"T3s obsolete all T2 cruisers"

"T3s replace battleships"

"T3s should be balanced against battleships"

It's almost as if there can be situational reasons to use both ships.

Really most of the GrrrrT3s threads where because HACs were terrible or because certain demographics really hated off grid boosting. What's left now? GrrrrT3s are flown as fleetships! But so are battleships still! This is a problem because GrrrT3!

Mostly its an issue with the massive EHP numbers these ships get that pushes them into mid BS range coupled with HAC level damage, small sig and fast speeds. The big reason why not a lot of T3 fleets are kicking abou is due to the fact that just about everyone has moved onto drone fleets, which T3 do poorly.

Never heard this one.


Haven't heard that one either.


Yeah, this is one I just made up myself. Basically, it's just, why should T3s be allowed to breach the thresholds of three separate classes? Why should they be allowed to diminish the usefulness of three separate classes simply by existing?

I suppose at this juncture, the question I have to ask myself is, would the game be better if T3s never existed? Unfortunately, my imagination lacks the scope to comprehend how the meta would look if T3s didn't exist. I'd be interested to hear some thoughts about that.

T3s are fast by battleship standards, but slow compared to HACs and t1 cruisers.

Encroachment, as you call it, is inevitable and its also a good thing.

Consider battlecruisers.

Why?


What's the point? They suck.

Well okay, maybe only 2/3 of them suck. A couple of the ABCs are decent and the drone boats are good, but again, that's just drones being drones.

What's the point? They suck.

Well okay, maybe only 2/3 of them suck. A couple of the ABCs are decent and the drone boats are good, but again, that's just drones being drones.

So you admit rebalancing has made most battlecruisers suck but you won't admit that CCP's supposed vision for T3 rebalancing doesn't fall into the "anyone that uses these after tiericide has to be ******* ********" category.

Why?


What's the point? They suck.

Well okay, maybe only 2/3 of them suck. A couple of the ABCs are decent and the drone boats are good, but again, that's just drones being drones.

T3s overshadow other ships in basic combat. Tank, gank and mobility, simply. They are more powerful than HACs. They are more powerful than navy and pirate cruisers. They are more powerful than BCs. They overshadow all these ships because they have BS tank, BC damage, and cruiser mobility and scan res.

T3s are pretty slow and have poor agility compared to HACs and T1 cruisers.

Seriously, try and make a Loki that does a Vagabond's job. Yeah it'll have more ehp, but it'll be useless for hit and run kiting.

Do you feel that because they don't obsolete recon and logi, that they don't need to be touched?

T3s are pretty slow and have poor agility compared to HACs and T1 cruisers.

Seriously, try and make a Loki that does a Vagabond's job. Yeah it'll have more ehp, but it'll be useless for hit and run kiting.

Yeah see this is the problem with your arguments, if they can be called that.

Look, there are literally hundreds of different ships. Any ship that is only used by even 1% of pilots is doing pretty well. You use vague terms like "overshadowing" but what does that even mean?

The other ships wouldn't be any better.

Even after being asked directly what the actual problem is with T3s, all you can come up with is the fact that people are using them therefore they must be OP.

Also you can't seriously tell me T3s have better mobility than HACs, especially considering HACs now have the 50% MWD sig bloom reduction. Only two T3s have a bonus to that, and it's half the strength.

Better than most.

T3 are getting nerfed, CCP have said as much and just about everyone has expected one for years now. The very fact that they are getting compared with BS and BC is enough to show how out of whack they are.

It would be easier to identify specific problems if I could tell what they are actually supposed to be. Seeing as they are classed as cruisers, I will assume they are supposed to be cruisers, which means they are breaking the dynamic of the tiericide because they have too much tank and probably too much DPS when compared with other cruisers.

I've yet to see a single argument from you on this subject.

I didn't claim they had better mobility than HACs, though I'm glad you acknowledged the MWD bonuses available to two of the T3 cruisers.

Do HICs have too much tank?

Do HACs have too much DPS?