| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |

Odithia
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
60
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 08:04:00 -
[1] - Quote
A lot of people have been complaining that Strategic Cruisers are extremely strong, boasting battleship like offensive and defensive power in a nimble hull for a now competitive price point. The SP loss is still a deterrent to newer players but bittervets wonGÇÖt mind much.
After a quick search, I havn't found any recent DEV post about possible T3 rebalance.
Do you think T3 cruiser are overpowered? why? How do you guys see T3 Cruiser in a balanced game?
One idea I had was to make them similar in power to T2 cruisers, their strength would be their versatility and the surprise effect. Ditch the SP loss Remove their rig slots Completely rewamp the subsystems so that the offensive and defensive power donGÇÖt exceed that of a battlecruiser or HAC. So that it can never be more effective at EWAR than a Recon. But could get say 1 of the 2 "recon bonus" and get a bit more tank or gank compared to force recon.
|

FireFrenzy
Satan's Unicorns
36
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 08:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
I have to say i sorta like them as they are, i just wish it wasnt so skewed, i mean if you go by the numbers a tengu is "objectively better" then a legion...
I'd much rather they equalize them by buffing the weaker ones to the and maybe nerfing the big boys a little then they do so by taking the nerf bat to the knees of the entire top 3... |

Voxinian
36
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 08:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
They are not overpowered (as in dps), the Orthrus cruiser has a bigger punch then a Tengu at the moment... and that is not even a battle cruiser. |

Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1754
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 10:18:00 -
[4] - Quote
Since the balancing pass to most of the sub caps, i don't see how T3 ships can be considered overpowered anymore. +1 |

Odithia
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
60
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 10:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Since the balancing pass to most of the sub caps, i don't see how T3 ships can be considered overpowered anymore. Well if you compare a Tengu to an Eagle or a Cerberus, there is little point in using the laters.
I suppose the same applies with every other race, except maybe the Protheus/Ishtar. |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1565
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 10:47:00 -
[6] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Since the balancing pass to most of the sub caps, i don't see how T3 ships can be considered overpowered anymore.
They are still unbalanced between themselves, and there are some weirdnesses.. Liek the stupdly huge EHP pool that a proteus can reach that create NOT fun and not interesting situations in high sec and low sec.
Some subsystems are competley crap and need to be redone (liek the mixed missiles and guns from the loki.. make it a full missiles one dammit).
The eletronics subsystems are almsot always the Ewar ones, with no reason to use the others. Put and extra slot for the others if you want those to be used. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12772
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 12:06:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP have stated that they will land between T1 and T2 cruisers. Expect many nerfs but also a few buffs but mostly massive nerfs. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Elisiist Aldent
Underground Coalition
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 12:14:00 -
[8] - Quote
T3 is kinda the jack of all trades. Just the problem with a jack of all trades is that whatever the T3 can do.. something can do better!
The question is.. how's that T3 rolling up on you fit out? (unless you've just memorized the looks of every single subsystem) |

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
882
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 12:24:00 -
[9] - Quote
Elisiist Aldent wrote:T3 is kinda the jack of all trades. Just the problem with a jack of all trades is that whatever the T3 can do.. something can do better!
The question is.. how's that T3 rolling up on you fit out? (unless you've just memorized the looks of every single subsystem)
T2 should be better than T3 in a specific area that is their specialisation ... but T3 should be able too do multiple things at the same time ... which is perhaps the main issue atm .. its a case of being able too bring a T3 too do the job of 2 or 3 ships .. for a fraction of the cost and skillpoints .. the trade-off being some effectiveness and eggs in one basket ..
remove rigs and SP loss .. make subs cheap .. so they can be interchangeable .. build the fittings/HP etc .. into the ship .. so subs only effect the ships bonuses .. this would make the hassle of changing subs and mods much less of a problem. and makes it easier too compare too other ships ..
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. |

Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
474
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 12:24:00 -
[10] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:CCP have stated that they will land between T1 and T2 cruisers. Expect many nerfs but also a few buffs but mostly massive nerfs.
i dont see severe nerfs. t3 are the carrot to dangle to have people move to wh's. nerf t3 to far, why buy them? no one buys...,why be in the wh's.
why rebalance is hard, how to control them but not have eve just screw it and pay tithes to tne 0.0 moon goo crews |

Nariya Kentaya
The Pulsar Innovation Surely You're Joking
1496
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 12:25:00 -
[11] - Quote
Elisiist Aldent wrote:T3 is kinda the jack of all trades. Just the problem with a jack of all trades is that whatever the T3 can do.. something can do better!
The question is.. how's that T3 rolling up on you fit out? (unless you've just memorized the looks of every single subsystem) The problem with a "jack of all trades" is that eve is a game of specializations. If you can do everything with 1 ship at once, but not as well as something that focuses on just 1, then 9 out of 10 times youll lose to the specialized ship. if you can do anything, but have to refit for roles, then it would be vastly more effective to just go to a carrier/dockup and exchange for a more powerful (and cheaper) specialized ship.
All nerfing them will do, is take away more value from living in womrhole space, since the only thing worth looting at that point will be blue-loot for NPC buy orders. |

Odithia
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
60
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 13:55:00 -
[12] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote: All nerfing them will do, is take away more value from living in womrhole space, since the only thing worth looting at that point will be blue-loot for NPC buy orders.
It's not just about nerfing. It's about balancing every subsistem so each one has its use. It's about finding alternative to rigs that kill the purpose of those ships. And it's about balancing the ships so that they don't completely dwarf T2 cruisers. Hence, the nerfing part would only affect the "super HAC of doom" subsystems.
Also I believe that a good rewamp of this class of ship has good chances to increase the demmand of such ships.
Balancing all this is a huge pile of work due to how the subsistems interact wich eachother, maybe that's why it's hasn't happened yet. |

Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
515
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 14:12:00 -
[13] - Quote
I don't like the idea of having no cpu and scanning/powergrid rigs on t3. They would have to be completely changed.
It would decrease their uses.
I think main problem is the tank. Dps and utility are certainly nice but not overpowered in any way.
EvE-Mail me if you need anything. |

Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1755
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 14:16:00 -
[14] - Quote
Odithia wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Since the balancing pass to most of the sub caps, i don't see how T3 ships can be considered overpowered anymore. Well if you compare a Tengu to an Eagle or a Cerberus, there is little point in using the laters. I suppose the same applies with every other race, except maybe the Protheus/Ishtar.
So why is the Cerberus one of the most popular ships for a shield fleet? +1 |

Bohneik Itohn
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
721
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 14:21:00 -
[15] - Quote
T3's are only going to be nerfed in a few minor respects, and even then it's going to be a few select subsystems getting the axe that unbalance the rest of the ship.
Remember, T3's were created to be effective and versatile in WH space primarily. That doesn't mean that they have carte blanche to be unbalanced anywhere else, and that's the issue being addressed, but it does mean that they will never drop below the point of being ineffective in WH's. Corps in C5's and C6's rely heavily on their T3 sub-cap support to control both PvP and PvE engagements, wringing out every last drop of efficacy these ships have. Ruin that and there will be a lot of problems.
As mentioned by CCP during the last fanfest, the goal isn't to nerf t3's into the ground, it's to bring the unbalanced subsystems into check and to buff the subsystems that aren't being used so that T3's can enjoy the full versatility they were designed for.
I expect T3's to get an actual true to heart rebalance in every sense of the word, with no real drop in desirability or function, just a squashing of the outlying abuses of particular combinations of effects. Talk has also been floating around about removable rigs so that people don't have to stockpile hulls, defeating one of t he primary purposes of versatility.
Call me an optimist, but I think in the end T3's are going to experience an overall buff. 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. |

Ghaustyl Kathix
Rising Thunder
17
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 14:54:00 -
[16] - Quote
I think when he was being interviewed on Down the Pipe, Fozzie mentioned nerfing the augmented plating subsystem, but he didn't mention other nerfs. They did say "rigs won't hold you back anymore" and "we won't be nerfing them into the ground," so I'm pretty hopeful that they found a way to remove the limitation of rigs for T3s without cutting the rig slots, like rigging subsystems themselves or taking the rigs off of them.
But yeah, mostly I think it'll be a buff to the lesser-used systems and T3s. |

