|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
440
|
Posted - 2017.04.19 10:26:33 -
[1] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Whatever changes are made need to consider solo/duo combat explorers and nomads (whether PvP or PvE driven) as well.
In the current ship trees, T3Cs are the optimal choice for that. The game lacks an equivalent to the SoE exploration line for PvE combat purposes. TC3s fill that role, albeit with a higher cost and the risk of SP loss.
Why should SoE have an equivalent pve exploration ship when they're pretty much specialised for that purpose? Not to mention that you can, also, get at least decent pvp fits for Astero or Stratios.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
442
|
Posted - 2017.04.19 11:33:55 -
[2] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Gimme Sake wrote:Why should SoE have an equivalent pve exploration ship when they're pretty much specialised for that purpose? Why do you ask me? I never claimed there should be. I pointed out that there isn't, and that T3Cs fill that role. Asteros/Stratios are quite poor at combat pve. They are data/relic optimised.
You still have the Gila for combat exploration if Stratios isn't enough dps for you. Some hacs do pretty well also. Yeah you can't run 10/10 ded in them but that should be battleship/marauder or team up business.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
443
|
Posted - 2017.04.20 11:45:09 -
[3] - Quote
Liafcipe9000 wrote:here's hoping the tengu's engineering get fixed and that active tank bonus on it will go back to minmatar where it belongs.
You just bought all the minmatar engineering subsystems on the market didn't you?
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
446
|
Posted - 2017.04.21 11:12:14 -
[4] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Rroff wrote:I was thinking that in respect to the strategic aspect i.e. IIRC Gallente tangle with Caldari quite a bit who amongst other things use ECM so for strategic purposes ewar resilience on the Prot could be a useful feature - which is why I kind of liked the idea mentioned earlier where it would be possible to adjust a compromise between offensive ewar and defensive ewar resilience on the fly. Yes. To further define the T3Cs along specialisation it would be good to follow existing faction characteristics. I think players would understand that more than outright nerfs. Nonetheless, versatility is the key that must not be broken off in TC3s. For a nomadic, hostile deepspace player, they need that. No other ship class comes close. Not because of stats per se, but because of versatility to refit for different tasks. NO OTHER SHIP CLASS CAN REFIT SUBSYSTEMS. This is the fact of the matter currently. This is what makes T3Cs optimal for this playstyle primarily, not their stats. This versatility is what makes them an optimum choice, not the stats. A Tengu does not perform that much better onsite when running PvE than a Gila or Ishtar for there to be an imbalance. The Tengu needs more training, costs more, and carries the SP loss risk. Blue locals can run BS/carriers. The versatility is the key to T3Cs, but that doesnt mean they cant be laterally adjusted so that the differentiation between T3Cs is deeper and more important to the chosen task at hand compared to another T3C (note: to another T3C, not another cruiser). Having said that, If T3Cs are nerfed across the board so hard that they cant, for example, clear even a 5/10 solo, that versatility will no longer matter. It will kill the nomadic hostile deepspace content overnight. Nor will anybody run Gilas/Rattlesnakes to fulfill that same playstyle, as it would be suicide. TLDR: Differentiation of T3Cs, sure. Outright nerfing of T3Cs, no.
The reason for the rebalance is pvp not pve.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
446
|
Posted - 2017.04.21 12:00:20 -
[5] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Gimme Sake wrote: The reason for the rebalance is pvp not pve.
You can do a 5/10 in Cerberus if that's your major worry.
One way or another it will still affect PVE though - ignoring the PVE element when making any changes to T3Cs would be silly. On another note I'd been pondering interdiction nullification - it shouldn't really change against passive non-targetted interdiction but there should always be a back and forth mechanic in active interdiction - a rough idea but maybe a "remote interdiction augmentor" module that could be fitted to command ships and HICs that when pointed at another HIC made it slower in some way for a nullfied ship to warp out of their bubble giving a chance to burn down and decloak them.
Maybe I'm wrong but haven't seen anyone doing pve in a proteus (200k ehp, cough, cough).
