|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
3304
   |
Posted - 2017.04.18 15:00:43 -
[1] - Quote
Rhyme Bittern wrote:The point of t3 strategic cruisers is not power, but versatility. As noted by devs, they should not be better than dedicated ships, but they should be able to fill many of their various roles.
In the coming t3 balance, many of the current abilities and stats of t3 crusers will be nerfed, and rightfully so. However, their ability to fill multiple roles should be emphasised. One of the ways to do this should be to let strategic cruisers refit in space directly from their cargo bays, without having to use a mobile depot and the such. This will help the lone wolves using them immensely, because without a mobile depot their cargo bays will become free to carry alternative fits. Timers can be utilised to make sure this is not exploited.
What say you?
What nerf do you think CCP should apply to the entire ship to counter for such a buff since they are already perceived as overpowered without being able to freely refit without a fitting service? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
3304
|
Posted - 2017.04.18 15:20:35 -
[2] - Quote
Rhyme Bittern wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
What nerf do you think CCP should apply to the entire ship to counter for such a buff since they are already perceived as overpowered without being able to freely refit without a fitting service?
I think that they should make t3 ship slightly inferior to dedicated t2 ships - a bit less dps than hacs, a bit less scan strength than covops, and so on. I think that this is already being worked on in the coming rebalance that ccp mentioned in fanfest. My suggestion is not making t3 cruisers that much stronger, just easier to work with as a multi-role ships, so I do not think a special extra nerf is necessary.
They are alraedy supposed to be below T2 in their dedicated roles so that state will already balanced if we ever reach it. What you propose a a blatan buff to the ship so it should be countered by a nerf unless your goat is a thinly veiled "Make sure my ship is still OP after the long needed re-balance" request. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
3304
|
Posted - 2017.04.18 15:39:01 -
[3] - Quote
Rhyme Bittern wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
They are alraedy supposed to be below T2 in their dedicated roles so that state will already balanced if we ever reach it. What you propose a a blatan buff to the ship so it should be countered by a nerf unless your goat is a thinly veiled "Make sure my ship is still OP after the long needed re-balance" request.
As far as I know, this is not currently the case. Tengus, for example, seem to out-perform almost all other subcaps on many pve situations, the Proteus' dps matches that of several battleships, and so on. My personal goal, if you ask, is to have a lovely Legion that can go from highsec to null, do some pve signature sites there and come back - something I can't currently do because with the necessary modules, subsystems and mobile depot I have no cargo space left for loot. I assume that after the coming rebalance it will not perform as well as it does now, and I find it understandable.
They are currently not balanced so you can't base your request for more power as a counter to the upcoming nerf. Once they get back in line to where they are supposed to be, then we can talk about giving them more options at some cost to be defined then and there. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
3309
|
Posted - 2017.04.19 16:16:53 -
[4] - Quote
Rhyme Bittern wrote:Wander Prian wrote:You thinking something is needed does not mean it is. It does not, but I work with what I have. So far you have only said that "things are like that now, and this means they should stay like that in the future". When you will post a valid argument, like the ones made by others in this thread, you will be entitled to a serious reply.
Our argument for why it should stay like that is that all ship are supposed to have limitation that force you to make choices. Why do you think T3C should completely avoid those choice by having refit in space power while also carrying lots of mods to be sure they can refit to many things?
If you want to change the current design, you have to provide valuable reason as to why it should change. And no, because I think it should be is not a valid reason. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
3309
|
Posted - 2017.04.19 16:38:38 -
[5] - Quote
Rhyme Bittern wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Our argument for why it should stay like that is that all ship are supposed to have limitation that force you to make choices. Why do you think T3C should completely avoid those choice by having refit in space power while also carrying lots of mods to be sure they can refit to many things?
If you want to change the current design, you have to provide valuable reason as to why it should change. And no, because I think it should be is not a valid reason. Thanks! Now that's an argument. My reason is this: in all other ships, space re-fitting should be an extreme strategic choice: possible, but with great efforts. But for T3Cs, space re-fitting should be the way of living. For them it must be as least cumbersome as possible.
And you are ok with the ship receiving an extra nerf bat swing after the upcoming balance to get that extra option? Because extra options are effectively power in this game so they would have to be brought down an additional peg or 2 after the currently intended balance to give room for more power. Like they did to freighter when they added options with low slots in case you need an actual example of options costing power. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
3311
|
Posted - 2017.04.19 17:30:57 -
[6] - Quote
Rhyme Bittern wrote:Wander Prian wrote:Rhyme Bittern wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:And you are ok with the ship receiving an extra nerf bat swing after the upcoming balance to get that extra option? Yes, I am. Pesonally I don't think that my suggestion is a very big force multiplier, but this is for CCP to decide. I want to use my 3TC everywhere and in as many roles as possible, and for that I am more than willing to make sacrifices regarding its efectiveness compared to dedicated ships. So like losing at least 50m3 of cargospace and limiting the ability to switch modules around into very specific circumstances? No, since these very abilities are among the abilities that should define a T3C. I thought more of limiting their DPS, their tankiness and the like.
When freighter were given agility/tank/cargo as option, what was nerfed was their base agility/tank/cargo.
If you think CCP will change their way of viewing things, you have a though case to build. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
3312
|
Posted - 2017.04.19 17:45:25 -
[7] - Quote
Rhyme Bittern wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
When freighter were given agility/tank/cargo as option, what was nerfed was their base agility/tank/cargo.
If you think CCP will change their way of viewing things, you have a though case to build.
I think what I say is quite logical: the versatility of T3Cs should be enhanced, and other abilities should pay the price for this enhancement.
SO you would rather have nerf to DPS, tank, probe strength, mobility and EWAR I guess. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
3318
|
Posted - 2017.04.20 12:23:53 -
[8] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:
Really, then why was that not what they implemented? And even if this is the case, trust me they will nerf it big time first. We have seen this time and time again.
If they had not gone back on their base idea that WH were not supposed to be populated permanently, T3 that can swap fit easily would of been the perfect ship design for that. Get in, fit for the content you spot there, run it and get out. A ship that really is a jack of all trade master of none would get used in place where getting the right ship is not exactly easy because of the relatively unknown portion of it.
We're way past that point right now tho and there is no going back on that by now. |
|
|
| |
|