Nariya Kentaya
The Pulsar Innovation Surely You're Joking
1496
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 15:48:00 -
[17] - Quote
Bohneik Itohn wrote:T3's are only going to be nerfed in a few minor respects, and even then it's going to be a few select subsystems getting the axe that unbalance the rest of the ship.
Remember, T3's were created to be effective and versatile in WH space primarily. That doesn't mean that they have carte blanche to be unbalanced anywhere else, and that's the issue being addressed, but it does mean that they will never drop below the point of being effective in WH's. Corps in C5's and C6's rely heavily on their T3 sub-cap support to control both PvP and PvE engagements, wringing out every last drop of efficacy these ships have. Ruin that and there will be a lot of problems.
As mentioned by CCP during the last fanfest, the goal isn't to nerf t3's into the ground, it's to bring the unbalanced subsystems into check and to buff the subsystems that aren't being used so that T3's can enjoy the full versatility they were designed for.
I expect T3's to get an actual true to heart rebalance in every sense of the word, with no real drop in desirability or function, just a squashing of the outlying abuses of particular combinations of effects. Talk has also been floating around about removable rigs so that people don't have to stockpile hulls, defeating one of t he primary purposes of versatility.
Call me an optimist, but I think in the end T3's are going to experience an overall buff. Except CCP also said they want them to be weaker in ANY regard to a T2. but able to fulfill multiple roles.
in other words, in EVE meta, they would never be used, because they would become too easy to overwhelm with specialized ships.
CCP pointed out in their graphs they wanted them to have less fight than a HAC, less logi than a logistics, etc, but be able to fit pieces of each. fact is, if they balance it around doing multiple roles, then to be relevant, fitting them for solely one would HAVE to be mroe powerful than a T2 because of the fitting space, which makes the rebalance irrelevant, and rebalancing them so that even focused they arent as good as a T2 would mean that when fulfiling their "multiple role" **** theyll be almost useless.
and no, throwing an extra T3-and-a-half of mods/subs in your inventory with a mobile depot is NOT justifiable as "being able to fulfill multiple roles", like so many propose, because relying on a mobile depot for your specialization means you lose your defining trait the second shooting starts (and lets not forget you need ammo and loot room aswell) |

Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
731
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 15:52:00 -
[18] - Quote
No they aren't overpowered - however I don't think the balance of bonuses and penalties is quite right - i.e. that afore mentioned augmented plating sub-system where the sig penalty associated with the massive increase in buffer HP is too small (in some cases even lower than the resist or active tank bonused ones which should be the ones with the smaller sigs). While they shouldn't be quite as big as BCs or BSs that extra HP should come with a sig and possibility mobility penalties that is much closer to that class than that of the smaller cruisers.
Removing rig slots would be utterly daft for reasons which is a whole topic of its own and taking the knife to HP or similar isn't much better. There are however quite a few areas where they don't have appropriate penalties for the bonus certain sub-systems give IMO. There are also a few tweaks needed to make certain configurations more useful. |

Bohneik Itohn
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
721
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 15:58:00 -
[19] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:[ Except CCP also said they want them to be weaker in ANY regard to a T2. but able to fulfill multiple roles.
Who, when and where? The talk from fanfest and Down the pipe is easily found and recorded for all to see. I haven't seen anything about bringing them down below T2's, which is just a silly concept and defies all reasonable practices from a balance standpoint.
There is no gap to fill between T1's and T2's, and versatility will not make the ships more appealing than T2's for WHers if they fall behind T2's. The majority of WH corps are fully capable of manufacturing their own T2's and bugger the logistics of having a different ship for every role in the POS.
I'm not getting all teary-eyed here or wishing upon that twinkly star in my heart, it's just a simple fact. There is no place for a ship between T1's and T2's. That's where faction ships sit and they fill those roles better than T3's ever will. 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. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 16:09:00 -
[20] - Quote
I definitely think there is a problem with T3s being OP relative to T1 and Pirate Battleships. For example you don't see many Maelstroms in null or WH space, even though they are nominally more expensive than a T3. I don't know if the answer is to nerf the T3s or buff some of the battleships, but I would think that CCP would like to see more of a balance. |

Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
731
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 16:14:00 -
[21] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I definitely think there is a problem with T3s being OP relative to T1 and Pirate Battleships. For example you don't see many Maelstroms in null or WH space, even though they are nominally more expensive than a T3. I don't know if the answer is to nerf the T3s or buff some of the battleships, but I would think that CCP would like to see more of a balance.
A maelstrom is relatively slow and lumbering - for quite a lot of use in null people don't want to be in what is essentially a sitting duck (hence the huge rise in the use of ishtars and VNI - other than just because of their drone bonuses) and it lacks attributes that make it that useful as a ship of the line outside of its artillery alpha role. You may see them used a little for PVE due to the active tanking capabilities. |

Bohneik Itohn
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
721
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 16:18:00 -
[22] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I definitely think there is a problem with T3s being OP relative to T1 and Pirate Battleships. For example you don't see many Maelstroms in null or WH space, even though they are nominally more expensive than a T3. I don't know if the answer is to nerf the T3s or buff some of the battleships, but I would think that CCP would like to see more of a balance.
This is not a reasonable argument. You don't see a lot of ships in a lot of different types of space. No one flies HIC's or dictors in high sec (dictors don't even get seen in low). You don't see T1 frigates in null beyond the first couple systems in. Pirate factions are just sprinkled about like a dash of salt in null, perhaps 1 or 2 per hundred, etc...
Different ships have different uses, and some of those uses are more practical in some areas of space where players and fleets are more prone to different types of behavior. It has nothing to do with whether Maelstroms are more or less expensive than T3's, and everything to do with whether a Maelstrom has a role that people find useful in WH's and null. 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. |

Ghaustyl Kathix
Rising Thunder
17
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 16:31:00 -
[23] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I definitely think there is a problem with T3s being OP relative to T1 and Pirate Battleships. For example you don't see many Maelstroms in null or WH space, even though they are nominally more expensive than a T3. That's likely because of a lack of mobility. If you see something on d-scan in a battleship, you have a lot less time to react in a battleship than in a T3. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12775
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 17:48:00 -
[24] - Quote
Bohneik Itohn wrote:Nariya Kentaya wrote:[ Except CCP also said they want them to be weaker in ANY regard to a T2. but able to fulfill multiple roles.
Who, when and where? The talk from fanfest and Down the pipe is easily found and recorded for all to see. I haven't seen anything about bringing them down below T2's, which is just a silly concept and defies all reasonable practices from a balance standpoint.
Its in the ship chart they brought out at the start of teircide. Its also not daft to have specialised ships that are better than none specialised ships in whatever they are specialising in.
What is daft is having a cruiser with the tank of a battleship, the firepower of a hack the sig of a light cruiser and the speed of a fast cruiser. Seriously, outside of the Ishtar why would you fly any hac over a tengu? And then we have the daftness that is fitting both a cov ops cloak and a nullifier at the same time.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
732
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 18:45:00 -
[25] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: Seriously, outside of the Ishtar why would you fly any hac over a tengu? And then we have the daftness that is fitting both a cov ops cloak and a nullifier at the same time.
Regarding Ishtar depressingly that also applies outside of any t3 topic, that is really another topic of its own however.
Turning T3s into something comparable to current T2 stats though would be a complete joke as things stand - go one way and you water them down so far you lose a lot of character from the game which is the last thing it needs, go the other way and you end up with something that has such high cost and penalties for what it is no one wants to fly them. |

Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1879
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 18:46:00 -
[26] - Quote
the 'jack of all trades, master of none' does not make a ship crap in eve.
falcons and rooks are ECM specialists but ECMgu's are used in some engagements for their tougher tank and other options they provide despite their weaker ECM strength.
covert ops and e-war resistant logi (once they have a decent logi sub) would be another useful option even if they are not as powerful logi as T2.
so i only anticipate (and hope for) a nerf to the raw combat abilities of T3's. Some areas will get buffed and i hope T3's in general get a lot more freedom and ease of use (i.e. get rid of SP loss and rigs) EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |

Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1879
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 18:48:00 -
[27] - Quote
Rroff wrote:
Turning T3s into something comparable to current T2 stats though would be a complete joke as things stand - go one way and you water them down so far you lose a lot of character from the game which is the last thing it needs, go the other way and you end up with something that has such high cost and penalties for what it is no one wants to fly them.
what does that even mean?
and penalties can be removed, costs are relative. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |

Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
732
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 18:56:00 -
[28] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Rroff wrote:
Turning T3s into something comparable to current T2 stats though would be a complete joke as things stand - go one way and you water them down so far you lose a lot of character from the game which is the last thing it needs, go the other way and you end up with something that has such high cost and penalties for what it is no one wants to fly them.
what does that even mean? and penalties can be removed, costs are relative.
Maybe not quite the best way of putting it but - for instance there is a lot more interest in killing a shiny tengu say than a drake, water t3s down too much and that is largely reduced or goes away leaving less interesting things in the game. |

Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1879
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 19:00:00 -
[29] - Quote
so your saying the very reason its fun to kill T3's is because they are so blatantly over powered? EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
883
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 19:01:00 -
[30] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:Rroff wrote:
Turning T3s into something comparable to current T2 stats though would be a complete joke as things stand - go one way and you water them down so far you lose a lot of character from the game which is the last thing it needs, go the other way and you end up with something that has such high cost and penalties for what it is no one wants to fly them.
what does that even mean? and penalties can be removed, costs are relative. Maybe not quite the best way of putting it but - for instance there is a lot more interest in killing a shiny tengu say than a drake, water t3s down too much and that is largely reduced or goes away leaving less interesting things in the game.
more options are always a good thing .. this is what the crux of the T3 debate is about .. more options .. moving away from the uber battleship like stats that T3's use all the time .. bar the cloaky WH type fits 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. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |