EVE Search - Sticky:[Scylla] Strategic Cruiser Defensive Subsystems

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Scylla] Strategic Cruiser Defensive Subsystems

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 15231	Posted - 2015.02.27 00:52:33 - [91] - Quote Predator BOA wrote: 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? They need a nerf, along with their base HP otherwise we still have battleship tanks on a cruiser. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 485	Posted - 2015.02.27 01:14:32 - [92] - Quote Dave Stark wrote: i honestly can't help feel that the irrelevant 3% regen bonus and the extra 2.5% shaved off the tengu defensive sub is bullshit. just nerf them all to 7.5%. I just ran some numbers on it, roughly you will gain an extra 1.5 - 2 hp/s raw regen. In other words very hard to quantify. Doesn't this actually make tengu fleets with logi better since they're slightly less reliant on reps now? Now you can fit your tengu with halo implants to drop the bloom a little? 15% regen extra on some setups is like an extra 60 ehp/s? Yeah not quite rattlesnake levels of passive regen but for something with a sig of maybe 230 that's pretty respectable. Faction warfare pilot and solo/small gang PVP advocate
LAlpha BLACK STUMP AU INC Conquerors of Coffee 12	Posted - 2015.02.27 01:31:33 - [93] - Quote T3s have a Skill loss upon the loss of ship which is extremely painful to a player. Approximately 4 Days worth of training at LV5 with +4 implants. No other ship in this game has this penalty. As such T3s should have stats like no other ship. If CCP intends to balance T3s by comparing its stats against all other ships then this Skill Loss must be removed. If not then the comparison is not a fair analysis.
4Rum Alt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.02.27 01:38:37 - [94] - Quote Dear CCP, I do not know why you let some of the players whom have no understanding of what a tech 3 ship is made you nerf them. Tech 3 ships are not overpowered and never have been. T3 ships were just before their time and all the other ships were underpowered. You have buffed all the other ships so t3's don't seem overpowered anymore. Then some many many players fail to see what a t3's ships is, so I will in the simplest why I can think of try to once again explain it. A t3's ship is basically a hybrid cruiser devised from the top T2 cruisers of the 4 empires and from sleeper technology which is far more advanced then the 4 empires technology. Now if you take the strengths of the 4 empires t2 ships and you add the strengths of sleeper ships, which are their tanks and dps, would they not be far superior to T2 ships? so why then do many of you expect t2 ships to be better than t3 ships? CCP has already made it to where no T3 can our perform the specific roles of the various t2 ships, as in a Loki can not be fit to have longer web range than a Rapier, a Proteus can not be fit to have longer point range than a Arazu, ect..... Ok going a little further, I'm sure all of you remember the movie Independence Day. Do you remember the alien ship that the Americans had, now take the top Fighter jet the Americans have and add just the shield technology(tank), the anti-gravity(speed) and weapons(dps) from the alien ship to the fighter jet. Now wouldn't that fighter jet be far superior? That my fellow Eve players is what a tech 3 ship is. I beg you CCP not to nerf the tech 3's tanks as it is what makes a t3 ship a tech 3 ship.............
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2021	Posted - 2015.02.27 02:13:07 - [95] - Quote unimatrix0030 wrote: Rowells wrote: Iirc proteus can pull 320k and legion can do 270k with only T2 mods. I believe the highest non-belonged set up I've seen on tengu reached 170 maybe. No way you can get above 100kehp on just t2 mods without implants and being able to fit modules in mids and high slots. With this nerf we get ships that aren't versatile(t3 cruisers can't change modes like the t3 destroyers), have less dps then a hac , less ehp like a hac . So basicly a useless ship. They even ecm/damp/tracking disrupt/neut/long point/paint worse then a T2. Next meta will be command ships with t2 recons.... . it is laughably easy to get over 100k with with any T3 and still fit for weapons. Tengus are already in use above 100 with full racks of rails, proteus doesnt even need a plate to breach 100 and legion can do it with 3 modules. Rigs + Augment/screening subs are very powerful.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2021	Posted - 2015.02.27 02:21:48 - [96] - Quote Alundil wrote: BL flies a RailGu setup that easily (and cheaply) hits over 200k EHP before links, etc etc. Legions in a fleet.....those don't happen unless in wspace and they are definitely notn pushing 270k EHP in typical configurations. Same thing with Proteus. No one uses them as a fleet doctrine outside of wspace and those typical configurations are, again, far less tanky than the RailGu seen in 00 (usually on the order of 120k-130k EHP). ok ive made it home and opened pyfa and i can now see my memory was wrong. I have a tengu at 299k ehp here. So my number of 100k was definitely wrong.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 837	Posted - 2015.02.27 03:00:35 - [97] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: TheMercenaryKing wrote: now if only the prop mod bonus affected only 10mn classes. a more sensible way to fix this would be to just completely prevent people from fitting oversized or undersized prop mods Agreed. The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 837	Posted - 2015.02.27 03:19:12 - [98] - Quote Rowells wrote: Could we possibly consider giving the Loki a shield boosting bonus for one of its subs? One of the lesser used subs getting a halfway decent bonus or replacing the bonus for a very good boosts to shield boosters. Seems odd that the cal dark have active bonus considering the pattern of most Calderon ships is in resists or shield amount. I'd totally support this change. The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 837	Posted - 2015.02.27 03:22:20 - [99] - Quote I don't think the EHP has been brought down quite enough yet. I would leave the resistances alone, but bring down the raw HP bonuses to 5% per level. The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
Saavik Ambraelle Lazerhawks 38	Posted - 2015.02.27 05:11:45 - [100] - Quote Zomgnomnom wrote: Make Battleships WORTH flying....... Waiting since.... what 2012? They'll never be much use in wormholes because of mass and the every present threat of being dread blapped. Intoxication is the most effective of warp scramblers.
Gurny Atreides Hounds of War. Hashashin Cartel 2	Posted - 2015.02.27 05:24:05 - [101] - Quote So we're still not giving the loki augmented plating sub?
Bullet Therapist Caldari Provisions Caldari State 267	Posted - 2015.02.27 05:49:50 - [102] - Quote Would really like to have seen all the defensive subsystems reduced to a 5% bonus. In terms of ehp, the proteus was the most egregious offender.
Eon Xero Disconnect. 0	Posted - 2015.02.27 05:55:00 - [103] - Quote Seems to me that a ship that risks skill points to fly should be pretty powerful. I also don't get the logic of making a more advanced ship (combination of advanced tech 2 ships + tech from a far more advanced civilization) less powerful than less advanced ships. Not gonna get involved in the stat comparisons people have going on here, but I think the most obvious deciding factor to how these ships are balanced should be directly based on whether they continue to have Skill Point penalties when lost. If they do, they need to stay powerful, if they don't, then nerf them into the ground, whatever. Who cares if it's logical in regards to the game lore. I refuse to do anything out of PVE with one anyway because I prefer to minimize the SP risk. Time is much more valuable than isk.
Alundil Isogen 5 871	Posted - 2015.02.27 05:58:54 - [104] - Quote Bullet Therapist wrote: Would really like to have seen all the defensive subsystems reduced to a 5% bonus. In terms of ehp, the proteus was the most egregious offender. 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. I'm right behind you
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 485	Posted - 2015.02.27 06:43:02 - [105] - Quote Faltzs wrote: Overall not bad changes, but I hope ccp also fixes tengus engineering subsystems, (one with the %power bonus has 2nd lowest power out put? and the one with cap recharge has the best so is clear the best to use.) Things like this really make you wonder what the designers were smoking at the time they made these ships. It's like they got someone who can't read the localisation language and copy-pasted data in to the totally wrong subs. And somehow this complete departure from logic made it through internal testing all the way to live... where like drones it has been neglected and ignored for like 6 years now. Faction warfare pilot and solo/small gang PVP advocate
NESTOR TRAVIS The reality disfunction 0	Posted - 2015.02.27 07:44:47 - [106] - Quote Weak buff to Loki IMO and even though I use the tengu the nerf should be more shield wise
Aiyshimin Fistful of Finns Triumvirate. 404	Posted - 2015.02.27 07:45:50 - [107] - Quote This is not a bad change ( I would have just removed rig slots instead), but why is the Proteus sig in these subs massively bigger than anything else?
Lowhyres Remember The Fallen. BLUE Alliance 14	Posted - 2015.02.27 08:19:36 - [108] - Quote im calling it now, Meta will change from Tengus back to Proteus/Legion fleets everywere. Why, because bombs still are in the game thats why.
Glathull Warlock Assassins 955	Posted - 2015.02.27 08:40:53 - [109] - Quote Frankly, I'm okay with this. I do love my tengu, and this has been expected for a while. I'm surprised it's not a lot worse. I was figuring CCP was going to dress the tengu up in a gimp suit and let all the other ships have their way with it. But this isn't that bad. I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon Shut up, Anslo. --everyone
Bullet Therapist Caldari Provisions Caldari State 267	Posted - 2015.02.27 08:41:10 - [110] - Quote Alundil wrote: Bullet Therapist wrote: Would really like to have seen all the defensive subsystems reduced to a 5% bonus. In terms of ehp, the proteus was the most egregious offender. 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. You do realize that a ship doesn't have to be suitable for current nullsec blob warfare to be overpowered, right? In any event, proteus/legion docs are definately a thing in null, and will only become the new tengus if they're changed as this current balance iteration indicates. Also, I'd suggest re-reading (and comprehending) the 'Shield Capacity: 3550 (-200)' part of the proposed adjustment. This is the tuning factor that CCP has at their disposal to address the disparity between shield and armor defensive systems, if that's what you're gnashing your teeth over. I don't know where you're pulling your numbers from in your earlier posts, but every proteus doc I've ever engaged or flown, edges over 165k ehp with t2, on a 168m sig rad (vs 233 for a tengu), before boosts. Throw in bling, or throw an extra module to tank, or both, and they edge over 180 and start topping out at 215 very rapidly and very cheaply. Bottom line is the prot is just as overpowered as the tengu, and has the distinction among the t3s as having the potential for being one of the tankiest subcaps, on no more than a cruiser hull. Even the potential for half million EHP should scream to any reasonable person that something is terribly broken on the hull.
Janeway84 Def Squadron Pride Before Fall 139	Posted - 2015.02.27 09:09:54 - [111] - Quote This is a hard nerf in a way but I guess if it makes the game better. Can't we make t3's hp 50% less when they in sov space?
Inggroth Aurora Ominae. The Gorgon Empire 40	Posted - 2015.02.27 10:04:43 - [112] - Quote Yo Fozzie, i know this is super old, but any chance of t3-offgrid-link nerf while you're doing t3 balance pass? Not talking anything major (like making Warfare Processor an offensive sub), just Warfare Processor tweak, so CS links are noticeably more powerful?
Necroborg Cytoserocin Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2015.02.27 10:07:41 - [113] - Quote I believe mentioned nerfings are missing some point. In highsec there are player who still are able to take solo wardeccer role. Since they often fight seriously outnumbered, T3 in their superiority are enablers of this nieche. To keep this nieche ("subprofession" would fit here too) I would suggest to make armor / shield bonuses dynamicaly correlating to fleet size to some small extent. That way solo wdeccers will still able to retain their playstyle while larger T3 fleets will be rebalanced.
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 127	Posted - 2015.02.27 10:35:17 - [114] - Quote As WH resident I support those changes but if u are giving us the bat please also give us the cookie. Nerfing this to 7,5 is not such a big deal tanks will still be huge. Like I wrote earlier I think you can easily bring them down to the level of loki but: 1) If buffer sub is gone we need +4% resists subs with full slots (6/7) but without rr. 2) Ls loss gone. 3) Rebalance of subsystems 4) 3/7 legion, 4/6 proteuss 5) work on signature T3 vs HAC vs Commands (maybe not increase much on T3 but lower on others) 6) anyone saying T3 need T1 resists is to be shot.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 15245	Posted - 2015.02.27 10:36:45 - [115] - Quote Alundil wrote: 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. Nerf the tengu and you will see them. Me and bullet don't see eye to eye on many things but on this he is spot on. The proteus is seriously out of whack in terms of tank compared to any cruiser and puts just about every batttleship to shame. Currently the bare hull gets: 125 shield EHP 125 armour EHP 2.32k hull EHP That's nothing I hear you cry, well yea buts that's before we slap on a subsystem. With the Augmented plating we get: 6.1K Shield EHP 14.9k EHP 2.32k EHP That's a little more than twice as much armour as a phobos, the supposedly superheavy cruiser for tackling titans. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Axloth Okiah Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 545	Posted - 2015.02.27 10:53:33 - [116] - Quote Nerfing tank/DPS on T3s is cool. I just hope you are gonna add some new neat things and roles as well (like a bubbling engineer or electronics sub \o/). W-Space Realtor
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 906	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:28:38 - [117] - Quote Step in the right direction but would like to see some mobility penalties and a little bigger sig penalty on the supplemental type subs and less of an EHP nerf unless there are specific cases where its game breaking rather than a token tweak to hp to keep people complaining happy. Increasing sig on the warfare sub is a nice idea to make off grid links less safe.
Corben Arctus Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 26	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:34:42 - [118] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: TheMercenaryKing wrote: now if only the prop mod bonus affected only 10mn classes. a more sensible way to fix this would be to just completely prevent people from fitting oversized or undersized prop mods I actually wouldn't mind if they did that.
Corben Arctus Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 26	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:35:28 - [119] - Quote Axloth Okiah wrote: Nerfing tank/DPS on T3s is cool. I just hope you are gonna add some new neat things and roles as well (like a bubbling engineer or electronics sub \o/). That's crazy talk.
Prospector Monk Perkone Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:56:34 - [120] - Quote Signature Radius: 150 (-15) Tengu Defensive - Supplemental Screening +5% Shield HP and +3% Shield Recharge Speed per level (previously +10% Shield HP) Well I guess the lvl 5 mission runner are pleased?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.