Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7214
|
Posted - 2014.07.14 18:27:00 -
[31] - Quote
I think T3s should be true jacks of all trades. Where is the mining subsystems, the hauling subsystems, the PI subsystems etc etc. So then you have a ship that's no where near as good as a 'real' ship made to purpose, but one that can pop up a mobile depot, change on the fly and be at least somewhat useful in a given task. |
|
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
400
|
Posted - 2014.07.14 20:04:00 -
[32] - Quote
Trolling post removed. Personal attack post removed. Off-topic post removed.
Forum rule 5. Trolling is prohibited. Forum rule 4. Personal attacks are prohibited. Forum rule 26. Off-topic posting is prohibited. ISD Tyrozan Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department @ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL |
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
330
|
Posted - 2014.07.14 22:46:00 -
[33] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:The reason for their existence is probably not as concrete and irrefutable as you've permitted yourself to believe. At this point in the balancing program T3s are being outclassed in a number of roles and perhaps as part of the T3 rebalance addressing one of their most obscure pain points should be a considered.
Apparently its keeping some like the people you want to hook up from flying them sooooo....it must be working. Yes there are hundreds out there. This is keeping hundreds + the damn the sp loss sucks holdouts away. You made the point that its more solo based than fleet and should shift there. Here I will use my argument of that is better for solo is even better for the fleet. I use it in the lets boost eve solo pvp threads. Ship that better handles say 2 on 1's.....becomes even better when its the 2 on 1 and not the 1 vs 2. Consolidation of subs also a bad idea. T3 is nice in that early on its it training you pick what you want to do well first and roll with it. Want the dakka dakka t3, offensive subs a good top list skill to put on the to do list. I want to make my tengu a falcon variant....I'd put in that skill instead. I get what I want faster, you get what you want faster. We all win end of the day really. Also you have to lose the must be xyz skill e-peen. I have popped a few t3 to pebcak errors. I then roll them out at one skill at 4 not 5. They still work decent enough and the skill loss is a subtle reminder to not fly a tard at least for a little while. T3 based on t2 skills he start of rather slippery slope...you don't want this. Skills should not carry over for it. This be a slippery slope just in t3 alone. I could push for my CS 5 boosting my t3 link fits after CCP had logi skill affect logi t3 fits. CCP with firm intent in a rebalance had t3 boost less than CS. This would negate this. Even worse...t3 gets 3 areas of link boosts vice t2's 2 areas of boosting. I'd get stronger boosts for more areas. This is why t3 is a pain to balance. You in your example looked at logistics. t3 balance has to look at all options it can do. YOu also need to look grandscheme as you keep on comparing t2 to t3. Cerb had a short lived hayday with rlml post buff prenerf. RLML got its nerf bat...and cerb got cut down abit. end result.....tengu still kept its dominant role in caldari cruiser use. Have to look at the big picture...not all races have t2 cruisers outshining the t3 the take away.
This reply of your doesn't really make a lot of sense but I'll address what I can get from it.
The 2v1/1v2 is supposed to be a losing situation for the 1 in straight-up combat. T3's are not meant to steamroll entire fleets. In having said that, bringing the right gear to kill something is also prudent and a contextually blank comparison is a poor platform for making this suggestion. Part of the reason why I said in my OP to make synergy bonuses for subsystems and skills was to simplify balancing and hopefully avoid future extemporanerous efforts like RLML/RHML being repeated.
The skill multipliers still add up. I see where you're coming from I just don't agree with it. I think it's a relic from an earlier design ideology that CCP no longer follows and it's something they can fix now.
The skillpoint loss has no precedent anywhere else in the game. It's not a "fun" mechanic and doesn't promote the use of T3's in scenarios where their loss is a fair probability except by those who take huge risks poorly evaluated anyway. For these people they by and large make it through on luck or as you said "I have popped a few t3 to pebcak errors".
The precedent for T3 synergy skills I based off of capital ships. You specialise and have the bonuses roll over to other parts of the game (logi skill affecting both capitals and T3's) and this helps I think create two unique lines of thought where capitals are strictly a fleet vessel with incredible power and T3's slip through the cracks and become difficult to define exactly. By letting them gain some kind of internal progression with bonuses supplied from T2 skills from elsewhere you can create a more definable and personal kind of uniqueness to the T3. Certainly we may say that only players with many dozens of millions of SP invested in specifically these things will be the only people who have the stats on this ship maxed out including synergies while its a paltry 20 days or so to train a t3 to maximum effectiveness from all 4 to all 5 now?
Using boosts/links as an example anywhere is just ridiculous. They're a horribly broken mechanic and should be deleted from the game until they're working properly (on grid).
You're telling me that the cerb overtook the tengu pre-rlml nerf and that post rlml nerf the tengu took back over? What is the lesson here? That CCP balancing is schitsophrenic? It was never that the Tengu was weaker than the cerb, it was that the cerb could fit tengu tank and a hilariously long sustained damage profile on a budget of 200m instead of 600m. Also don't forget that the two ships are by and large the same animal - any skills that benefit one benefits the other except for obviously subsystem skills or the strat cruiser skill itself. Also everyone knows how broken some T3 subs are so that was a contributing factor there too. Did you also know that post-rebalance that the cerb is quite a bit faster? Lots of little things. Wife calling. Long replies again tomorrow if I have time. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
142
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 06:41:00 -
[34] - Quote
I dunno. Given their overall flexibility and power, the loss of skill levels for losing one seems fair compensation.
Also, have you seen them in fleets? Nasty things. |
Lan Wang
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
29
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 09:00:00 -
[35] - Quote
Petrified wrote:I dunno. Given their overall flexibility and power, the loss of skill levels for losing one seems fair compensation. Also, have you seen them in fleets? Nasty things.
93% resists across the board 120k ehp and great tackle from a loki, the thing can tank a fleet long enough to kill a few ships and for your friends to get on grid. the sp loss isnt a big enough deal for me not to use one
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
330
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 11:01:00 -
[36] - Quote
Yea but as you aptly pointed out that is a fleet fit and not a solo ship. The removal of the sp loss is only a part of what I'd like to see change with T3. It's really hard to understand why people are so attached to the sp loss. It's a "jesus feature" and it makes no sense within the context of the rest of the game. CCP pretty clearly designed T3 to be some kind of end game feature with the SP loss to do *something* about controlling their proliferation. It hasn't worked and wormholers complain that t3 are worthless now because the market is so saturated with them. If they were meant to be an endgame thing then banning them from highsec should have been introduced to help curb their use, not sp loss.
And if ccp do nerf he t3 severely once they rebalance them then what? Will SP loss still be viewed as necessary/deterrent/inconvenience or will be jump up and down that its stupid and should have been removed? It's just a dumb crutch mechanic and should be removed and I've yet to see an actual argument that can objectively state reasons why it should stay. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
330
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 11:09:00 -
[37] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:I think T3s should be true jacks of all trades. Where is the mining subsystems, the hauling subsystems, the PI subsystems etc etc. So then you have a ship that's no where near as good as a 'real' ship made to purpose, but one that can pop up a mobile depot, change on the fly and be at least somewhat useful in a given task.
I do think that t3 could stand to have a larger cargo bay at minimum. My cerb has something like 600m3? Or whatever while my tengu gets a glorious 250 or so. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
143
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 00:53:00 -
[38] - Quote
What makes you think there is an end game in EVE? Or, for that matter, that the Tengu is the end-game? I've never seen EVE as having an 'end-game' that you get in other MMOs. |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
330
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 06:23:00 -
[39] - Quote
I think there is a pretty defined end game and certain groups are in it already. What else is there for them to do/achieve after this? At the point you run out of milestones to achieve you can be said to have reached the endgame. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Bohneik Itohn
Amarrian Salvage Gnomes and Associates
510
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 17:47:00 -
[40] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Yea but as you aptly pointed out that is a fleet fit and not a solo ship. The removal of the sp loss is only a part of what I'd like to see change with T3. It's really hard to understand why people are so attached to the sp loss. It's a "jesus feature" and it makes no sense within the context of the rest of the game. CCP pretty clearly designed T3 to be some kind of end game feature with the SP loss to do *something* about controlling their proliferation. It hasn't worked and wormholers complain that t3 are worthless now because the market is so saturated with them. If they were meant to be an endgame thing then banning them from highsec should have been introduced to help curb their use, not sp loss.
