Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Beast of Revelations
Hedion University Amarr Empire
211
|
Posted - 2017.05.19 01:32:18 -
[721] - Quote
Lillith Sakata wrote:@beast: How else are they going to get any feedback? demand it?
Personally, I think the best way to do it would be a thread like this. Anyone can participate, put their views out, defend them, ask or answer questions from the devs, etc. In other words, an open forum. They could even start by copying and pasting the entirety of this thread into the OP, and proceed from there.
Just having a couple people on some 'panel' hash things out is a prescription for disaster. |
HydrogenBond Shaishi
C-H-C
13
|
Posted - 2017.05.19 03:07:32 -
[722] - Quote
Beast of Revelations wrote:Are there plans for nerfs (I haven't seen them) or are they simply going to consolidate subsystems?
A universe without increased DPS from NPCs doesn't deserve T3 Nerfs/Buffs. Comparing T3 Cruisers to T2 BS is irrelevant if the space which they operate augments based on the player ship dealing DPS. In other words., the space should adapt to the player ship that's attacking it. For PVP...the player should adapt to the ships attacking them.
Point: drone sub system is a joke on T3 when it gimps Legion and forces only a neut legion as the best available option. |
Salvos Rhoska
2922
|
Posted - 2017.05.19 06:23:45 -
[723] - Quote
Beast of Revelations wrote:Lillith Sakata wrote:@beast: How else are they going to get any feedback? demand it? Personally, I think the best way to do it would be a thread like this. Anyone can participate, put their views out, defend them, ask or answer questions from the devs, etc. In other words, an open forum. .
Hopefully that will happen anyways at some point, regardless of the closed focus groups discussions.
In anycase we can continue here so as to maintain a public, open thread for discussion on it. Thread has remained fairly civil and I expect CCP will allow it some small levity to continue.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners ChaosTheory.
15856
|
Posted - 2017.05.19 12:29:49 -
[724] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Id sign up to the focus group, but I don't fly T3C often so I doubt I meet that specific entry criteria.
???
http://eve-search.com/stats/thread/517087-1 Quote:Salvos Rhoska142 (19,6%)
You think you know enough to reply 142 times in a totally useless general discussion thread that CCP cares nothing about, but not enough to be a part of a CCP created focus group that will actually have an impact on the thing you took the time to make 142 posts about...
Don't you think you should gain more personal experience with a thing before spending 142 posts talking about what to do with that thing? One of the biggest problems with these forums is people wasting time talking about things that they could be experiencing (so as to then cure their ignorance about the thing being discussed), it's crazy to be the poster responsible for 1/5th of a 36 page discussion thread about something they are generally unfamiliar with.
You have EVE Online, why not start it up and fly some T3Cs?
|
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
692
|
Posted - 2017.05.19 13:12:39 -
[725] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Id sign up to the focus group, but I don't fly T3C often so I doubt I meet that specific entry criteria.
??? http://eve-search.com/stats/thread/517087-1 Quote:Salvos Rhoska142 (19,6%) You think you know enough to reply 142 times in a totally useless general discussion thread that CCP cares nothing about, but not enough to be a part of a CCP created focus group that will actually have an impact on the thing you took the time to make 142 posts about...Don't you think you should gain more personal experience with a thing before spending 142 posts talking about what to do with that thing? One of the biggest problems with these forums is people wasting time talking about things that they could be experiencing (so as to then cure their ignorance about the thing being discussed), it's crazy to be the poster responsible for 1/5th of a 36 page discussion thread about something they are generally unfamiliar with. You have EVE Online, why not start it up and fly some T3Cs?
Hilarious, isn't it.
|
Cade Windstalker
1537
|
Posted - 2017.05.19 15:22:03 -
[726] - Quote
Beast of Revelations wrote:Re: Focus Group
The way this appears to be being organized doesn't instill a lot of confidence in me. Just asking for people to randomly sign up is a recipe for getting a stacked deck. The first couple people volunteering are wormholers who fly the things in wormholes as a matter of course. It's like... do you think they will want their bread and butter nerfed?
I'm not jumping the gun or pronouncing judgment. But I will say if they aren't careful as hell in choosing who the focus group members are, this is going to be a disaster.
It's not like it's first-come first-served for focus groups, and the previous ones have worked pretty well.
The whole point of a focus group is to have a lot of different perspectives to create a good discussion. CCP aren't just going to fill the thing with Wormholers or Null players, or PvEers.
Beast of Revelations wrote:Lillith Sakata wrote:@beast: How else are they going to get any feedback? demand it? Personally, I think the best way to do it would be a thread like this. Anyone can participate, put their views out, defend them, ask or answer questions from the devs, etc. In other words, an open forum. They could even start by copying and pasting the entirety of this thread into the OP, and proceed from there. Just having a couple people on some 'panel' hash things out is a prescription for disaster.
Personally I *really* disagree. As much as I enjoy debating with others on the forums and generally participating on here the quality of feedback is about one step short of a cow patty on most days, and it's a *lot* of work to sort through all the digressions, stupid arguments, and niggling over details to get to the actually good discussion.
With a focus group CCP can weed out anyone they feel is just going to cause trouble or detract from the discussion and can focus on getting a lot of subject matter experts from a lot of different game areas together in one place.
While this thread has had some good discussion it's also had a ton of personal attacks, digressions, bad information, and unsupported speculation thrown into it. Out of 36 pages of debate and discussion I'd be surprised if there's even 6 pages of actually good and useful feedback and discussion on the T3Cs, and most of *that* is at a fairly low level of "this is why they're OP and here's the numbers/proof".
By bringing in people who actually know what they're talking about with regards to a large swath of ship balance they can avoid the basics and skip a lot of the low level debate as to whether or not the ships actually need fixing and get around to fixing them. |
Beast of Revelations
Hedion University Amarr Empire
211
|
Posted - 2017.05.19 19:38:28 -
[727] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: Personally I *really* disagree. As much as I enjoy debating with others on the forums and generally participating on here the quality of feedback is about one step short of a cow patty on most days, and it's a *lot* of work to sort through all the digressions, stupid arguments, and niggling over details to get to the actually good discussion.
It's not a lot of work. I could sift through this whole thread in 10 minutes optimistically, 30 minutes pessimistically, and generate bullet point arguments 'for' and 'against,' things most people 'agree' vs. 'disagree' on, etc.
Quote:By bringing in people who actually know what they're talking about with regards to a large swath of ship balance they can....
1) If they actually do that, great. But who says they will? Just saying 'sign up for focus group' doesn't necessarily accomplish that.
2) Knowing what you are talking about, and not being biased and wanting to do 'the right thing,' is two different things. So even if they get people who know what they are talking about, they still may be biased or not want to do the right thing. Some guy could have more knowledge than anyone else about ship balance, he may be able to beat anyone else in the game 1v1 PvP. He may also have an agenda of preserving his favorite OP ship.
I say cast a wider net. Sure, you'll get a lot of garbage opinions, as you stated above. But those are extremely easy to filter out. |
Helene Fidard
CTRL-Q
55
|
Posted - 2017.05.19 20:02:27 -
[728] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:SP loss was put in to try to justify T3C power. maybe this was the intention originally but I suspect it's working the other way now
we'll see I guess
Hey! I don't know about you
but I'm joining CTRL-Q
|
Cade Windstalker
1538
|
Posted - 2017.05.19 21:02:06 -
[729] - Quote
Beast of Revelations wrote:It's not a lot of work. I could sift through this whole thread in 10 minutes optimistically, 30 minutes pessimistically, and generate bullet point arguments 'for' and 'against,' things most people 'agree' vs. 'disagree' on, etc.
I highly doubt you could actually read everything posted in this thread in 30 minutes, let alone check all of the various claims made, vet any links, ect.
This isn't even a huge thread either, it's been running for over a month and it's only 37 pages. If CCP posted up a public thread asking for actual feedback on something like this it'd be 36 pages inside of a day or two.
Beast of Revelations wrote:Quote:By bringing in people who actually know what they're talking about with regards to a large swath of ship balance they can.... 1) If they actually do that, great. But who says they will? Just saying 'sign up for focus group' doesn't necessarily accomplish that. 2) Knowing what you are talking about, and not being biased and wanting to do 'the right thing,' is two different things. So even if they get people who know what they are talking about, they still may be biased or not want to do the right thing. Some guy could have more knowledge than anyone else about ship balance, he may be able to beat anyone else in the game 1v1 PvP. He may also have an agenda of preserving his favorite OP ship. I say cast a wider net. Sure, you'll get a lot of garbage opinions, as you stated above. But those are extremely easy to filter out.
1. This is literally how these focus groups work. Go read the post and check the contents of the previous focus groups.
No seriously, go look at the past focus groups, read some of the logs, and look at the list of participants.
2. Eliminating this, or at least reducing it, is part of the point of a focus group. Individuals will all be biased, even the devs. If you gather a group of people with different view points together though then the biases average out to something approximating the gravitational center of opinion on a subject. Sure, not everyone is going to agree with the end result, but it's a lot better than only having input from one or two people, or from people all belonging to one group.
Really, for someone who spends as much time on the forums as you do (I know, I'm around here too to watch you posting) you seem to *greatly* underestimate the volume of garbage an open discussion can produce.
Case and point one and two, 95% of everything posted in the Player Features and Ideas Discussion section and half the comments on the last round of Rorqual changes. Most of what's posted in PFaID is either hilariously impractical or hilarious bad. Most of the comments in the Rorqual nerfs thread ignored available evidence or were just straight up bad economics.
In a completely open discussion for every good and well thought out comment you're going to have ten idiotic comebacks and maybe one good response and then the chain continues. Discussions like that are exhausting for the participants, don't encourage good feedback, and are generally just a terrible way to get anything done. |
J03ys3v3n
Super Mass Gainer Democratic People's Republic of Khanid
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 00:08:05 -
[730] - Quote
Seems like most of the commenters have been shot by a t3c and not flown one of them, at a battleship tank/dps level requires a lot of training and isk not to mention when you die you have to reskill using up the second most valuable thing in eve: time. Nerf them? Are you joking? High dps/ehp proteus is only just that with almost 0 utility, and a drone proteus? Laffo!!! |
|
Fabled Warrior
Bohemian Veterans Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.28 08:08:05 -
[731] - Quote
OLD PVE Tengu
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Gistum B-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field Pith X-Type EM Ward Field Pith X-Type EM Ward Field Gistum A-Type Medium Shield Booster Pith X-Type Shield Boost Amplifier Corelum A-Type 10MN Afterburner
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II Medium Rocket Fuel Cache Partition I Medium Hydraulic Bay Thrusters II
Tengu Electronics - Dissolution Sequencer Tengu Defensive - Amplification Node Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay Tengu Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst
NEW PVE Tengu
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Gistum B-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field Pith X-Type EM Ward Field Pith X-Type EM Ward Field Gistum A-Type Medium Shield Booster Pith X-Type Shield Boost Amplifier Corelum A-Type 10MN Afterburner
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II Medium Rocket Fuel Cache Partition I Medium Hydraulic Bay Thrusters II
Tengu Core - Augmented Graviton Reactor Tengu Defensive - Amplification Node Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay Tengu Propulsion - Chassis Optimization
Differences in stats:
DPS: OLD: 1021 - NEW: 1021
Rezist: OLD: 88/89/83/71 - NEW: 88/77/74/71
Cap: OLD: 2 173/255s - 4,4% stable - NEW: 2 871/210s - 40,4% stable
Boost: OLD: 568hp/3s - NEW: 568hp/3s
Speed: OLD: 690,6m/s - NEW: 531,3m/s
Signature: OLD: 150m - NEW: 180m
Align: OLD: 6,95s - NEW: 6,40s
inertia: OLD: 0.26112x - NEW: 0,2405x
EHP: OLD: 34 719 - NEW: 22 739
Where is the buf? This is NERF!!! |
Chan'aar
State War Academy Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2017.06.28 13:04:21 -
[732] - Quote
Fabled Warrior wrote:Where is the buff? This is NERF!!!
Erm, that was the whole point of this rebalance the T3C's were (in general) over powered, the Tengu especially being the go to ship for lots of roles, therefore it is the one that has taken the heaviest nerf.
Nerf and boost, boost and nerf such is the cycle of Eve.
You might want to check out the Loki, it seems to be the favoured child this time around. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3445
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 13:46:03 -
[733] - Quote
Fabled Warrior wrote:
Where is the buf? This is NERF!!!
The intent of the balance pass was not to make them more powerful... |
Mike Adoulin
Adolescent Radioactive Pirate Hamsters
2370
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 14:06:01 -
[734] - Quote
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Hilarious, isn't it.
What is actually funny is that it is easier to get in to a t3 cruiser than a t2 cruiser, skillwise.
Everything in EVE is a trap.
And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)
You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.
Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.
|
Mike Adoulin
Adolescent Radioactive Pirate Hamsters
2370
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 14:07:35 -
[735] - Quote
And that they are better at blopping than actual BLOPS.....
Everything in EVE is a trap.
And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)
You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.
Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.
|
Beast of Revelations
Hedion University Amarr Empire
229
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 17:25:04 -
[736] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Fabled Warrior wrote:
Where is the buf? This is NERF!!!
The intent of the balance pass was not to make them more powerful...
Actually, the numbers the guy posted up there look like a joke. I see an EHP reduction, but practically nothing else. Even the EHP reduction doesn't look like enough, off the top of my head.
Doesn't look like much of a nerf to me, and they are in serious need of serious nerfs. Fortunately, after they nerfed carriers in PvP because CCP had issues in PvE, I unsubbed. So I really don't care that much, and am just lurking around here and there for fun or when I'm bored. |
Wander Prian
Art Of Explosions
484
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 18:59:17 -
[737] - Quote
Beast of Revelations wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Fabled Warrior wrote:
Where is the buf? This is NERF!!!
The intent of the balance pass was not to make them more powerful... Actually, the numbers the guy posted up there look like a joke. I see an EHP reduction, but practically nothing else. Even the EHP reduction doesn't look like enough, off the top of my head. Doesn't look like much of a nerf to me, and they are in serious need of serious nerfs. Fortunately, after they nerfed carriers in PvP because CCP had issues in PvE, I unsubbed. So I really don't care that much, and am just lurking around here and there for fun or when I'm bored.
EHP-reduction, increase in signature radius, less speed and much less agility, Both CPU and PG slashed.
Not a nerf enough yet?
Wormholer for life.
|
Cherry Sulphate
ojingo
71
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 19:04:58 -
[738] - Quote
i read the first three posts on page 37 and just thought 'jesus christ ******* kill me'. |
Ikudza Saraki
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2017.06.30 20:03:56 -
[739] - Quote
Rest in peace my favorite brick prottie... Tried it on Sisi and... decided to sell and train to fly leggie |
Cade Windstalker
1591
|
Posted - 2017.06.30 20:29:14 -
[740] - Quote
Fabled Warrior wrote:Where is the buf? This is NERF!!!
So, first off, thanks for showing your work! Really great post, more like this please.
Second: No **** it's a nerf. This was always going to be a nerf. You're posting in a thread that's 37 pages of people debating how big of a nerf the T3Cs were going to get
Beast of Revelations wrote:Actually, the numbers the guy posted up there look like a joke. I see an EHP reduction, but practically nothing else. Even the EHP reduction doesn't look like enough, off the top of my head.
Doesn't look like much of a nerf to me, and they are in serious need of serious nerfs. Fortunately, after they nerfed carriers in PvP because CCP had issues in PvE, I unsubbed. So I really don't care that much, and am just lurking around here and there for fun or when I'm bored.
So, I'm going to withhold judgement on whether this is 'enough' or not. I haven't looked hard enough to say.
I will say that this is more significant than you're making it out to be though. The reason the T3Cs are so absurd is largely because of their tank and not all of that is in EHP, a lot of it is in sig and speed.
To enumerate, on the commented fit the following changed:
- The raw EHP dropped by 1/3rd.
- The resists dropped significantly. This means that both remote and local reps are less effective.
- The speed dropped by almost 25%. This is not at all insignificant in terms of tank or how easy these ships are to catch and kill.
- The signature radius grew by 30m from 150 to 180. Again, not at all insignificant in terms of effect on tank for the hull. For reference that's slightly more than the effect of a single Large Shield Extender II on the ship's sig radius (25m increase vs 30m for this nerf) but without the 2.6k shield hit points it grants.
The only buff I'm seeing is a small one to capacitor.
I'm not sure if it's enough of a nerf or not, but I wouldn't call it a small one by any means, and it's not just to EHP. |
|
Beast of Revelations
Hedion University Amarr Empire
229
|
Posted - 2017.07.01 03:24:08 -
[741] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:...I'm not sure if it's enough of a nerf or not, but I wouldn't call it a small one by any means, and it's not just to EHP.
Fair enough. I'll adopt a 'wait and see' approach then. |
The Devils Cousin
Evian Industries EVIAN NATION
353
|
Posted - 2017.07.01 09:36:48 -
[742] - Quote
It's all very secret & hush hush
I'm pretty sure the CIA are involved some how as well
Struggling to make ISK? Then Worry No More! Cause This Is Your Saviour For Your ISK Worries
|
Rumi Shanti
Center For Exploration Life And PVE
4
|
Posted - 2017.07.06 13:59:08 -
[743] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:T3Cs post baltecs nerf will barely be able to run a 4/10 in HS. Your anecdotal testimony of running 6/10s in a Mach is hardly relevant. If you are so secure, happy and successful running 6/10s in Mach, that is the opposite of a reason to nerf T3Cs to be unable to do so too.
I cannot run higher either.
If this is the way the T3 Cruiser is going to go, fix the Nestor and add an SoCT ship with similar role capability:
Nestor:
-Designed around endgame PVE, exploration
-remove energy turret bonuses -remove logi bonuses (seriously? a ship that can run data and relic but does remote repair? it's absurd) -give it a Jump Portal Generator with limited range and heavy penalties to fatigue )to ensure it is primarily used for Superior Sleeper Caches and high DED's -2-3 Missile hardpoints with penalties to HAMS -Stick with the no covert design to avoid overshadowing the BlackOps boats -%5 or %10 bonus to Energy Neuts and Nosfs -Penalty to Warp Scrams and Disruptors
-Introduce a SoCT ship with a similar capability. A Jove ship at some point as well, all being endgame availability
-Put these out of reach of newbies! Make it very hard to skill into. The game is changing very quickly to meet the demand for instant gratification. With normal speeds and a balanced map, make it take a year to skill into
-Put T3D's, which are going to be the ship of choice now for old pros who are left with nothing after this end to the T3Cs far out of reach for young players. Rename T3Cs "tech1000" class or something, priced at around 10-40M a ship, drastically lower skill requirement, entice newbies to fly them so that Senior Capsuleers have pinatas.
-Increase the skill required for ALL SOE ships so that they are where they should be, in the hands of senior players. The Astero is one of the most potent ships in the game if you know what you are doing
-Recognize that Eve is a place for players that expect a higher level of everything in the game experience. They tend to be very different from other gamers. Don't open the flood gates to the masses, or New Eden will be lost. The masses want a game they can reach endgame state in 3 minutes and they don't want to think....they only want to click rapidly and watch the pretty lights flicker from the explosions. Remain true to the original audience, otherwise this will become an app on your android device that you play sitting on the can (although it would be nice to have a portal that lets you make use of this time)
-Respect and reward older players. The T3C's were a sort of retirement perk for many older capsules. They allowed them a level of security that was not easily breached. The car to take out for a Sunday stoll, pocket 500M isk, and park. I truly believe CCP will loose a fair amount of these subscribers because of these changes to T3s. If you can't accommodate the T3C as is but with a much higher skill requirement, at least have something available to this audience to replace it. None of the capitals can do this, an I for one have NO desire to fly them, they belong to large alliances in my book.
-Wormhole life is going to change. What are you going to do to shore up the hole left for small operators in WH space?
-Give younger players more gimmicky flashy options to skill into as a sort of decoy. It gives them instant Gratification while ensuring older players maintain status
-Giant nulsec alliances don't like these ships because they feel vulnerable by them. They should! Why do they seem to have all the influence with CCP!? -The T3C's should BE the ship that can take a capital. It's simple, don't leave your capital ships vulnerable. If you fly them and don't have the ability to back them, you should have to deal with the consequences. -Keep the nature like sand box a sand box! yes of course there will be some imbalance! Older Alpha Dawgs are on top for a reason, the made the right choices. Let them have it! Make it take a great deal of time for young players to invest to be able to challenge.
-Both the stealth bombers and the Combat Recons are literally useless for anything other than scouting now if used solo. But you might forget that the stealthy snipey nature of the the players who choose to fly them.... are... you guessed it, most likely to want to fly solo! It's too bad a penalty to couldn't be introduced to these ships that only comes into effect when there are more than one of these on grid. THAT would make the game interesting! Have them interfere with one another's fields or something. |
Salvos Rhoska
3070
|
Posted - 2017.07.07 08:20:24 -
[744] - Quote
Ive only tried Loki on Serenity.
Its DPS is anemic, unless you overheat the entire rack.
T3Cs are becoming Overheat specialists.
This is contrary if the purpose was to nerf them especially for PvP, as they can still overperform in short bursts but now cant sustain appreciable dps in extended PvE engagements.
Loki tops out at 800dps on full overheat, whereas a Stratios can manage 700 sustained (albeit drones arent constant damage) with comparable tank and sig, but less speed.
Ive already started skilling into Stratios on my alts for a Stratios multifleet to run PvE content.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Rumi Shanti
Center For Exploration Life And PVE
4
|
Posted - 2017.07.09 06:58:32 -
[745] - Quote
oiukhp Muvila wrote:Yeah, Strategic Cruisers could have been done better, but they have waited far too long to balance them.
I think CCP should clearly map out expected EHP and DPS ranges for the various classes and stick to it, even if it means expanding T1 BS to over 1200 dps to make room for future advancements in Med turret ships in the future.
No med turret hull should have dps close to a lg turret regardless of tech level.
Of course that would mean a re-vist of nearly all ships DPS output.
Ideas:(with full short-range turret loadout with 1-3 dmg mods + std drones for hull)
Sm turret hulls: up to 400 dps, t1 baseline 250 dps.
Med turret hulls: up to 900 dps, t1 baseline 550 dps.
Lg turret hulls: up to 2000 dps, t1 baseline 1250 dps.
Of course that damage range could be expanded even more to give more room between med hull max dps and the t1 Lg turret baseline.
Yes at this point I would have to agree. After seeing how the t3c went from blissful and perfect for a no skill player like myself to use for survivability, to fool hardy to fly... I think that if we are so concerned about imbalance all the time then there should be set classes with set base specs and stick to it! This so far has been my number one frustration in the game. Oh and to boot, T3Cs have no business having nullification, it takes all the sport out of the use. I have a VLY for that to haul booty. The T3C nullified makes it an entirely different beast, and is the single most imbalanced feature of the category. To me, ironically though, the time to warp is so bad as is the tank... That the ship will almost certainly not survive an instalock camp, which defeats the purpose of nullification in the first place. So get rid of this whole concept and leave it for its proper class. With the resists so low now, and the drastic tank reduction, why would one not choose a T3D instead? I haven't compared the specs side by side but the T3D also has a much more convenient mode change layout. I did notice yesterday on SISI that the Tenth has a subsystem bay. Does anyone know if this is going to stay? And what the hell happened to the tractor beam??? I did actually like the idea of salvaging with this, as the noct is cumbersome and awkward to use. Did they can this feature? I really hope not. Heheh if they did I bet the bonus in place will be another sig rad increase lol but yeah, I think CCP should poll potential T3C users (because not many current users will continue to use) and ask them with the specs in place, if they want nullification. I bet almost everyone says no. |
Karl Jerr
Herzack Unit
132
|
Posted - 2017.07.11 01:41:06 -
[746] - Quote
Tried one of my pve fit Proteus with a sisi Pyfa, with about the same config @lv5 all for fair comparison:
therm shield goes from 65% to 47.5% effective EHP goes from 105k to 67.6k dps/volley stay the same, railgun range stay the same but they take less power and cpu to fit it gains hull points?? but lose about 39.05% in armor point
speed -55m/s +1 target (6 vs the old 5) a bit more of targeting range/scan res/sensor str signature goes to 172 vs old 151 (w/ mid grade halo) more align time: 8.15s vs the old 7.45........
I don't know what to think of the EHP, the rest is OK for me excepted the bloom in sig (w/o the halos: it goes at 200 vs the old 176, I find that... excessive) And the drop of speed, and growth of align; please it's a cruiser not a BC!
Well it's a lotsa of nerfs. I will continue to use it since I love the Proteus but I need to study more the subsytems before Mixed feeling but n ot a surprising one... but hey enjoy, we can switch of rigs now...
NB: oh yeah it gain a fourth midslot vs the old fit, a-w-e-s-o-m-e, especially for an armor fit |
Karl Jerr
Herzack Unit
132
|
Posted - 2017.07.11 02:10:13 -
[747] - Quote
Lol the covops Gallente subsystem gives a bonus of 5m for sig radius, good joke |
Sithia deMorta
Conquering Darkness
1
|
Posted - 2017.07.14 01:01:58 -
[748] - Quote
After playing with the fits, I see no reason to use a T3 in PVP, and not much of one for running sites. For ships that cost 400 mil + they are terrible. (not including the skill point lose if you lose one) |
Alea
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
248
|
Posted - 2017.07.14 04:20:08 -
[749] - Quote
So what are T3s good for now besides reprocessing into something useful.? I'd put forth an effort to find out for myself but I'm finding it hard to find a reason to play any more.
Whomever is making the last few years decisions on what changes are to be implemented in this game, must hate Eve with all their being.
|
Inactive Seller
Hedion University Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2017.07.14 04:44:41 -
[750] - Quote
Alea wrote:So what are T3s good for now besides reprocessing into something useful.? I'd put forth an effort to find out for myself but I'm finding it hard to find a reason to play any more.
IN my humble opinion the nerf was excessive in EHP; now is a mix of Astero / Prospect / Interceptor with more cost. I begin to ponder what is the niche they are filling, but for many users Black Ops sonund more attractive for the escape cyno. The campers in fountain remain using tengu, but the normal users i know fly tengus, switch to rattlesnake.
All character bazaar done. Finally 39 pilot and 3 can be killed later. This account will be used only for forum interaction, fly safe.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |