Gday Guys

It seem like an interesting Buff and Nerf with this Subsystem.
But question is there going to be and Nerf or Buff with the Armor or Shield Resistance with the changes?

Clearly you haven't seen what's typically flown in fleets where the most egregious issues are most 'abused'. There are no big proteus fleets. It's not something that has ever caught on, ever. Can't be that egregious.

T3s Vs FracBS
-less tank
-1.5X less dps
-skill loss
-less cap
-less slots (vindi have 5 mid-slots proteus only 3)
-less anti-jam
-less optimal
-MJD?
-target count
-lock range
-fitting problems
-learning subsis skills in 5 takes over 20 days

+agility
+warp speed
+scan res
+mwd speed (20% more then Bs)
+weapon sig rate
+sig size
+mass
and why?

You think, I have to compare 500KK hull ships with under 200KK hull costs?!

So you are saying that a 500 mil cruiser shud be weaker than a 50 mil battlecruiser?

So your logic is that a more skill intensive ship and more expensive ship (not due to rarity or AT rewards) shud be weaker just cause its smaller....lol

Whats the problem here? I see this in null all the time and even in low with smaller numbers. 150 machs/tfi's vs 150 tengus nothing new in null blobs. For example this is fleet doctrine for stain russians and they are not only ones using arty mach doctrine with these numbers.

Get on the fighter assist thread and your bucket will be well used.

Well i have seen 150 mach fleets. But i guess you havent been in stain. Alltho im pretty sure they use these elsewhere too.
And yes you can alpha tengus from enough range when you have enough alpha. Your speed and sig doesnt work so well from range. With enough numbers T3's will pop. I have seen this happen.

Point of my earlier comparison was that your far more likely to see links used in conjunction with a T3 than a lot of other ships, even without the links though the overall mobility and sig is out of whack with the EHP by a considerable margin - that isn't to say the answer is to nerf EHP. Changes to T3s should be about making the player make a little more choice/trade off not about taking a chainsaw to any one attribute.

No reason why you can't have the options for both, having the supplemental type sub-systems allow for huge tank but not great mobility/sig doesn't tread on the other T2 cruiser's toes and you have the option of using the adaptive type sub-system if you want the mobility and sig to compare to T2 cruisers at a loss to potential EHP.

The fact is a lot of T2 cruisers are somewhere between bland and uninteresting and downright ineffective cutting T3s back to compare to and using that as your base to work off would do nothing good for the game. Possibly enhancing the specialisation of T2 cruisers into some interesting capabilities would be of more benefit than nerfing T3s into mediocrity - I don't even know why I would fly a vagabond or muninn these days T3 or no - though rise hasn't done too bad a job with recons - I can see myself using 1-2 of them now that I wouldn't have touched before.