A command implant and/or charge type useable on commad dessies/cruisers that empowers HICs in fleet is interesting. Let's say 25% delay to align and entering warp time for ships using inter nullification.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
446
|
Posted - 2017.04.21 12:17:42 -
[6] - Quote
Personal experimenting and tinkering is fun but does not constitutes mainstream game play. :D
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
446
|
Posted - 2017.04.21 12:36:19 -
[7] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Gimme Sake wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Rroff wrote:I was thinking that in respect to the strategic aspect i.e. IIRC Gallente tangle with Caldari quite a bit who amongst other things use ECM so for strategic purposes ewar resilience on the Prot could be a useful feature - which is why I kind of liked the idea mentioned earlier where it would be possible to adjust a compromise between offensive ewar and defensive ewar resilience on the fly. Yes. To further define the T3Cs along specialisation it would be good to follow existing faction characteristics. I think players would understand that more than outright nerfs. Nonetheless, versatility is the key that must not be broken off in TC3s. For a nomadic, hostile deepspace player, they need that. No other ship class comes close. Not because of stats per se, but because of versatility to refit for different tasks. NO OTHER SHIP CLASS CAN REFIT SUBSYSTEMS. This is the fact of the matter currently. This is what makes T3Cs optimal for this playstyle primarily, not their stats. This versatility is what makes them an optimum choice, not the stats. A Tengu does not perform that much better onsite when running PvE than a Gila or Ishtar for there to be an imbalance. The Tengu needs more training, costs more, and carries the SP loss risk. Blue locals can run BS/carriers. The versatility is the key to T3Cs, but that doesnt mean they cant be laterally adjusted so that the differentiation between T3Cs is deeper and more important to the chosen task at hand compared to another T3C (note: to another T3C, not another cruiser). Having said that, If T3Cs are nerfed across the board so hard that they cant, for example, clear even a 5/10 solo, that versatility will no longer matter. It will kill the nomadic hostile deepspace content overnight. Nor will anybody run Gilas/Rattlesnakes to fulfill that same playstyle, as it would be suicide. TLDR: Differentiation of T3Cs, sure. Outright nerfing of T3Cs, no. The reason for the rebalance is pvp not pve. You can do a 5/10 in Cerberus if that's your major worry. Yes, I can run some 5/10 in a Cerberus, but I cant refit for travel and site running as I can in a T3C. Read the parts about nomadic life in hostile deepspace. You are not grasping that T3Cs are the key to this, due to their ubique subsystem layout.
They did mention something about the ability to refit rigs without destroying them so you'll have even more options. I think that fits the nomadic life style you mention. Hopefully they'll also ad extra cargo space to make it viable.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
451
|
Posted - 2017.04.22 10:24:20 -
[8] - Quote
This thread has turned into "ccplease dun nurf my pve pwnmobile" and Baltec's Megathron vs everyone solo forum peeveepee.
Meanwhile, on Reddit....
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
451
|
Posted - 2017.04.22 10:58:16 -
[9] - Quote
As I see it, SP loss was there to prevent only t3 usage. It has become obsolete and pointless.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
453
|
Posted - 2017.04.23 10:36:57 -
[10] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
5. Currently t3c get far more powergrid than t2 battlecruisers. Its a cruiser, it needs cruiser CPU and Powergrid
Nerf that and the problem gets solved.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
456
|
Posted - 2017.04.24 10:25:17 -
[11] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:I flew the Proteus almost exclusively for years and I don't think Baltec realises just how vulnerable it is with only 3 or 4 mids. Cap injector or web / scram, without the injector your dead against a neut, it can't run for crap, it can be kited really easily or with injector its very difficult to keep in range without the web. I think baltec1 is speaking from the huge fleet perspective, I was able to force proteus off the grid while in pve Gila (it was four man gang actually).
My good man, the whole scope of T3 rebalancing IS exactly large fleet combat not pve.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
456
|
Posted - 2017.04.24 10:39:15 -
[12] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Gimme Sake wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:I flew the Proteus almost exclusively for years and I don't think Baltec realises just how vulnerable it is with only 3 or 4 mids. Cap injector or web / scram, without the injector your dead against a neut, it can't run for crap, it can be kited really easily or with injector its very difficult to keep in range without the web. I think baltec1 is speaking from the huge fleet perspective, I was able to force proteus off the grid while in pve Gila (it was four man gang actually). My good man, the whole scope of T3 rebalancing IS exactly large fleet combat not pve. Also small scale. A cloaky legion can get 400-500 dps, bonuses webs, nullification and fit a XL booster. Try to get a rapier close to that.
A ship can only fit what pg/cpu allows it to fit. That's their only issue. CCP tried some timid nerfing last year but... without any conviction.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
456
|
Posted - 2017.04.24 10:44:20 -
[13] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:baltec1 wrote:And the EFT shitfits start.
I wonder how many will notice you called the first one a t1 cruise when it is in fact a pirate cruiser and has hard to source mods fitted. None of the ships you cooked up can do the job of our proteus or legion. Lol. Shitfits my arse, hard to source mods my arse :). They're more capable than your 160k EHP Proteus brick with the speed of a snail. Heres another one: More EHP than a Proteus, more dps than a Proteus, better range than a Proteus, cap stable unlike a Proteus. You're obsessed with how overpowered the Proteus is yet I've posted 5 different hulls that are equal or better than your Proteus. You should give up. [Nighthawk, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Power Diagnostic System II Power Diagnostic System II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field 50MN Microwarpdrive II Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Medium Energy Nosferatu II Medium Energy Nosferatu II Medium Core Defense Field Extender II Medium Core Defense Field Extender II Warrior II x5
You're not really going to compare heavy missile range and dps with hybrids are you?
2x pithum c invulns ha ha that alone is the cost of another t2 fit nighthawk
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
456
|
Posted - 2017.04.24 10:51:39 -
[14] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote:baltec1 wrote:Gimme Sake wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:I flew the Proteus almost exclusively for years and I don't think Baltec realises just how vulnerable it is with only 3 or 4 mids. Cap injector or web / scram, without the injector your dead against a neut, it can't run for crap, it can be kited really easily or with injector its very difficult to keep in range without the web. I think baltec1 is speaking from the huge fleet perspective, I was able to force proteus off the grid while in pve Gila (it was four man gang actually). My good man, the whole scope of T3 rebalancing IS exactly large fleet combat not pve. Also small scale. A cloaky legion can get 400-500 dps, bonuses webs, nullification and fit a XL booster. Try to get a rapier close to that. To my knowledge a legion does not have a bonus to webs in any of the subsystems.
I think he meant Loki.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
456
|
Posted - 2017.04.24 11:10:06 -
[15] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Gimme Sake wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:[quote=baltec1]And the EFT shitfits start.
I wonder how many will notice you called the first one a t1 cruise when it is in fact a pirate cruiser and has hard to source mods fitted. None of the ships you cooked up can do the job of our proteus or legion. Lol. Shitfits my arse, hard to source mods my arse :). They're more capable than your 160k EHP Proteus brick with the speed of a snail. Heres another one: More EHP than a Proteus, more dps than a Proteus, better range than a Proteus, cap stable unlike a Proteus. You're obsessed with how overpowered the Proteus is yet I've posted 5 different hulls that are equal or better than your Proteus. You should give up. [Nighthawk, New Setup 1] snip You're not really going to compare heavy missile range and dps with hybrids are you? 2x pithum c invulns ha ha that alone is the cost of another t2 fit nighthawk Well given their example T3C's fit med afterburners I don't think it matters about range. As for the invuls theyre C-Types, who cares, you can be poor and fit Gist and you'll still get 165k EHP.
My point is you can't compare a pve fit with a pvp fit. Compare a pvp fit Nighthawk with a pvp fit Proteus and then we'll talk.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
456
|
Posted - 2017.04.24 11:14:58 -
[16] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Gimme Sake wrote:My good man, the whole scope of T3 rebalancing IS exactly large fleet combat not pve. I'm no saying we have to balance hull via pve, but my pve fitted gila was able to chase off the field proteus that was in 4-man gang. Propablly fail fit.
Prob fit for something else, smart bombing for example.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
461
|
Posted - 2017.04.25 11:04:01 -
[17] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Tung Yoggi wrote:
Making out of the box fits for your activities do not equate making doctrine ships. You are not solving any problem with the proposed fits, besides maybe making Great Wildlands a better missioning place with all those Thukker items.
Making funky fits or out of the box stuff for your activities is one thing, making doctrine fits is another.
This is not about doctrine fits. Of all the PvP in game the minority is fleet fights. Doctrine need to be developed from ships balanced for the majority not the minority. The majority is small to medium gangs. Also thukker large extenders are cheap and plentiful. From memory 30 mill
No, Thukker large extenders cost around 60 mil, Republic 30 and Cal. Navy around 20.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
461
|
Posted - 2017.04.26 11:20:20 -
[18] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Beast of Revelations wrote:I'm not so convinced yet that there will be heavy nerfs.. If T3Cs end up between T1 and Navy, its probably the hardest nerf any ship class has ever undergone in EVE. baltec1s proposal of reducing them from a conservative 450mil cost (with subsystems) to a 40-50mil cost (with subsystems) alone, is unheard of in EVE history.
Well, I got bad news for you! CCP in their wisdom decided to introduce palyer ownable concord ships. Those can't be more powerful than the actual t3's since it is impossible, so t3's need to be nerfed.
So you'll need to train concord skills and you'll have back your t3's under another name.
The spice must flow
etc.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
461
|
Posted - 2017.04.26 11:32:01 -
[19] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Gimme Sake wrote:Well, I got bad news for you! CCP in their wisdom decided to introduce palyer ownable concord ships. ?! Do you happen to have a source bookmarked? Havent read anything about this.
It's a fanfest video with Fozzie talking about it. Currently searching for it.
edit:
Here it is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hU9VxKhVgaw
fwd to minute 7.00
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
461
|
Posted - 2017.04.26 11:47:45 -
[20] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Nvm, the link I found is someones own ideas :/
No, watch the video. Sec status tank
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
|
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
461
|
Posted - 2017.04.26 12:21:21 -
[21] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Gimme Sake wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Nvm, the link I found is someones own ideas :/ No, watch the video. Sec status tank Yeah, I watched it. They are interesting ships for HS/LS, but not something as an alternative to T3C for running PvE content with in WH/NS. They are, to boil it down, just another Force Recon with sllghtly more effective dps. The cyno element is perplexing regarding HS... Their accessibility also seems to be restricted to events. Thanks for the heads-up, but I dont see these as relevant to the T3C issue.
Have you look at the proposed bonuses? Those pretty much seem yuuugely op.
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
|
|
|