supers.
The availability of cynos and variable points of entry makes this work in nullsec so it seems all well and good. In wormholes however we only have the wormhole. Which makes every fight boring, since either you have to jump into me or me into you. Bringing all ranges to zero and concentrating everything into this little bitty sphere, where the do it all nature of the t3 makes it absurdly overpowered. Most of this is due to the nature of the terribleness of command ships and hacs in their current configurations, and the squishyness and inflexibility of recons. SInce the dangers to t3 fleets are removed by way of the limited mass of the wormhole they become overpowered because the only things that can beat them can't be used. Rendering them the one and only option out there. And that is both OP and boring at the same time.
Any discussion of battleships in WH is bascially mute. WH mass limitations can really create issues. Is it possible that since BS mass doesn't work well with WH that T3 reigns for that reason? (that is a rhetorical question btw) Seems pretty obvious your basic issue is blobs. Most often used definition for blob in EVE is "any fleet which is larger than ours".
Geez, none of this was a comparison of 0.0 to WH space. It was simply trying to make the statment that if T3's were the OP "IWIN" button of EVE, why don't 0.0 alliances just fly T3 fleets exclusively.
|
Royal Jedi
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
98
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 12:40:00 -
[95] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote: to use a somewhat ironic example... Aquila used to use a lot of nano fleet tactics to very good effect against many large WH groups and their T3s. they ended up joining in with the T3 blobs though unfortunately.
solo T3s can lose to BCs small scale T3s will lose to ewar even t3 blobs can lose to alpha fleets
there are other option, people dont use them very much though.
(dont get me wrong, t3s probably are the best pound for pound but you only need a little imagination to find alternatives if you want to.)
Please don't try to tell me those alternatives are a more effective tactic than armor brawling t3's... thats just not true....
Guess the reason why we joined in with T3 fleets.... they beat everything else.
Your examples are so uncommon... Your not jumping into anyone and nano-ing around anymore and as far as alpha fleets are concerned when and who does that happen on a regular basis?
Sure, you can use alternatives but they are pretty terrible, stop trying to believe that there are more effective gangs in w-space today than just T3 T3 T3 T3, its a bit boring and i wish it would change. |
Sandslinger
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
99
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 14:05:00 -
[96] - Quote
Double post |
Sandslinger
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
99
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 14:05:00 -
[97] - Quote
Royal Jedi wrote:Jack Miton wrote: to use a somewhat ironic example... Aquila used to use a lot of nano fleet tactics to very good effect against many large WH groups and their T3s. they ended up joining in with the T3 blobs though unfortunately.
solo T3s can lose to BCs small scale T3s will lose to ewar even t3 blobs can lose to alpha fleets
there are other option, people dont use them very much though.
(dont get me wrong, t3s probably are the best pound for pound but you only need a little imagination to find alternatives if you want to.)
Please don't try to tell me those alternatives are a more effective tactic than armor brawling t3's... thats just not true.... Guess the reason why we joined in with T3 fleets.... they beat everything else. Your examples are so uncommon... Your not jumping into anyone and nano-ing around anymore and as far as alpha fleets are concerned when and who does that on a regular basis? Sure, you can use alternatives but they are pretty terrible, stop trying to believe that there are more effective gangs in w-space today than just T3 T3 T3 T3, its a bit boring and i wish it would change.
Jack already pointed out the most flippin obvious thing already..
Remove T3's abilities to do the Armor brawl that they do now and Faction BC and Command ships will be the next thing to be used. wormholes encourage close range brawling by their very nature. If you jump into a gang that is simply sniping at you. you either fix a warpin on top of them or simply blueball them out of sheer boredom.
So what happens when everyone is using Bc and CMD. Well they have less utility for starters so less ewar options to play with, less ways to deal with guardians means more sheer dps focus to simply overcome guardian reps. Where now T3 allow plenty of ewar options for overcoming or confussling guardians enough to get kills through logi. I understand that you guys want to be able to range and kite everything in wormholes and transfer your tactic versus the nullsec idiots that run straight into them to wormholes. Truth is 99% of entities will simply just jump back through the wormhole and say **** chasing that. your not going to get what you want in wormholes regarding of how much you wish you could....
Back on BC and CMD, they have twice the sig so your looking at Dreads basically becoming twice as OP as they are now. Funny thing with the example given about the smaller unit standign up versus larger number with just 1/2 dreads. that is a nice example of a small unit utilizing a homefield advantage. However that tactic doesn't scale well. To beat it you simply need more flippin numbers then the opposing side. You need to be able to neutralize their web in some way orthe Dread itself, which means more and more numbers. And once you start talking about multiple dreads on field you need even larger numbers to beat it.
Unless the enemy is acting pure stupid Dread's give you a insane advantage and can't be beaten by a gang the same size which by itself promotes "blobbing" the enemy. Massive amounts of capitals is is why invasions now require hundreds of people and logistically burn out the people doing them. They are the main reason why Wspace got as static as it did.
But back to the T3 arguments. Sure T3 can do a lot of things well. Hauler,CovOpTackler or Brawler. Point is they are used for this because the nature of Wh space promotes it. Remove them and people will only ever use the second best option and so forth and so forth. Personally I think the interdiction subsystem is OP and wouldn't mind seeing it removed or seeing the Cov Op subsystem Kill the DPS on the ships. In that regard I do think they are a bit OP as they encroach on Recons (Bit biased here as they are my alltime fav ship)
The main problem I see is that unless T3 does something Very Well then why ever use them. Every tactic in eve has always leaned towards multiples of one ship that does one thing the best. I can not ever remember a tactic that relied on a ship that was a jack of all trades but worst at everything. If someone else does please give me a example. I'll list the counter ones I can name off the cuff here
Vagabond blob (best speed) - We used to **** BS fleets 5 times our size with these, fuckall dps per vaga but bring enough and they raped all while not even needing logi to tank all.
Vaga + Ishtar Nano Blob (Best speed coupled with best applied alpha dps)
Zealot Ahac blob (Best armor tank with guards) Abbadon sniper Blob ArtyBaddon Drake Blob Tengu Blob Hurricane blob
All of these and many before them had one thing in common, they were the best at their task so why ever use anything else. Unless CCP uniforms every race this will always be the case.
What you see in EvE is People find the ship that is best at its role and then use greater and greater numbers of that one ship. ever Play a fighting game versus that one guy that is using the one character that has a certain combo that almost no characters can block, or been that guy :P It's the same flippin thing human nature.
At least T3 by their nature in wormholes promotes the usage of ewar/tactics to win fights over equal or superior numbers whereupon the second best options promotes tons and tons of dps. I'll take fights based upon the former then the latter any flippin day.
As to the "spread our blob into smaller blobs to not get alphaed by your guys" comment below .... Is this a serious comment or some sort of ironic self troll ?? Please tell me it's the latter =)
One more comment to add.
I think the unformity in fitting T3 fleets could do well with some imaginative input. I hope we(NoHo) can provide this going forwards =) |
Royal Jedi
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
98
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 14:44:00 -
[98] - Quote
Sandslinger wrote: As to the "spread our blob into smaller blobs to not get alphaed by your guys" comment below .... Is this a serious comment or some sort of ironic self troll ?? Please tell me it's the latter =)
What? |
Gnaw LF
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
446
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 15:38:00 -
[99] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote: to use a somewhat ironic example... Aquila used to use a lot of nano fleet tactics to very good effect against many large WH groups and their T3s. they ended up joining in with the T3 blobs though unfortunately.
solo T3s can lose to BCs small scale T3s will lose to ewar even t3 blobs can lose to alpha fleets
there are other option, people dont use them very much though.
(dont get me wrong, t3s probably are the best pound for pound but you only need a little imagination to find alternatives if you want to.)
Its not an ironic example, it is a poorly informed example. We used nano fleet tactics against "large" WH groups back in the day when 100 to 150 pilots in a corp / alliance was a "large" group. Second, many of those "large" groups did not have a full T3 fleet but rather a rag tag fleet sprinkled with T3s. Thirdly, our nano tactics worked well in an age when shield fleets were more popular, Tengus ruled the sky and very few pilots were trained for Loki or Proteus. All that is gone, a nano fleet cannot hold a candle to a T3 fleet in w-space, Lokis will web out to 50km (optimal range of a nano Talos) and Proteus can point to an insane distance. Not to mention that a nano fleet will get messed up on the initial warp in with the HIC bubble up.
And yeah we ended up with T3 as our ships of choice, why wouldn't we? EvE is all about "adopt or die" mentality and we don't like dying. |
Rengas
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
193
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 17:17:00 -
[100] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Royal Jedi wrote:Jack Miton wrote: PS: Yes, in WHs everyone ends up using T3s. This is probably because T3s are made and designed specifically for and from WHs, makes sense they'd be good at WHs. Saying T3s are the best ship for WHs is kinda like saying Titans are the best ship for doomsdaying carriers with. Well, yes, and?
Somewhat agree, but right now its pretty much the ONLY viable tactic in wspace, it shouldnt be T3 or GTFO. It would be nice to add a different dimension to wspace pvp. to use a somewhat ironic example... Aquila used to use a lot of nano fleet tactics to very good effect against many large WH groups and their T3s. they ended up joining in with the T3 blobs though unfortunately. solo T3s can lose to BCs small scale T3s will lose to ewar even t3 blobs can lose to alpha fleets there are other option, people dont use them very much though. (dont get me wrong, t3s probably are the best pound for pound but you only need a little imagination to find alternatives if you want to.) Yeah we never use nano vs T3s these days.
Regardless, the posting quality on here is starting to rival Kugu.
Keep it up! |
|
James Arget
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
138
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 19:30:00 -
[101] - Quote
*sigh* Fine, I'll accelerate CCP's plans to nerf T3s. Sheesh. CSM 8 Representative
http://csm8.org |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
209
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 20:28:00 -
[102] - Quote
James Arget wrote:*sigh* Fine, I'll accelerate CCP's plans to nerf T3s. Sheesh.
Sad day indeed for EVE...
James, remember most of the world thought the world was flat at one time. Turns out they were wrong. I'm beginning to think many EVE players would have been 'flat earth' types!! |
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
156
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 22:43:00 -
[103] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:James Arget wrote:*sigh* Fine, I'll accelerate CCP's plans to nerf T3s. Sheesh. Sad day indeed for EVE... James, remember most of the world thought the world was flat at one time. Turns out they were wrong. I'm beginning to think many EVE players would have been 'flat earth' types!!
Shirly you're joking... or is he, is sarcasm lost on this generation. |
ROSSLINDEN0
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
111
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 01:42:00 -
[104] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Winthorp wrote:Messoroz wrote:DEATH TO TECH 3s.
Seriously, supers are easier to kill than a tech 3 blob. Geez enough of how much you love null already. Your like a broken record man. He's a broken record with blob... blob this... blob that... blob over there... blob over here... blobs of blobs. If he hates blobs so much, why go to null sex? If you hate blobs then NS is the last place you should go.
Hi can i just say you're a faggit, you and your alliance are not revenant.
and for the we don't nano anymore comments its a bit hard to fight t3 gangs with nano if all they do is sit at 0m on a wh like they have always done being skillless cunts who can only think of one way to counter it "Durr lets sit on the otherside at 0m and make them jump into us!" dem tactics. the only thing wrong with wpsace is the ******* useless cunts living in it. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
213
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 03:49:00 -
[105] - Quote
Love both of you. One day you will get over yourself (or yourselves??). Both ot you probably weren't born when I graduated from HS. :) |
ROSSLINDEN0
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
116
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 04:08:00 -
[106] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Nathern Colition :) I graduated from HS before you were born. (sp is intentional)
ROSSLINDEN0, You have a tremendous grasp of the English language (name calling and profanity ftw). You pretty much proved very quickly you have nothing to add to the conversation. Thanks for trying though!!
why dont you take a seat and think of a comment you wont change in 2 minutes fuckign tool |
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
408
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 04:51:00 -
[107] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Nathern Colition :) I graduated from HS before you were born. (sp is intentional)
ROSSLINDEN0, You have a tremendous grasp of the English language (name calling and profanity ftw). You pretty much proved very quickly you have nothing to add to the conversation. Thanks for trying though!!
It's ironic, I think he was English...or Irish...or Scottish...fudge..hes European, he has superior mastery of Englsih. |
Joan Greywind
Temnava Legion No Holes Barred
48
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 04:48:00 -
[108] - Quote
If asked the question, what is the best ship type (comp) in wh space? If the answer is clear (it is really, bring t3's with guardian support) in most situations, then it is a problem. Are you saying they should nerf t3' to the ground? Of course not, but making more comps viable and talking about it doesn't seem bad at all. For instance the geddon didn't get nerfed, but "rebalanced". t3's are trickier I admit, but fleet comps are becoming somewhat bland in WH's.
As I said before, I use t3's almost exclusively, so I am not pitching from the other side of the fence.
On another note, I don't see the point of name calling, and calling someone out for his bad English. It serves no purpose but to diminish the discussion at hand. |
Kalel Nimrott
EG CORP Mass Overload
333
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 05:54:00 -
[109] - Quote
Would it change the current situation if we could change subsystems in wspace? It willresolve one of the problems with t3s inour space givi g the posibility of more flexible doctrines. |
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
408
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 06:10:00 -
[110] - Quote
Kalel Nimrott wrote:Would it change the current situation if we could change subsystems in wspace? It willresolve one of the problems with t3s inour space givi g the posibility of more flexible doctrines.
More flexible doctrines?What other doctrine is there besides armour blob?
Slightly more tanked armour blob? Slightly more dps armour blob? Cloaky armour blob? |
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
832
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 10:03:00 -
[111] - Quote
Shield blobs? Putting work in since 2010. |
Chitsa Jason
Infinity Explorers Exhale.
645
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 11:23:00 -
[112] - Quote
This thread is going places.
/me like CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
408
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 17:46:00 -
[113] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Shield blobs?
Try shield fitting proteuses.
I would tell you the results but I want some free killmails first. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
284
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 17:52:00 -
[114] - Quote
Messoroz wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Shield blobs? Try shield fitting proteuses. I would tell you the results but I want some free killmails first.
Before they nerfed TEs you could do a wanabbe shield adrestia fit on a prot, with the pointless nerf to TEs you can't hold the range needed and get the dps at that range needed to make it at all worthwhile tho.
|
Rengas
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
197
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 23:17:00 -
[115] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Messoroz wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Shield blobs? Try shield fitting proteuses. I would tell you the results but I want some free killmails first. Before they nerfed TEs you could do a wanabbe shield adrestia fit on a prot, with the pointless nerf to TEs you can't hold the range needed and get the dps at that range needed to make it at all worthwhile tho. After the rail buff, shield kiting prots are going to be IWIN buttons. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
835
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 23:45:00 -
[116] - Quote
Messoroz wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Shield blobs? Try shield fitting proteuses. I would tell you the results but I want some free killmails first.
Hull tank blobs then?
Putting work in since 2010. |
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
408
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 03:13:00 -
[117] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Messoroz wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Shield blobs? Try shield fitting proteuses. I would tell you the results but I want some free killmails first. Hull tank blobs then?
We tested a Vindicator today with only 2 scimis agaisnt an 60 man kitchen fleet on a wormhole. The vindi killed everything in structure. This may work. 3 v 60 ftw. |
chris elliot
EG CORP Mass Overload
213
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 03:51:00 -
[118] - Quote
Rengas wrote:Rroff wrote:Messoroz wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Shield blobs? Try shield fitting proteuses. I would tell you the results but I want some free killmails first. Before they nerfed TEs you could do a wanabbe shield adrestia fit on a prot, with the pointless nerf to TEs you can't hold the range needed and get the dps at that range needed to make it at all worthwhile tho. After the rail buff, shield kiting prots are going to be IWIN buttons.
I'm looking forward to it actually. |
Leskit
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
29
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 05:53:00 -
[119] - Quote
I will try to address the "problems" as I've encountered them, and suggest possible fixes. Being a wormhole denizen myself, my experience, offensively, and defensibly with tech 3's is this: Between my toons, I use and fly all four of them for what it's worth.
--You faction fit t3's. Not tech two, but faction, or even deadspace. You want every bang for your ship's buck, especially in wh space, so you're going to get better results out of it because of that.
--Hacs suck at the moment
--The loki, from my experience, is about perfectly balanced. You have to chose between tank or gank. The proteus and to some extent the tengu can do both while having bonuses to ewar.
--The proteus and tengu are the two "OP" if anything: The proteus gets over 1k dps, while having more low slots than a legion (being amarr, that's odd). Doing as much damage as a battleship...in a cruiser hull...causes issues. my old HAMgu is an issue-950-1k dps with implants, BUT you have to sacrifice tank and/or propulsion mods to do so. Which basically balances it out.
For the stats I fly with and run into, I frequently see these numbers: Legion (ham or laser), 80k ehp @750dps; or 125k ehp @650 dps (I have a dual plate fit that's 163k ehp @646 dps, but the resistances are mediocre) Loki (armor): 100k ehp @650 dps; (shield) 70k ehp @800 dps Protues: 163k ehp @950 dps; 195k ehp @800 dps tengu (hm): 105k-85k ehp @635 dps; (ham) 110k ehp @775 dps [my cloaky ham tengu does 545 dps]
Possible fixes: --If anything, the legion needs a slight buff; one more low slot added to the augmented plating and adaptive augmentor should fix that. If you cloak fit it, you're usually running 5 low slots compared to the proteus' 7. --revoke a low slot on the proteus-then you will have to live with a resist hole and gank, or lose damage for a better tank (like the current legion) Tengu-I think is actually OK (shock, burn me at the stake!). You have to chose between tank and gank...usually The loki is in great shape I think, but it got hit by the resistance nerf. It could go for an amount subsystem.
I think once we pass the 800dps ,mark on a cruiser hull, we get into dangerous territory. Looking at the stats, i'd say the legion needs a slight buff (1 more low slot with an extra 10 or so CPU), and the proteus needs a slight nerf, but I fly it the least so I can't suggest a satisfactory compromise. It's the only one on my list that gets an amazing tank and amazing dps. Better than some battleships, and better than a lot of current command ships. |
Bamsey Amraa
Unseen Nomads Exiled Ones
33
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 06:41:00 -
[120] - Quote
First of all before you "nerf T3 players" get that nerf i propose new idea for CCP: Nerf T3 and add lost skill after death to all ships and we get true balance.... |
|
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 06:46:00 -
[121] - Quote
Okay ..... thats a good point.... But then, no local for NullSec Pilots. This will also end the tiresome afk cloaky discussion.
If EVE Online is to hard ......., you are too weak..... :-P Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
chris elliot
EG CORP Mass Overload
213
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 07:14:00 -
[122] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote:Okay ..... thats a good point.... But then, no local for NullSec Pilots. This will also end the tiresome afk cloaky discussion.
If EVE Online is to hard ......., you are too weak..... :-P
Wrong forum genius. The nullbears crying about campers is in C&P. This is the forum where we gripe about people flying the same OP bullsht all the time. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 07:40:00 -
[123] - Quote
So who are crying here about OP Tech 3 Ships? I think most time NullSec Carebear's (Gl++cksb+ñrchis in German)
We people in w-space know that some t3 should be overworked, but we dont cry around. To say a Tengus with Faction Fit is OP...... i said it in a another post. If you put 3 billions ISK in a Ship, it will be OP. And its okay because, the player have the risk to loos the tengu with the fit and well a lvl 5 subsystem skill.
Comparing a HAC with T2 with a Tengu with Faction Fit, Is like to compare a pears with apples..... Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2151
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 08:12:00 -
[124] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote:So who are crying here about OP Tech 3 Ships? Mostly Aquila from the sounds of this thread. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 09:04:00 -
[125] - Quote
- It was meant as a rhetorical question. As an style element, often used in german (question + answer). - BTW. is Aquila not an WH Corp ? I can remember seen them often in w-space.... i am confused.
@ chris elliot
i answerd to this post. *hust*
Quote:First of all before you "nerf T3 players" get that nerf i propose new idea for CCP: Nerf T3 and add lost skill after death to all ships and we get true balance.... Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Royal Jedi
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
99
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 12:39:00 -
[126] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Kira Hhallas wrote:So who are crying here about OP Tech 3 Ships? Mostly Aquila from the sounds of this thread.
Not really,
You just cant talk about changing T3's without most people in wormholes crying their eyes out/ getting pissy because they cant do anything else.
Its the same old **** with this thread, GUYS WE WANT W-SPACE PVP TO BE MORE FUN BUT WELL GET ALL ANGRY IF YOU TRY TO CHANGE ANYTHING!! |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
216
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 12:47:00 -
[127] - Quote
Royal Jedi wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Kira Hhallas wrote:So who are crying here about OP Tech 3 Ships? Mostly Aquila from the sounds of this thread. Not really, You just cant talk about changing T3's without most people in wormholes crying their eyes out/ getting pissy because they cant do anything else. Its the same old **** with this thread, GUYS WE WANT W-SPACE PVP TO BE MORE FUN BUT WELL GET ALL ANGRY IF YOU TRY TO CHANGE ANYTHING!!
The response is sort of ironic given what Jack was saying. ;)
We definitely need to wait for the T2 changes first then see what needs to be done with T3. As to what needs to be done with T3... ask X number of people and you will find X number of changes that need to be made. |
Royal Jedi
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
102
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 12:51:00 -
[128] - Quote
Onomerous wrote: The response is sort of ironic given what Jack was saying. ;)
Confirming suggesting change is crying. |
Bamsey Amraa
Unseen Nomads Exiled Ones
33
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 12:55:00 -
[129] - Quote
T3 are overpovered? Then skill it and use it. They are too expensive for you? Screw low/null/hi and come live in WH there is many isk for you. WH are too hardcore for you ? Then stop yelling about how T3s are overpowered.
I pay in ISK for all my lost T3s ( include isk for plex when i must again skill the same subsystem) Want more fun still there? |
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
411
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 22:45:00 -
[130] - Quote
Bamsey Amraa wrote:T3 are overpovered? Then skill it and use it. They are too expensive for you? Screw low/null/hi and come live in WH there is many isk for you. WH are too hardcore for you ? Then stop yelling about how T3s are overpowered.
I pay in ISK for all my lost T3s ( include isk for plex when i must again skill the same subsystem) Want more fun still there?
LOLOL. It doesn't take any skill to sit on a wormhole and press F1 for a tech 3.
-Signed, a person with more kills in a day than you have in an entire month last three months. |
|
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
158
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 23:08:00 -
[131] - Quote
Messoroz wrote:Bamsey Amraa wrote:T3 are overpovered? Then skill it and use it. They are too expensive for you? Screw low/null/hi and come live in WH there is many isk for you. WH are too hardcore for you ? Then stop yelling about how T3s are overpowered.
I pay in ISK for all my lost T3s ( include isk for plex when i must again skill the same subsystem) Want more fun still there? LOLOL. It doesn't take any skill to sit on a wormhole and press F1 for a tech 3. -Signed, a person with more kills in a day than you have in an entire month last three months.
You are so pro man. |
Indo Nira
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized.
84
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 00:00:00 -
[132] - Quote
Royal Jedi wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Kira Hhallas wrote:So who are crying here about OP Tech 3 Ships? Mostly Aquila from the sounds of this thread. Not really, You just cant talk about changing T3's without most people in wormholes crying their eyes out/ getting pissy because they cant do anything else. Its the same old **** with this thread, GUYS WE WANT W-SPACE PVP TO BE MORE FUN BUT WELL GET ALL ANGRY IF YOU TRY TO CHANGE ANYTHING!! i don't see why this section of the forum even bothers to make these threads if you just say the people that want a change are only 'crying', such a typical crappy attitude.
the only pissy person i see everyday with pissy person posts is your corpmate
Messoroz wrote: LOLOL. It doesn't take any skill to sit on a wormhole and press F1 for a tech 3.
-Signed, a person with more kills in a day than you have in an entire month last three months.
there you go. should be enough proof |
Royal Jedi
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
104
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 00:55:00 -
[133] - Quote
Indo Nira wrote:Royal Jedi wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Kira Hhallas wrote:So who are crying here about OP Tech 3 Ships? Mostly Aquila from the sounds of this thread. Not really, You just cant talk about changing T3's without most people in wormholes crying their eyes out/ getting pissy because they cant do anything else. Its the same old **** with this thread, GUYS WE WANT W-SPACE PVP TO BE MORE FUN BUT WELL GET ALL ANGRY IF YOU TRY TO CHANGE ANYTHING!! i don't see why this section of the forum even bothers to make these threads if you just say the people that want a change are only 'crying', such a typical crappy attitude. the only pissy person i see everyday with pissy person posts is your corpmate Messoroz wrote: LOLOL. It doesn't take any skill to sit on a wormhole and press F1 for a tech 3.
-Signed, a person with more kills in a day than you have in an entire month last three months.
there you go. should be enough proof
You should really stop listening to Mess! :P
|
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
411
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 01:05:00 -
[134] - Quote
TBH, I thought this was kugu with all the terrible posts.
Indo Nira wrote:Royal Jedi wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Kira Hhallas wrote:So who are crying here about OP Tech 3 Ships? Mostly Aquila from the sounds of this thread. Not really, You just cant talk about changing T3's without most people in wormholes crying their eyes out/ getting pissy because they cant do anything else. Its the same old **** with this thread, GUYS WE WANT W-SPACE PVP TO BE MORE FUN BUT WELL GET ALL ANGRY IF YOU TRY TO CHANGE ANYTHING!! i don't see why this section of the forum even bothers to make these threads if you just say the people that want a change are only 'crying', such a typical crappy attitude. the only pissy person i see everyday with pissy person posts is your corpmate Messoroz wrote: LOLOL. It doesn't take any skill to sit on a wormhole and press F1 for a tech 3.
-Signed, a person with more kills in a day than you have in an entire month last three months.
there you go. should be enough proof
You just jelly I have a bigger peen score. |
Ayeson
Hard Knocks Inc. Kill It With Fire
300
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 01:43:00 -
[135] - Quote
Michael_Jackson_Eating_Popcorn_In_Red_Leather_Jumpsuit.gif Ask me about Rengas-dar, HRDKX's Most recent, groundbreaking, game-changing, wormhole-collapsing research endeavour.
|
Royal Jedi
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
104
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 01:46:00 -
[136] - Quote
Ayeson wrote:Michael_Jackson_Eating_Popcorn_In_Red_Leather_Jumpsuit.gif
AYESON!
**SWOONS*** |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1352
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 02:20:00 -
[137] - Quote
Royal Jedi wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Kira Hhallas wrote:So who are crying here about OP Tech 3 Ships? Mostly Aquila from the sounds of this thread. Not really, You just cant talk about changing T3's without most people in wormholes crying their eyes out/ getting pissy because they cant do anything else. Its the same old **** with this thread, GUYS WE WANT W-SPACE PVP TO BE MORE FUN BUT WELL GET ALL ANGRY IF YOU TRY TO CHANGE ANYTHING!! i don't see why this section of the forum even bothers to make these threads if you just say the people that want a change are only 'crying', such a typical crappy attitude.
You mean having the entire w-space economy in ruins because sleeper loot which is turned into T3's will be worth squat when T3 are relegated to sub T2 performance isn't something we should all be concerned about? You do realize that such a change affects not only those that depend on T3's for pew but also those of you who hate them and live in w-space.
In fact, if the T3's nerf drops income for w-space you can be assured that those complaining that there isn't enough pew will be complaining a lot more as it makes more sense to run incursions in HS than maintain billions of isk in w-space that can never be adequately supported and people leave in droves.
I think a lot of people who are from w-space calling for a T3 nerf don't fully understand the ramifications beyond what they claim is a ship that is overpowered. Of course whenever someone points out an overpowered T3....it's usually a +3bil isk T3, which really, such overpower can be achieved in a plethora of other ships if only +3bil isk were spent to build them. HTFU!...for the children! |
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
412
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 02:22:00 -
[138] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Royal Jedi wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Kira Hhallas wrote:So who are crying here about OP Tech 3 Ships? Mostly Aquila from the sounds of this thread. Not really, You just cant talk about changing T3's without most people in wormholes crying their eyes out/ getting pissy because they cant do anything else. Its the same old **** with this thread, GUYS WE WANT W-SPACE PVP TO BE MORE FUN BUT WELL GET ALL ANGRY IF YOU TRY TO CHANGE ANYTHING!! i don't see why this section of the forum even bothers to make these threads if you just say the people that want a change are only 'crying', such a typical crappy attitude. You mean having the entire w-space economy in ruins because sleeper loot which is turned into T3's will be worth squat when T3 are relegated to sub T2 performance isn't something we should all be concerned about? You do realize that such a change affects not only those that depend on T3's for pew but also those of you who hate them and live in w-space. In fact, if the T3's nerf drops income for w-space you can be assured that those complaining that there isn't enough pew will be complaining a lot more as it makes more sense to run incursions in HS than maintain billions of isk in w-space that can never be adequately supported and people leave in droves. I think a lot of people who are from w-space calling for a T3 nerf don't fully understand the ramifications beyond what they claim is a ship that is overpowered. Of course whenever someone points out an overpowered T3....it's usually a +3bil isk T3, which really, such overpower can be achieved in a plethora of other ships if only +3bil isk were spent to build them. \
tl;dr "Don't touch my isk fountain" |
Ayeson
Hard Knocks Inc. Kill It With Fire
301
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 04:22:00 -
[139] - Quote
Royal Jedi wrote:Ayeson wrote:Michael_Jackson_Eating_Popcorn_In_Red_Leather_Jumpsuit.gif AYESON! **SWOONS***
Jediiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Ask me about Rengas-dar, HRDKX's Most recent, groundbreaking, game-changing, wormhole-collapsing research endeavour.
|
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 06:02:00 -
[140] - Quote
Why i believed, it i s possible to discuss such things here in the english forum more objectively...
*kira falls down on her knees and shout*
"Oh Lord ! Please ! throw down brain !" Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
851
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 08:15:00 -
[141] - Quote
Messoroz wrote:Bamsey Amraa wrote:T3 are overpovered? Then skill it and use it. They are too expensive for you? Screw low/null/hi and come live in WH there is many isk for you. WH are too hardcore for you ? Then stop yelling about how T3s are overpowered.
I pay in ISK for all my lost T3s ( include isk for plex when i must again skill the same subsystem) Want more fun still there? LOLOL. It doesn't take any skill to sit on a wormhole and press F1 for a tech 3. -Signed, a person with more kills in a day than you have in an entire month last three months.
So you have moved on from T3 brawls and your now ganking T1 cruisers in null sec... Congratulations but we don't care!
I don't know why you are even posting in the wormhole form if you hate what goes on in W-space and have nothing constructive to add.
I used to have a lot of respect for Aquila before this prick came along. Putting work in since 2010. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2152
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 09:48:00 -
[142] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:You mean having the entire w-space economy in ruins because sleeper loot which is turned into T3's will be worth squat when T3 are relegated to sub T2 performance isn't something we should all be concerned about? if youre making your isk in WHs from sleeper salvage and not blue books then you should probably just run HS incursions for much easier, safer and better isk. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 10:00:00 -
[143] - Quote
WH life is not about making ISK primary. Its like to be sitting on your own Island. W-Space is for individualists, who get tired from the old world.
Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Rengas
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
201
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 11:06:00 -
[144] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Messoroz wrote:Bamsey Amraa wrote:T3 are overpovered? Then skill it and use it. They are too expensive for you? Screw low/null/hi and come live in WH there is many isk for you. WH are too hardcore for you ? Then stop yelling about how T3s are overpowered.
I pay in ISK for all my lost T3s ( include isk for plex when i must again skill the same subsystem) Want more fun still there? LOLOL. It doesn't take any skill to sit on a wormhole and press F1 for a tech 3. -Signed, a person with more kills in a day than you have in an entire month last three months. So you have moved on from T3 brawls and your now ganking T1 cruisers in null sec... Congratulations but we don't care! I don't know why you are even posting in the wormhole form if you hate what goes on in W-space and have nothing constructive to add. I used to have a lot of respect for Aquila before this prick came along. Same here. |
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
412
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 12:00:00 -
[145] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I used to have a lot of respect for Aquila before this prick came along.
https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/Messoroz
That bio hasn't changed for 2 years. I guess people are illiterate I suppose. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
854
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 12:26:00 -
[146] - Quote
Congratulations on being that much of a tard that your corp makes you put a disclaimer in your bio.
Stay on topic. Putting work in since 2010. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
226
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 14:04:00 -
[147] - Quote
T3 could use some adjusting but let's wait until after the T2 balancing.
As for the VoC peeps... don't feed them anymore please. Thanks!!
Jack Miton wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:You mean having the entire w-space economy in ruins because sleeper loot which is turned into T3's will be worth squat when T3 are relegated to sub T2 performance isn't something we should all be concerned about? if youre making your isk in WHs from sleeper salvage and not blue books then you should probably just run HS incursions for much easier, safer and better isk.
So no reason for C1-C3 sites I guess. Great idea. Let's convince fewer people to try WH by lowering the value of nanoribbons. All the people wanting more PVP... yeah, fewer day trippers or others willing to try WH will definitely get more PVP with FEWER people in it!!
(Blue loot isn't worth much in C1-C3 but then you already knew that??!!) |
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
412
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 22:59:00 -
[148] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Congratulations on being that much of a tard that your corp makes you put a disclaimer in your bio.
Stay on topic.
I put the disclaimer there because people blamed the corp rather than me. Thanks, for blaming the corp again, tard. |
ROSSLINDEN0
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
118
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 02:38:00 -
[149] - Quote
Messoroz wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Congratulations on being that much of a tard that your corp makes you put a disclaimer in your bio.
Stay on topic. I put the disclaimer there because people blamed the corp rather than me. Thanks, for blaming the corp again, tard.
Dont worry mess they're all useless cunts anyway i love you |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2155
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 04:27:00 -
[150] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:You mean having the entire w-space economy in ruins because sleeper loot which is turned into T3's will be worth squat when T3 are relegated to sub T2 performance isn't something we should all be concerned about? if youre making your isk in WHs from sleeper salvage and not blue books then you should probably just run HS incursions for much easier, safer and better isk. So no reason for C1-C3 sites I guess. Great idea. Let's convince fewer people to try WH by lowering the value of nanoribbons. All the people wanting more PVP... yeah, fewer day trippers or others willing to try WH will definitely get more PVP with FEWER people in it!! (Blue loot isn't worth much in C1-C3 but then you already knew that??!!) I'll say it again: If youre running C1-3 sites for isk, and just isk, then you may as well run HS incursions. You make more isk easier and safer.
Do I want less people in WHs? no of course not. That doesnt change the above fact though. I want people who live in WHs to be there for other reasons than just ISK.
|
|
Leskit
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
31
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 06:19:00 -
[151] - Quote
A refinement of a previous thought:
T3's aren't OP for what they cost, what you lose if you die, etc. But there are balance issues between teir 3's. The legion needs another low slot to bring it up to par. The cloaky proteus is the only fitting i'll actually say is OP. 120k ehp and 650 dps on a cloaked platform is a wee bit ridiculous. A normal legion (2x faction damage mods, 3% implants x2) barely breaks 650.
Shield loki could use 5% more raw shields. Carry on. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 06:24:00 -
[152] - Quote
Please post fittings.. and how much isk do you put in it. Everyone say someting abbout OP T3 but no one say how much ISK where spend for the ship. Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
|
ISD Gallifreyan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
193
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 06:52:00 -
[153] - Quote
Some posts in this thread have been cleaned to remove inappropriate language and borderline abuse. Personal attacks using profanity or discriminatory language is not tolerated on this forum.
Please respect all Forum_rules ISD Gallifreyan Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCL) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Leskit
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
31
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 06:55:00 -
[154] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote:Please post fittings.. and how much isk do you put in it. Everyone say someting abbout OP T3 but no one say how much ISK where spend for the ship.
Sure thing! high dps ham legion normal laser legion normal proteus cloaky proteus cloaky legion
Now all those are tailored to some personal preference, and your views of a better fit will differ. I don't fit a damage control for one, just a personal preference. I'm estimating prices are around the 750 mil mark; faction heatsinks are of course cheaper than FN magstabs. No fleet boosts applied.
Also change out tech 2 ammo for faction where you would use it-I would rarely use conflagration up close unless both it and myself weren't moving quickly. my gallente friends dislike void for that reason. CN antimatter drops 100dps off the non-cloaked prot.
If you downgrade to tech 1 trimarks, then ehp changes to this, respectively: no change; 129k ehp; 119.8k ehp; 119.8k ehp; 102k ehp. another oddity is that the proteus can keep 7 lowslots in the cloaked configuration, wheras the legion drops to 5. I keep noticing more oddities as I delve into this more thoughtfully. (like why does the loki webbing subsystem take away a midslot? so you can't shield tank and do ewar at the same time?) |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 07:03:00 -
[155] - Quote
You say, the price is about 750 mill.... for the ship ? Nice... the 3% Imps are more or less cheap .... Hmmm... All lvl 5 okay.. does the results change much if you use your char instead of all lvl 5 ?
Is see no tengus :-(
Thank you for the work Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Bamsey Amraa
Unseen Nomads Exiled Ones
33
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 08:05:00 -
[156] - Quote
Leskit wrote:A refinement of a previous thought:
T3's aren't OP for what they cost, what you lose if you die, etc. But there are balance issues between teir 3's. The legion needs another low slot to bring it up to par. The cloaky proteus is the only fitting i'll actually say is OP. 120k ehp and 650 dps on a cloaked platform is a wee bit ridiculous. A normal legion (2x faction damage mods, 3% implants x2) barely breaks 650.
Shield loki could use 5% more raw shields. Carry on.
Why noany speak about range of fire on the Proteus vs others T3? Before proteus can make any damage the others T3s can open fire, scram, web and even run away with 100mn AB. Why noany speak how easy take off that " overpovered" dps just by using neutralizers (yep cap needed for shoot ;p )
And how about rails? All others T3 have chose long or short dps fit but only proteus have this ****** rails for chose. ..
|
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 08:38:00 -
[157] - Quote
Okay i have to say only in small gang i have seen "neuts" or if i was alone in ah Tech3 ship.
Its a good idea to bring the Tech3 ships with the second wave.... because most of the "WH small PVP gangs" throw there stuff in the first wave into the Battle Short range is better.. Long rang ships can be damped away even with cheap frigs. Rapier will stop the 100mn AB Tengus .... Falcon / Curse / Neute Ships are Primery ..... But most time there is a bigger fleet behind them so with a good scout you know in WH what they bring. And oyu can abort the fight.
But its true T3 Ships are vulnerable to neuts Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
892
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 08:42:00 -
[158] - Quote
Overpowered or under-powered, it's all relative. You can't make a fit on eft, compare it to other ships and say use that to make an argument as to whether the ship needs a nerf. PVP in eve doesn't work like that as we are not all running around soloing each other.
It's not a game of rock, paper scissors when that cloaky proteus is only pointing you so his 5 friends can come and get on the killmail. Putting work in since 2010. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 08:52:00 -
[159] - Quote
So well but they are most the second wave. Solo in ah Tech3 you will never get a fair fight. But this ships are realy mean if your fleet have Falcon + Rapier + HAM Nighthawk. Tech3 ships give them a realy nice DPS Punch. They are the spice for a PVP gang :-) Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2156
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 09:22:00 -
[160] - Quote
Leskit wrote:Kira Hhallas wrote:Please post fittings.. and how much isk do you put in it. Everyone say someting abbout OP T3 but no one say how much ISK where spend for the ship. Sure thing! normal laser legion here's a Harbinger fit that costs about the same:
Quote:[Harbinger, Balancing Factor] 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane Core B-Type Armor Explosive Hardener Damage Control II Imperial Navy Heat Sink
Corelum C-Type 10MN Microwarpdrive Republic Fleet Warp Disruptor Federation Navy Stasis Webifier Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400
Heavy Pulse Laser II, Conflagration M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Conflagration M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Conflagration M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Conflagration M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Conflagration M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Conflagration M Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump II Medium Trimark Armor Pump II Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
Hammerhead II x5 Hornet EC-300 x5 gets a little less tank and a bit more DPS.
|
|
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 09:29:00 -
[161] - Quote
Interesting .....
without the stupid SkillLoss if I die .... But with a bigger signature and its not so fast.... but realy interesting... Can you put the DPS results and the tank results in your fit? I am in the Office and i don't have ah EVEHQ at my hand in moment. Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Bamsey Amraa
Unseen Nomads Exiled Ones
34
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 10:25:00 -
[162] - Quote
Try use that battlecruiser with dreads shooting to you on the grid. T3 are a lot better than BC in that case ;).... But now i go to try fit Astarte or Vigilant with 800kk fit ;))) |
Sandslinger
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
101
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 11:36:00 -
[163] - Quote
It always comes back to the dreads. Exhale used to run large Abso gangs, guessing they stopped when they realised how much more vulnerable cmd is to dreads vs Cruiser Hulls.
Until dreads are rebalanced in wh close combat, there isn't much point discussing alternatives to T3. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 11:40:00 -
[164] - Quote
I think i missed something..... Abso ? cmd ?
Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
892
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 11:49:00 -
[165] - Quote
Sandslinger wrote:It always comes back to the dreads. Exhale used to run large Abso gangs, guessing they stopped when they realised how much more vulnerable cmd is to dreads vs Cruiser Hulls.
Until dreads are rebalanced in wh close combat, there isn't much point discussing alternatives to T3.
Dreads have already be "balanced" and they have nothing to do with whether T3's need a nerf or not... But let's not start the dread blapping debate again. Putting work in since 2010. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 11:56:00 -
[166] - Quote
?? blapping ?? Excuse me if i can understand this word, but google translate or LEO.dicctionary dont know this word..... Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
892
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 11:59:00 -
[167] - Quote
When people use dreadnoughts to alpha (insta-pop) sub-capitals. Putting work in since 2010. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 12:15:00 -
[168] - Quote
Ah okay... thank you for your explanation. Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
230
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 12:24:00 -
[169] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Onomerous wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:You mean having the entire w-space economy in ruins because sleeper loot which is turned into T3's will be worth squat when T3 are relegated to sub T2 performance isn't something we should all be concerned about? if youre making your isk in WHs from sleeper salvage and not blue books then you should probably just run HS incursions for much easier, safer and better isk. So no reason for C1-C3 sites I guess. Great idea. Let's convince fewer people to try WH by lowering the value of nanoribbons. All the people wanting more PVP... yeah, fewer day trippers or others willing to try WH will definitely get more PVP with FEWER people in it!! (Blue loot isn't worth much in C1-C3 but then you already knew that??!!) I'll say it again: If youre running C1-3 sites for isk, and just isk, then you may as well run HS incursions. You make more isk easier and safer. Do I want less people in WHs? no of course not. That doesnt change the above fact though. I want people who live in WHs to be there for other reasons than just ISK.
I'll say it again: If youre running C1-3 sites for isk, and just isk, then you may as well run HS incursions. That's nice. Have fun with that!!
You have to start somewhere. Starting WH experience by WH diving in C1-C3 for isk is definitely a good way to get started. I'm interested in WH so I prefer to encourage as people to get started with WH as soon as they feel ready. |
Rengas
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
203
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 12:34:00 -
[170] - Quote
This era of Dread blapping is similar to the issue that K-space residents used to have with that of the tracking Titan.
A possible solution for WH residents tired of having their expensive T3s volleyed in mere seconds would be to nerf Dread tracking even further while simultaneously increasing the signature radius of Sleeper battleships.
edit: Yeah I know this has been discussed to death. But the more we bring it up the more likely someone from CCP will actually notice and do something about it. |
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
892
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 12:57:00 -
[171] - Quote
Nah it's nothing like being able to cyno in 100 titans to lay waist to your enemy. It's more like a tier 3 BC shooting a webbed and painted t1 frigate... Not a problem at all.
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18500507 did i cry a little after that happened? Sure. Would i want to take the dread blap ability away from those guys? No. Putting work in since 2010. |
Leskit
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
31
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 17:19:00 -
[172] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote:You say, the price is about 750 mill.... for the ship ? Nice... the 3% Imps are more or less cheap ( g++nstig ) .... Hmmm... All lvl 5 okay.. does the results change much if you use your char instead of all lvl 5 ?
Is see no tengus :-(
Thank you for the work. But i see nice results for 750 mil. ISK ....
The legion fits are all ones that I own; I lose about 20 dps (no pulse laser spec V), and 0.2km less falloff on short range ammo. Tank remains the same. I'm really just guessing on the priceGǪit could be double that, but amarr faction mods are nice and cheap.
Bamsey Amraa wrote: Why noany speak about range of fire on the Proteus vs others T3? Before proteus can make any damage the others T3s can open fire, scram, web and even run away with 100mn AB. Why noany speak how easy take off that " overpovered" dps just by using neutralizers (yep cap needed for shoot ;p ) The range at which you can start firing on a proteus is less than a laser leigon, definitely. My experience is that on wormhole jumps, your first MWD pulse gets you to within firing range so it becomes a moot point. You can choose when to decloak so that you're in range. Again, this is just my experience. I've been neuted so many times that I almost stopped flying laser legions in exchange for ham legions. Everything is turned off, people still die :P Rails are getting their balance, have patience. I'd love to see medium beams get a pass too, they aren't very good either.
Rek Seven wrote: Overpowered or under-powered, it's all relative. Bingo! I'm not trying to make them all the same. The proteus, like the moros, is just better enough than the others in enough situations to make me go "huh, should it be that way?" I can link all the fits I own and fly, and the prot fits that my corpmates fly if you'd like.
|
Fisty McBumfart
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 03:20:00 -
[173] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Onomerous wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:You mean having the entire w-space economy in ruins because sleeper loot which is turned into T3's will be worth squat when T3 are relegated to sub T2 performance isn't something we should all be concerned about? if youre making your isk in WHs from sleeper salvage and not blue books then you should probably just run HS incursions for much easier, safer and better isk. So no reason for C1-C3 sites I guess. Great idea. Let's convince fewer people to try WH by lowering the value of nanoribbons. All the people wanting more PVP... yeah, fewer day trippers or others willing to try WH will definitely get more PVP with FEWER people in it!! (Blue loot isn't worth much in C1-C3 but then you already knew that??!!) I'll say it again: If youre running C1-3 sites for isk, and just isk, then you may as well run HS incursions. You make more isk easier and safer. Do I want less people in WHs? no of course not. That doesnt change the above fact though. I want people who live in WHs to be there for other reasons than just ISK. I'll say it again: If youre running C1-3 sites for isk, and just isk, then you may as well run HS incursions. That's nice. Have fun with that!! You have to start somewhere. Starting WH experience by WH diving in C1-C3 for isk is definitely a good way to get started. I'm interested in WH so I prefer to encourage as people to get started with WH as soon as they feel ready.
This guy used to make a noise when he farted now its like a mouse coughing |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2157
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 06:18:00 -
[174] - Quote
Bamsey Amraa wrote:Try use that battlecruiser with dreads shooting to you on the grid. T3 are a lot better than BC in that case ;).... But now i go to try fit Astarte or Vigilant with 800kk fit ;))) obviously no one in theyre right mind is going to use that BC fit, that's not the point. the fact that you can fit a ship that's a full two tech levels lower than a legion to have comparable stats at the same cost is kinda funny to me tbh and a good indicator of why the legion is **** poor for a T3.
|
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 06:27:00 -
[175] - Quote
Thats why i ask for fittings. I also dont understand this OP discussin. Well Cloaky / Null Tech3 Ships are mean. But you can shoot them down ... and if the pilot is solo, he never get a fair fight :-P I tried this so many times solo with my HAM Tengu. Forget it. they will throw caps after you in some LS systems...
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18015912
And thank you for the fits.... Maybe there are also equal Fittings from other BC. To show its possible to "beat" T3 ships... Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2157
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 06:56:00 -
[176] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote:Maybe there are also equal Fittings from other BC. To show its possible to "beat" T3 ships... you don't need any 'special fits' to beat T3s. just shoot them and you'll find they explode just as easily as any other ship.
As for cloaky T3s, theyre universally horrible for solo fights. The prot is by far the best but it still just dies to anything shield tanked with a mwd. Hell, ive killed a cloaky loki solo with my hurricane (pre nerf to be fair) while his alt in a cloaky tengu was also shooting me. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 07:19:00 -
[177] - Quote
Thats right Clokay Tengus are nice for hit und run, but in a fight they are fast down....
I used Cloaky Tengu as ReconShis, with nice DPS or as an -¦ratting tengu if we had a NullSec wormhole. But after i lost some Tengus in pvp i dont use them any more. The SkillLoss is uninteresting. I have more fun with a HAM drake or HAM Nighthawk... and they are cheaper.
So why we discuss about OP Tech3 ships, if we found out that Tech3 ships are not realy OP ? Give me a hint. Can it be, that Tech3 Fleet a better trained and have more experence than other fleets ? Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
412
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:41:00 -
[178] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote: Give me a hint. Can it be, that Tech3 Fleet a better trained and have more experence than other fleets ?
|
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
162
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:44:00 -
[179] - Quote
Who lent this dickhead a brain? |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:45:00 -
[180] - Quote
sorry for my tipos...
But why not :-) if they was so much OP, you could us trained monkeys ..... :-P Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
|
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
412
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:45:00 -
[181] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Who lent this dickhead a brain?
Bro, why are you here |
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
162
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:46:00 -
[182] - Quote
Messoroz wrote:Winthorp wrote:Who lent this dickhead a brain? Sorry, I'm not going to be a gentle snowflake.
Why are you?
Damn you ninja edit quick. |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
171
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:50:00 -
[183] - Quote
Hey its ah ceap fit... why i should but to more ISK in it .
Before you muck around like a WoW Player, please enlight me , and give me Fit with the best cost-efficiently. Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Senn Denroth
Lead Farmers Kill It With Fire
86
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 23:38:00 -
[184] - Quote
Rengas wrote:This era of Dread blapping is similar to the issue that K-space residents used to have with that of the tracking Titan.
A possible solution for WH residents tired of having their expensive T3s volleyed in mere seconds would be to nerf Dread tracking even further while simultaneously increasing the signature radius of Sleeper battleships.
edit: Yeah I know this has been discussed to death. But the more we bring it up the more likely someone from CCP will actually notice and do something about it.
Hmmm not 100% sure I agree with this. I think it needs to be balanced to some degree to stop single cruiser sized hulls getting blapped off the field because you have your MWD on or have a slightly bad angle while flying toward a dread.
If they opponent has webs and target painters then by all means I think it should be possible that they can shoot your cruisers with the aid of the webs/TP's being focused.
We've had smaller forces able to fight us in their home because they can bring as many dreads/carriers to make up for their smaller numbers vs our larger fleet. Take this away and you take away a lot of fights in W Space.
Solution: Reduce the sig radius bloom when a MWD is active.
When you really think about it, why would activating a MWD cause a sig radius to become so huge? It wouldn't.. if anything you could speed tank all day. It was a nerf to minmatar ships a long time ago which could tank any man and their dog all day long.
On the subject of T3's I want to be able to take subsystems in my cargohold and refit on the fly. Or just leave them alone. T3's were invented by sleepers using magnets and all sorts of other magic. Besides the tank of a T3, which T3 does better than it's T2 counterpart?? If anything it's the T2 ships that need a balance to make them more relevant. |
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
358
|
Posted - 2013.07.21 01:04:00 -
[185] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts (and those that quoted them) and let some edge cases stay. Please keep it on topic people and above all civil!
The rules: 2. Be respectful toward others at all times.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued. ISD Ezwal Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Yuan Taizu
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.21 15:06:00 -
[186] - Quote
I think CCP will do the right thing and look into T2 re-balancing before they start any serious discussions on T3 ships. The nullifier might be OP, but if they were to remove that subsystem, at least give blockade runners the nullified ability!
And one more thing..more of a request. CCP, please give covert fitted T3's the same jump effect as bombers and blockade runners, PLEASE! |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page] |