Run people out of wh space and buff 0.0? If ccp nerfs the T3 what reason would there be to inhabit wh's and do any production there? Not raging here but if ccp nerfs T3's I will most likely quit eve all of my characters sp are focused around wh's and I am not looking to retrain for other roles because I am forced into it.

I want to cross train when I feel like it. I don't care how much in the future it is I do not feel these changes are needed.

One because it just gives more power to the 0.0 power blocks
Two it effectively ruins a whole group of people's play style.
The sp and isk investment and the specialized role these ships fit justify the current state of the ships.

If you want to buff t2 then fine do so but don't nerf T3 based on trying to fix t2s. It is after all a T3 by this logic I want to see t2 nerved to be more in line with t1 this goes for everything from the hull to ammo and guns and tank.

The thing is CCP devs play EVE also and they are out there in null sec with these null sec alliances.
They got caught when they gave out BPOs to an alliance so they will not be able to do that anymore.
SOO what's an other way to rig the game for big 00 alliance blobs?
Nerf everything in sight in an attempt to herd everyone into 00.

I am hoping the WH community would be able to put their love for EVE behind them and unsub if a major T3 nerf hits live servers.
Last time CCP made a change that everyone hated they lost thousands of subs and it did not take long to revert those changes. Same thing will need to happen here players need to make a stand to make sure CCP does the right things.

I also feel that it is never to early to plan how the community will handle this.

Bullshit. If it comes to that, I'll just unsub and problem solved.

yah, ive read the changes. theyre not fixing HACs...

Its simply.

If CCP broke my game and fun in WH i just go to play another game.

End story.

WTF HAC are supposed to be used for is beyond me.

T2s beat T3s at their specialization for every hull type except HAC. If T3 are supposed to be more flexible (they are) but not as good as T2 in their specialization (they aren't except HAC) then I would say they have accomplished their plan. Should T3 get some SLIGHT nerfs? Yes, but notice the modifier SLIGHT. The pitchfork and torch clan is out rioting to have them nerf into the ground...

Versatility in wspace. Thank you.

No, I'm going to give them ro the person who hates you the most so he can have more ships to shoot at you with.

5 days off legion...... *should i stop* ? ; )

Was going to train for a loki
Glad I stumbled across this thread...

You're faith about what's going to happen with a T3 nerf is commendable especially after a Dev states they "need to be put down like a rabid dog". Not much room for interpretation there. The fact that other CCP Devs will most likely temper that statement only serves to lead the rest of us to believe that the T3, while still existing in the game, will be a shadow of its former self. Arguments that are anti-t3-nerf are broader than the perceived "I win" ship for people who don't even fly them.

If CCP's attempt is to make T2's the primary pew ship for higher sp toons in the cruiser arena then that leads me to conclude that T3's are going to have less ability that all other T2's including the HAC which does not bode well for its future since very few people actually fly a HAC and for good reason.

And this, of course, leads us to the w-space economy which will be destroyed by being tied to a sole product that noone wants to buy. This has yet to be addressed by ANY DEV POST that I'm aware of which leads me to believe that it's not even a consideration.

So lets just sum up what will happen should the T3 become a useless hull.

cut

I find it odd that people complain that the Armour T3 Blob is unbeatable, but freak out when they talk about nerfing t3s

I think the price, production requirements and skill loss on T3s sorta justifies its current state. Once you've assembled a T3 it can do one role especially well and only that one role until you redo the subsystems on it. As its mainly used by WHers, it also needs to be taken to k-space to be refit, you cant just have the modules in your hangar.

T2 could def use a little buff to have more advantages over T1, but it shouldnt be able to match T3. Nerfing T3s should be done in small steps if anything, with close monitoring of the WH community along the way to make sure it doesn't have a huge negative impact on an important and popular part of the game.

My 2 isk anyway.

That is a lie and you know it!
You only compare T2-ships T2 fit with T3 - faction bling bling ships.
There is no T3 bether then a T2 or a BC.

Go compare numbers for T2 fit T2 Cruisers and T3s the numbers arent that insane. Yes the T3s have about a 25/30% better tank. And 20% more DPS (comparing Cerb to Tengu) but Cerb has 40% more range than a tengu a lower sig res. THey also cost 3 times more and incur a SP loss.......So it has better tank and less range than a Kiting ship.....Yes thats so OP...

Yep, its not insane because 3 times more expensive than T2 and skill loss when die. You cant compare this two tiers...

Command ships yes. noone with a brain disagrees with the command ships vs T3 balance.

But yes they are better than HACs but they are bigger slower most expensive by a factor of 3 and you lose skillpoints when you die. That sounds like fairish Balance. Yeh the HAM Tengu is a bit stupid on the DPS side but none of the others can put out the same DPS. compare the DPS of a loki to a Vagabond or munin and they are roughly the same. Proteus can get some silly passive tank i'll give you that.

But overall they just need some minor tweaks maybe a couple nerfs. They arent the disgustingly OP ships most people seem to think they are.

Just a personal newb observation of the game.

I'd much rather live with an overpowered class of ships than seeing an entire section of the economy nerfed.

PvP game mechanics come and go, and honestly, who gives a damn.

But the economy in this game is everything. I'll fly just about anything in my future and not care much. But if you're going to close off an entire sector of the economy, then honestly I don't care how much better it made one section of PvP mechanics.

You are still not considering the price of the ship, skill loss on death and production requirements for T3 compared to T2. You are right, a T3 performs better at than T2 ships - but it works rhe same way. Only one role at a time, but ~30% better at it in every way for 300% of the cost + 3 to 4 days of skilling lost (unless you dont skill subsystems to 5 and its even less than ~30% better).

Why doesn't the big bad null alliances use T3s more often than T2 if they are sooo much better? Same with smaller gang stuff, you rarely see T3 fleets out of WHs because people tend to blob for shiny KMs.

You seem to be ignoring the relevant parts of the replies you get, and I somehow doubt you've been in WH space for long, if at all.

If it were up to me (which it clearly isn't), Id have t2 design ships as THE best ship for a particular role, e.g the best brawlers, kiters, scanners, remote reppers, etc. They would be THE specialized (and therefore BEST for their role) ships for their race.

I'd have t3s reach somewhere near 80-90% ( just under) the effectiveness of a t2 if you design the subsystems and mods around that role, however it would remain flexible enough to swap it's role by replacing sub systems/ modules at stations/ POS so that you could fly a full DPS t3 or swap out at a station/ POS to something different like for example- cloaky, scanner, remote rep, kiter, etc.

That would make t2 the ship you would go to if you needed to specialize your role in a fleet. T3 would be the ship you could change roles depending on what was needed at the time, also if you were limited in terms of ship movement or storage or just if you wanted 1 ship that could do a lot of different things effectively but still not as good as buying/ moving/ alt-piloting many different specialized ships.

If that meant buffing the t2 and nerfing the t3 then that's what I'd do.

The the picture you pain involves people having to go to their pos and change the sup systems on their T3... Why would they bother doing that when they could just have multiple T2 ships that are specialised for the role people need them to do?

T3s would be redundant if you had your way.

First off you muddled up what I said. I said t3s should be about 80-90% effectiveness of a t2.

And you are being rude. People will always fly the best ship? I call BS. People fly the ships they enjoy flying, they also fly ships they feel are effective in a fight, they also fly ships that are cheap and fast.

But if you are still dead set on your 'people fly the best ships', then let that be a t2 specialized ship. One that you can't just swap around subsystems to be effective at all different roles.

Sounds to me like the people that oppose the t3 changes the most are those that profit from their manufacture.

w-space combat gets boring fast when its t3s as far as the eye can see.

So, let me get this straight, you want to make a ship that is the singular reason that there is an economy in w-space and make it worse in everything it does than all the rest of the T2's except the one T2 that the general consensus of it is that it lacks the stats to have a role thereby the HAC and the T3 can make friends and play nice?

This is your idea?

Quick mention of the changes to Strategic Cruiser Warfare Processor subsystems:

The Warfare Processors will now provide a 2% increase in the strength of warfare links per level of their racial defensive subsystem skill. They will also now provide bonuses to three different types of gang links:
Loki: Siege, Armored, Skirmish
Proteus: Armored, Skirmish, Information
Tengu: Siege, Skirmish, Information
Legion: Armored, Skirmish, Information

A HAC is supposed to be a tough but maneuverable ship, so wish granted.

Back to T3 vs T2.
Logistics - Guardians and Scimis are used rather than Lokis and Legions
EWar - Falcon outclasses Tengus, Huginns outclass Lokis, Arazus outclass Prots, and Curses outclass Legions.
Boosting - T3s have a 10% advantage, but this doesn't justify a wholesale slaughter of a ship class.


Clearly T3s are not universally better than T2s, so go back to shitpoasting in general discussion and get out of Wormhole subtopic.

[
T2 are specalized, T3s are more generalized jack of all trades.

T2s are very good at one thing (Repping, EWar, etc.) but htey suffer in other areas (tank, DPS)
T3s are worse at the specalized thing, (they are poor logistics, EWar is weaker than recons, etc.) but have better DPS and Tank to compensate.
They also cost far more, and when lost they cost the pilot 4 days of training.

So if T2s are so terrible, why are Guardians, Scimitars, Oneiros', Rapiers, Huginns, Arazus, Falcons, Zealots, among other ships, flown at all?

T3s aren't as OP as you think.

We shall see soon.

Unless they jump over to doing capitals and industrials, T3's are next.