And if ccp do nerf he t3 severely once they rebalance them then what? Will SP loss still be viewed as necessary/deterrent/inconvenience or will be jump up and down that its stupid and should have been removed? It's just a dumb crutch mechanic and should be removed and I've yet to see an actual argument that can objectively state reasons why it should stay.
Jesus feature? No... It's well explained and most people are okay with how it fits into Eve. T3's are comprised of bits and pieces of technology that was not developed by the current factions. They have taken to slapping it together with a bit of duct tape, elbow grease and rainbows to get better ships, but they don't know exactly what they're doing and the method pilots interface with them is a minefield. Getting forcefully ejected from your ship causes brain damage in the same way that hard resetting a PC back in the day used to carry a risk of damaging the hard drive. You use your mind to control the ship.
WH'ers have complete control over the supply of the T3 market. If prices are dropping, they have only each other to blame. Volume sold has remained steady for about a year now.
How does banning them from high sec make them an endgame ship? They're subcaps. All subcaps are balanced with all security ratings in mind, only capitals are balanced specifically for low and null sec. The idea that a ship being banned from high sec is a prerequisite for it having endgame uses is just as absurd as suggesting that everyone's endgame in Eve is the same experience. Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!-á - Freyya
Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help. |
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
166
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:10:00 -
[41] - Quote
At no time should simply dying in a particular ship lead to SP loss, its a horrible mechanic that needs to go. Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
Ellendras Silver
Ordo Drakonis Nulli Secunda
148
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:18:00 -
[42] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:At no time should simply dying in a particular ship lead to SP loss, its a horrible mechanic that needs to go.
i agree but AFTER they are nerfed/balanced Carpe noctem |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
330
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 22:56:00 -
[43] - Quote
Ellendras Silver wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:At no time should simply dying in a particular ship lead to SP loss, its a horrible mechanic that needs to go. i agree but AFTER they are nerfed/balanced
And thats part of what I am getting at. Th sp loss should be removed as part of a more comprehensive rebalance.
Including some of the stuff I have raised previously https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Bohneik Itohn
Amarrian Salvage Gnomes and Associates
512
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 00:13:00 -
[44] - Quote
Skill loss sucks - Yes.
This means skill loss is a bad mechanic - No.
Skill loss is a unique tool used to balance the ships. Something unique had to be used to balance them because they were given unique advantages, so the standard balance mechanisms were not sufficient to bring them in line. If you remove SP loss you have to find a way to balance the unique advantage appropriately
This does not mean increasing initial training time along with the rebalance. Increasing training time is not a significant drawback and is no drawback at all for people who have already trained the skills, since CCP has a policy of allowing you to keep ranks instead of raw SP value. This means that you'd have to nerf T3's into the ground.
So you've nerfed T3's in exchange for skill mechanics you are comfortable with. This likely puts most, if not all, T3 subsystem combinations below the performance of T2's since versatility is such a big advantage, combined with unique skills that must be trained separately from the cores unlike the T2's. Great job, now anybody who couldn't fly a T3 before the change has no desire to do so. They are better off training for the T2's for equal if not better performance since that also allows them to train core skills which cross over to other ships. Not only this, but training those core skills benefits them across all ship factions, and not just one. T3's would be the biggest waste of time to train into for anyone not currently trained for them.
I don't like the idea of losing SP any more than the rest of you, but I also like the performance offered by the T3's. CCP has stated they have no intention of nerfing them, that they just want to balance the subsystems out and bring the OP combinations in line with expectations and the underpowered combinations up to snuff. This means that if they do it correctly T3's will have MORE utility after balancing than they currently do.
So that's what it boils down to. CCP feels that SP loss is a fair trade for what the T3's are capable of, and if you want SP loss removed, you need a reasonable and equally valuable drawback to replace it with that fits in with CCP's current plans.
Increasing training time does none of this. Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!-á - Freyya
Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |