i thought that was logical and it only support my point T3 cruisers are OP and need a nerf. but the TS wants to give BS a HUGE buff because Tr cruisers are OP and that makes as much sense as a cat with swimming fins

Hmm.. I don't know if that is the answer. Being a slow ship doesn't have to be a bad thing. When I am on SiSi I get to fly a lot of battleships that I usually wouldn't but being slow didn't really have a bitter taste.

But on one thing I hope everyone will agree with you, I do, the Abaddon - the worst laserboat in New Eden, even worse than the Punisher.
Was trying to make this ship work last night but for the life of me there was no way to make it viable. The damage bonus is misplaced and should be replaced with something useful even if it's just the capacitor use bonus some Amarr ships share.

Just for my curiousity, what do you think is wrong with the Navy Apocalypse? I always liked the Apocalypse since I can fly her and the Navy Apocalypse is just a little easier to fit, so I am curious.

Why do you think that having more buffer would be a good thing on the four ships?

I really think that current trend to hull-buffer everything is terrible to say the least. It used to be an artform to active tank. Now it is racing challenge to put as much bulkhead on every boat as you can.

Btw. we need a pirate faction implant set that increases hull hp by 7 million % and 3 trillion as set bonus /sarcasm.

please pee in this cup i would like to test it for drugs

in case you don't believe me http://eveboard.com/pilot/Ellendras_Silver
edit:
[quote]

I guess they like them as much as I do.



[quote=O2 jayjay]More EHP makes it more of a grind to kill the Battleship. Makes it harder to take them off field which gives more time for logi to cycle reps on.

Can you see the difference?

Problem is that our hypothetical Apocalypse doesn't hit anything below another battleship or a planet, dps or not. Even if you would increase the laser damage by 2x that hypothectial ~12000hp damage every ~6 seconds still doesn't hit anything.

But I agree that a battleship should have a lot more resources than a tiny cruiser and not get sunk in 20 seconds.

I see the difference, proteus have 1000dps at 4km. and lose any damage at 20km
Apoc at 22km
nice difference isnt it?

if T3s were overpowered, CCP would have nerfed them ages ago like they did with the op Ishtar! They may need slight tweaks but they are by no means OP...

I hate these arguments about T3s being op with people throwing about there opinion like it's fact.
...
And like it or not, cost is a balancing factor.

And the Proteus will have all the mobility it wants to dictate range, transversal, and whether or not the engagement continues. Nice difference, isn't it?

They did, and then said there's more to come.



Nice fail

Is their a way to restore your post? I jacked it up and deleted it.

normal tanked proteus have same speed at mwd, as bs for example mach. Proteus cant dictate anything, he doesnt have utiliti high slots. enough med slots(3 may be 4 at best)

@O2 jayjay
i don't hate T3 cruisers or else i would not have trained them, and i already stated that i am not against a small buff for BS in general, what the TS suggests in his OP is like stated before not out of proportion, but it is off the scale. The reason i want T3 cruisers to be nerfed is because they are so OP it is not funny, and nerfing them will solve a lot ofc it isnt easy as a lot of people depend on its income (WH industry) and they need to be able to do WH sites properly

@W0lf Crendraven
i really cant take you seriously i am sorry but T3 cruisers crush every T2 cruiser and even battle-cruiser in the game only exception is the commandship (only since they changed it) and logi

@Oskolda Eriker
funny but why do you say flights?????? you mean i never lost a T3 cruiser well not on this toon no but on 2 other toons i did, i can assure you i used them on multiple characters

That blog is referring to T3 balance in terms of their subsystems being unbalanced, as there are certain configurations that are almost never used. It also clearly says that their tank was nerfed to "bring them in line", which i would say, indicates that ccp don't conciser then "overpowered".

So get your facts straight if you are going to disagree... Oh and if price wasn't a balancing factor, all comparable ship hulls would be the same price and every ship would be using officer mods... but yeah "fail" was another brilliant argument.

I never had a problem applying dps to T3. I go to my opt, scram and web it then shoot my main batteries at it. As long as my ship isn't moving and they are at rang i have no problems hitting them. In a decent fleet fight BS don't have enough dps to shoot them off field before logi can get reps on them. BS also die too fast against a T3 gang. I still think the cost and SP lost is a huge risk when flying T3 that they are fine where they are at and BS don't posses the proper strength for fleet warfare.

@W0lf Crendraven
i really cant take you seriously i am sorry but T3 cruisers crush every T2 cruiser and even battle-cruiser in the game only exception is the commandship (only since they changed it) and logi

1. They dont, bcs have mjds which alone makes them different enough and they are T1 ships, which makes them insurable, cheap and easy to fit. Yes they arent in a great spot right now but that has nothing to do with t3s, if you remember back around 2011 t3s were stronger then now and bcs were about the same (slightly better) and it was all bcs, t3s really dont enroach onto bc at all.


2. Then you have t2 cruiser, logi are straight up better as you said, for anything bar reaaaly big fleets recons are straight up better, hics are hics so no contest there. Then you have Hacs, which you probably mean by t2 cruisers. And there you can buy 2.3 hacs per t3, they are somewhat insurable and you dont lose sp if you die in them, which by itself makes them on par. But they arent even actually worse then t3s as such, cerb>tengu due to rlml bonus', vaga is about equal to a loki in most cases and the deimos is a valid proteus substitue, the prot reps more and does more dps but its much worse in most other stats, and speed is fairly important.

3. And the sac is an amazing fleet ship as shown by balex countless times, legion is good too but they are similar enough for the extra price on the legion to be worth it.

4. Face it, for solo, small scale and mid scale hacs are almost equal to their t3 counterparts, some more some less. And that a proteus is a better fleet dps ship then the deimos is totally irrelevant cause the abso still is cheaper and better.

5. t3s do pseudo recons in big fleets where recons would instapop, they do the fleet ships for the unskilled who cant fly command ships and thats about it.

6. If you roam around and see a t3 you don't worry at all, they arent good ships, they are easy to beat and offer nothing special in the current meta. A orthrus or gila is much more scary.

Lol. You lied and contradicted yourself all in one post.

Just like the ishtar, orthrus and d3's, the balances for t3's will come in multiple increments. Im not saying that ccp will definitely nerf tank again, but the fact they've had one balance change so far doesnt mean they are now considered balanced.

Deterrent =/= balance.

Making ships more expensive doesnt justify obsoleting several ship classes at once. This is especially true when T3's are intended to be jacks of all trades and master of none.

It sounds like a contradiction and admittedly hypocritical when you quote snipets of my post but not if you consider and understand the entire thing in context... But I fail to see how I lied.

I never said T3s are perfectly balanced I said t3 cruisers are not "overpowered".

I also said nothing about price acting as a "justification" for power. I said it was a balancing factor, if you acknowledge the fact that eve is a game about risk and reward, where assets have a value and can be permanently lost.

I also said nothing about price acting as a "justification" for power.

I said it was a balancing factor, if you acknowledge the fact that eve is a game about risk and reward, where assets have a value and can be permanently lost.

I'll fight a T3 in a non-t3 if anyone wants to prove to me how OP they are. Just let me know.

it is a contradiction if you say:

so pricing is no justification for power, is what you say then in the next sentence you say:

i don't care how you try to justify this, but what you say is price is a justification for its power

i don't care how you try to justify this, but what you say is price is a justification for its power

Then answer my question...

Why is being poor stopping you from fighting me if you are so sure you will win?

i am not sure i will win, because i am not good at solo PVP and been out of the game for over 2 years (PVP wise) and over 1 year PVE wise.

Well overpowered indicates one thing has a superior advantage. So unless it is a certainty that a ship will beat a "weaker" ship, I don't think you should be claiming it is OP.

My point with the offer to fight a T3, was to show that price does get considered in ballance. Not on paper but in game. If it didn't, you wouldn't care if you lost to me no matter how bad at pvp you consider yourself to be.

Anyway, we are massively off topic. Can we just agree battleships need a buff in damage?

My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge.

1. ISK is irrelevant when it comes to balancing, and yes they are they do too much DPS with too much tank and way too fast and agile too pack that much tank and DPS it simply outclasses everything.

My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge.

that is far and i mean far too much can we agree on this aswell?