| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Arthur Aihaken
Erebus Solia
3423
   |
Posted - 2014.05.02 01:28:00 -
[31] - Quote
motie one wrote:What will they replace them with Nestors?  lol.
I know at least one person that would be ecstatic with that. 
motie one wrote:watching the stream, I believe he said repeatedly and clearly not to worry they were NOT going to be nerfed.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Seith Kali
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 08:22:00 -
[32] - Quote
They will probably tone down the subsystems that make T3 better than T2 at a particular role - some will see it as a nerf. A loki shouldn't be a better webber than a huginn, but it should make up for it with crazy speed or damage projection or something instead.
I want to make a proteus into a dampening stratios or a tengu into a jamming eagle, that kind of stuff.
Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privalage.-á |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Ineluctable.
471
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 08:26:00 -
[33] - Quote
Why should it not? As long as Recons are absolutely unusable in fights, T3 are the only choice you have. |
Daoden
The Scope
Gallente Federation
47
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 08:30:00 -
[34] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Why should it not? As long as Recons are absolutely unusable in fights, T3 are the only choice you have.
Exactly how are recons useless? Yeah they cant tank as well as a T3 or a HAC but they arnt meant to. They arnt meant to do tons of DPS either. If you think its useless its because your ignorant and dont understand how to use it. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Ineluctable.
471
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 08:34:00 -
[35] - Quote
Daoden wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Why should it not? As long as Recons are absolutely unusable in fights, T3 are the only choice you have. Exactly how are recons useless? Yeah they cant tank as well as a T3 or a HAC but they arnt meant to. They arnt meant to do tons of DPS either. If you think its useless its because your ignorant and dont understand how to use it.
They don't need to do DPS at all, they just need to able to not get alpha'd off the field. If they get alpha'd off the field or are worn down very quickly by sustained DPS, they are useless when T3 can do the same job for the same price, but tank and actually benefit the fleet.  |
Owen Levanth
Federated Deep Space Explorations
131
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 08:37:00 -
[36] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Daoden wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Why should it not? As long as Recons are absolutely unusable in fights, T3 are the only choice you have. Exactly how are recons useless? Yeah they cant tank as well as a T3 or a HAC but they arnt meant to. They arnt meant to do tons of DPS either. If you think its useless its because your ignorant and dont understand how to use it. They don't need to do DPS at all, they just need to able to not get alpha'd off the field. If they get alpha'd off the field or are worn down very quickly by sustained DPS, they are useless when T3 can do the same job for the same price, but tank and actually benefit the fleet.
Hopefully the recon-rebalance addresses this. Hell, having my Pilgrim do more then annoy people in W-Space would be nice. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3137
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 08:52:00 -
[37] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:We all know that the T3's are about to be nerfed in oblivion. I have a Loki and Proteus, both of which I have loved flying. Both ships will have no use whatsoever after fozzie is done "loving them".
High sec missions and incursions will be obliterated next (just like high sec / low sec industry just was), so the majority of the player base won't have an opportunity to use them anyway.
while you continue your attempts to draw the mob's attention to our organisation's agenda, the organisation shall continue to target the ships we observe you flying. as your most beloved ships are nerfed one after another, remember this: while dissent is punished, cooperation and obedience may be rewarded. it's your choice. |
Seith Kali
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 08:53:00 -
[38] - Quote
Yeah, you still want the recon to be better at the role it is for. What good is a fleet recon when a T3 has just as good ewar and a better tank?
The curse should remain a better neuter than the legion, perhaps with better range. The Legion should be able to make up for the loss of neut range with greater manoeuvrability and a couple of sentry drones, for example.
If you just want stuff neuted, you pick the recon every time.
Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privalage.-á |
Asa Shahni
BIack Sun
Drunk 'n' Disorderly
13
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 12:03:00 -
[39] - Quote
Seith Kali wrote:Yeah, you still want the recon to be better at the role it is for. What good is a fleet recon when a T3 has just as good ewar and a better tank?
The curse should remain a better neuter than the legion, perhaps with better range. The Legion should be able to make up for the loss of neut range with greater manoeuvrability and a couple of sentry drones, for example.
If you just want stuff neuted, you pick the recon every time.
Sounds fair but the legion is just better at doing it (stable with a BS hull tank and twice as much neuts)
They need to give combat recons the EHP af a HAC and a better slot layout because right now you cant armor tank most of them.
Only place you see them is in nanofag gang where you dont need the massive buffer to compete in a typical HAC/BS/T3 fight.
They are all wrong in their priorities since they rebalanced the HAC then went straight into pirate faction and now they speak of T3. 
CCP needs to get their **** in order and do all the T2 and maybe a few cap/super before touching those.
Not to mention that more than half of the weapon systems are not used and most of those previously "rebalanced" ships. ^^
|
Arthur Aihaken
Erebus Solia
3426
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 12:10:00 -
[40] - Quote
Asa Shahni wrote:CCP needs to get their **** in order and do all the T2 and maybe a few cap/super before touching those.
Not to mention that more than half of the weapon systems are not used and most of those previously "rebalanced" ships. ^^
I believe they indicated Recons were next for rebalancing along with T3s.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
789
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 12:18:00 -
[41] - Quote
there has been so many T3 threads in the last few tears .. i can't imagine there is anything new too say here really...
some main points that need to be addressed by CCP are..
- rigs - either remove them from T3's completely or make them removable ...
- T2 resists - these need too go T3's aren't T2 and should be treated as such
- stats of ships - trying too figure out stats/layout/fitting etc is very complex being in the subs and should be moved to the hull
- SP loss - needs to be removed it doesn't balance anything and is silly mechanic much like drone assist is..
-price- T3 hull is ok on price but the subs are quite expensive and allowing rigs also just adds to the cost 300mil plus fully fitted
- versatility - is hampered by rigs and expensive subs and sub combinations aren't great..
- skill requirements - cruiser lv5 is counter intuitive to versatility over specialty .. especially as there is no bonus from it..
- add a 6th sub - too improve versatility the allocation of subs needs too be better and more options would help..
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Owen Levanth
Federated Deep Space Explorations
131
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 12:36:00 -
[42] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:there has been so many T3 threads in the last few tears .. i can't imagine there is anything new too say here really...
some main points that need to be addressed by CCP are..
- rigs - either remove them from T3's completely or make them removable ...
- T2 resists - these need too go T3's aren't T2 and should be treated as such
- stats of ships - trying too figure out stats/layout/fitting etc is very complex being in the subs and should be moved to the hull
- SP loss - needs to be removed it doesn't balance anything and is silly mechanic much like drone assist is..
-price- T3 hull is ok on price but the subs are quite expensive and allowing rigs also just adds to the cost 300mil plus fully fitted
- versatility - is hampered by rigs and expensive subs and sub combinations aren't great..
- skill requirements - cruiser lv5 is counter intuitive to versatility over specialty .. especially as there is no bonus from it..
- add a 6th sub - too improve versatility the allocation of subs needs too be better and more options would help..
OK I'll bite, even though I will surely regret it:
-Rigs: Good idea, but making them removable is better then just removing them completely.
-T2 resists: Technically, T3 is made out of really fance Sleeper-technology, so I see nothing wrong with T2 resists.
-I have no idea what you mean by that. Use Eve-Mon if you have trouble figuring out fits.
-SP loss is just a few days, get over it.
-What the hell is CCP supposed to do about the price? Nerf Sleeper-rat AI to make the materials more easily obtainable? Multiply the amount of Sleeper-salvage by 10? Write a stern Even-mail to every W-Space industrialist building them to demand lower prices? Good look with that.
-Good point. Hopefully the coming rebalance adresses the ****** subsystem-combinations.
-A 6th sub would be either superfluos or you would have to carve out stuff from the other subsystems to give it a reason to exist. Sounds like a bad idea, but if CCP makes the T3s better, maybe in the future during a second rebalance or something. Right now the number of subsysems isn't a problem.
My two cents. |
Seith Kali
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
17
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 12:46:00 -
[43] - Quote
The price is meh, get richer peasants.
I get skill point loss being a bit dumb, but I still have a lot to train for!
Not switching rigs is fine, you need to make intelligent choices and there are plenty of versatile rigs out there.
Additional subsystems? What did you have in mind? What do you think is missing?
Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
789
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 12:54:00 -
[44] - Quote
@ owen..
- prices ... removing rigs would certainly reduce the overall price of T3's ..
on sub prices ... well i have noticed the price drop on them quite a bit already which tells us that demand can massively inflate prices beyond what they could be.. reducing material amounts required in subs would reduce cost further..
- building stats into hulls .. normalising slot layouts and HP/fittings etc.. would make more sense than the current format ..
it would free up subs too be bonused based only.
-on 6th sub - well atm its difficult too get a T3 too do 2 or 3 things at once
- defense- tank bonuses - logi sub - warfare link sub
-offense- dps - cloaky sub
-electronic- e-war/probe/eccm/scan res
-propulsion- speed - interdiction nullifier
-engineering- pg/cap/OH bonuses
problem here is ... defense subs stops you performing logi and warfare links roles at the same time
cloaky sub stops you picking the weapon types you want ...
a 6th sub could be used too move some of the conflicting subs into a new category ... this would improve veratility
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Arthur Aihaken
Erebus Solia
3427
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 13:03:00 -
[45] - Quote
I would like to see the elimination of the skill point loss for strategic cruisers.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |