Didn't ccp say they were going to reduce the types of subsystems available "soon"?

Maybe, I haven't been keeping updated on CCPs plans, got a link by any chance?

And for all those mathematical possibilities only 2 or 3 variants will actually see any real usage.

most T1 frigates at least have 12 slots totally. Even if one slot can only fit one of the 3 possible modules, there' will be millions of combination totally. But does any certain T1 frigate hull have more than 100 practical fits?

They mentioned something about it during the ship balance segment of fanfest.

That's not really a valid comparison, fitting a single module does very little to a ship's overall capabilities. Choice of subsystem does change the ships capabilities by a large amount, and even changes the base hull stats and slot layout. On top of that, a T3 with subsystems then gets to fill its slots like any normal ship, with however many possible module combinations that gives. The largest effect though comes from the subsystems.

I said so to imply that there aren't 1024 practical subsystem combinations for a T3C hull, either.

5^4 not 4^5

625 combinations per ship.

2500 total combinations summing all four races.

No, it's 4^5.

Five types of subs. Four subs in each.

Just my high level of stupid today.

What percentage would you estimate? Keeping in mind the many varied uses of T3C hulls. I can't think of many useless subsystems.

It was actually one of the things that got me to bother playing at times - kept things interesting if you didn't know exactly what you were up against and tearing down the killmail to see if they had done anything unusual - something clever you hadn't thought of before or as a cautionary tale when they'd done something utterly mind bogglingly stupid with the fit :D

Don't forget there is also so many combinations you can do with regard to rigs and other fittings - even with a specific combination of sub-systems there is probably another 5-6 different (valid or atleast not totally stupid) ways you can fit a T3.

Largely though most race T3s were fitted out into roughly the same 5-6 types as posted above - you see a Prot and Guardian fleet landing and you pretty much could guarantee they were moderately buffered, high dps fit, etc. in most cases you could figure it out from the fleet composition - even then though we would sometimes hide something a bit more unusual amongst a lot of "standard" fit T3s.

Balanced and easy should never exist in the same context as a T3 - if you are afraid of the T3 don't engage T3s :s

Didn't ccp say they were going to reduce the types of subsystems available "soon"?

I once put a XL SB on a Proteus. Worked extremely well.

Having said that there are only a few sub combos that are any use. There are a few people (like myself) who spend hours and hours in EFT trying to squeeze out the max performance from ships. If there was an awesome sub combo that hasn't been discovered and cookie cut into a doctrine I'd be extremely surprised.

most T1 frigates at least have 12 slots totally. Even if one slot can only fit one of the 3 possible modules, there' will be millions of combination totally. But does any certain T1 frigate hull have more than 100 practical fits?

T3s would be much much easier to balance and play against, if there were fewer possibilities of finished ship. Should CCP get rid of subsystems completely? Reduce the number of them? Or are subsystems not the problem with T3Cs? If not how would you go about fixing T3Cs?

Well, since I mainly fly T3 Cruiser, my answer to your questions is a definite NO.

The only thing I would fix on T3 Cruisers is make them all equally balanced so there isn't just one T3 Cruiser in-game that's overpowering the rest of them *cough Tengu cough*. Course I wouldn't mind it if the Loki had an option to become a Missile / Drone boat. Would definitely make the last mission of the level 4 Caldari Epic Arc much easier to complete solo.

Anyway, it seems to me those who do fly T3 Cruisers never complain about them while those who don't fly T3 Cruisers always complain about them.


DMC

To be fair to the T3s and especially the Tengu the issue is not the hulls but their ability to fit oversized modules. Tengu was relatively weak in PvP until CCP introduced the cap battery buff.

After the buff being able to fit a thukker large battery and a large SB, along with cap regent matrix made pumping out in excess of 2k boost with 80-90% resists cap stable and largely immune to no bonuses nuets very easy.

Take away that battery and things change dramatically. I easily tanked 15 man fleets in those Regengus. You could easily do the same thing in the Onyx or Eagle. Have a look at my alt L DOPA's killboard my Tengu vs NC, lasted about 10 mins vs two supers and a bunch of other ships including HAC, T3, etc etc. Was tanklng fine until they dropped the last Rag on it.

Why reduce variations? Maybe see what is currently OP and just hit that Nerf Bat a few times......... I'm sure they have something to keep track of "most used ships for pvp" or "most used ships in pve" to analyze>!?

4 subsystem slots with 3 choices seems a much easier to balance approach, with far fewer possibilities of hull. I'm glad they're looking in this direction with the changes to T3s.

To be fair to the T3s and especially the Tengu the issue is not the hulls but their ability to fit oversized modules. Tengu was relatively weak in PvP until CCP introduced the cap battery buff.

After the buff being able to fit a thukker large battery and a large SB, along with cap regent matrix made pumping out in excess of 2k boost with 80-90% resists cap stable and largely immune to no bonuses nuets very easy.

Take away that battery and things change dramatically. I easily tanked 15 man fleets in those Regengus. You could easily do the same thing in the Onyx or Eagle. Have a look at my alt L DOPA's killboard my Tengu vs NC, lasted about 10 mins vs two supers and a bunch of other ships including HAC, T3, etc etc. Was tanklng fine until they dropped the last Rag on it.