| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Secretariot Eto
Angur Management
3
   |
Posted - 2017.06.26 23:04:54 -
[421] - Quote
T3Cs are receiving a long awaited nerf. I think we all need to get over that fact and realize they won't have the best damage/tank/ewar/agility combined anymore.
Btw, they still deal a ridiculous amount of damage for cruiser hull. |
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
3968
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 00:09:01 -
[422] - Quote
They still have a ridiculous amount of damage and tank.
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
129
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 00:39:58 -
[423] - Quote
Secretariot Eto wrote:T3Cs are receiving a long awaited nerf. I think we all need to get over that fact and realize they won't have the best damage/tank/ewar/agility combined anymore.
Btw, they still deal a ridiculous amount of damage for cruiser hull.
What they're getting is a halfassed rush job that isn't producing the results needed. |
Secretariot Eto
Angur Management
3
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 03:15:01 -
[424] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:They still have a ridiculous amount of damage and tank.
Completely agree. I see so many comments about tank isn't good enough, not enough PG/CPU, slot layout not right... etc.
Welcome to fitting every other ship in the game. |
Lina Miaoke
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
119
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 04:13:45 -
[425] - Quote
Whatever you do, please do not take away the mini Avatar look away from Exploring Legion. :(
The current Dissolution Sequencer look fugly, Nos/Neut Legion can have that look for all I care. |
Blazemonger
Omni Galactic
Central Omni Galactic Group
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 07:12:43 -
[426] - Quote
Secretariot Eto wrote:T3Cs are receiving a long awaited nerf. I think we all need to get over that fact and realize they won't have the best damage/tank/ewar/agility combined anymore.
Btw, they still deal a ridiculous amount of damage for cruiser hull.
The nerf is ineffective as it only truly affects those areas for which no alternative exists in other ships. On top of that the changes actually buff DPS from what we see. So it would appear the changes actually result in exactly what was not supposed to happen.
You can build a cloaky monster DPS platform that can sneak up undetected and unleash, but you can't create an explorer which can take the considerable damage in some of the higher end sites while at the same time be able to cloak as a purely defensive action unless you bring two different cloaks and refit in space leaving you vulnerable with a very expensive ship where you will also run the risk of losing SP.
It's a rush job indeed and actually it looks like it was mostly ready to go with the focus group put in place to provide the 'community rubber stamp' to what Fozzie&co thought up.. |
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
92
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 09:15:06 -
[427] - Quote
Blazemonger wrote:Secretariot Eto wrote:T3Cs are receiving a long awaited nerf. I think we all need to get over that fact and realize they won't have the best damage/tank/ewar/agility combined anymore.
Btw, they still deal a ridiculous amount of damage for cruiser hull. The nerf is ineffective as it only truly affects those areas for which no alternative exists in other ships. On top of that the changes actually buff DPS from what we see. So it would appear the changes actually result in exactly what was not supposed to happen. You can build a cloaky monster DPS platform that can sneak up undetected and unleash, but you can't create an explorer which can take the considerable damage in some of the higher end sites while at the same time be able to cloak as a purely defensive action unless you bring two different cloaks and refit in space leaving you vulnerable with a very expensive ship where you will also run the risk of losing SP. It's a rush job indeed and actually it looks like it was mostly ready to go with the focus group put in place to provide the 'community rubber stamp' to what Fozzie&co thought up..
It's kind of interesting that this "nerf" will result ships that are easier to kill, but also easier to be killed by them. This only makes sense for hunters, as they don't want a real fight, they depend on high dps and alpha damage as I understand.
If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!
But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
|
Ben Ishikela
93
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 12:45:00 -
[428] - Quote
I logged in to SISI and installed the SISIpyfa. ghost fitting seemed to be not working 2days ago.
SISIpyfa shows good numbers on the ships.
Seems like covertnullified T3Cs do not need to refit for running complexes which is very nice.
The fastalign&isntawarp Hunter T3C does not work anymore. Which is nice. It was Overpowered and Boring anyway. It was also raising the minimal radius a blue sov donut must have to at least 3 systems.
With those changes, there might be more ratting opportunity for independent guys, a little less need for blues and therefor more fights. Which is nice.
Good Job CCP!
TLDR rip huntertengu we will remember.
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.
|
Tyrant's Bane
Honor's Lost Cause
12
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 20:38:38 -
[429] - Quote
Well, After 4 years I have decided to come back and one of the first things I notice is the discussion on upcoming changes to T3 cruisers. I really like the proposed changes and am looking forward to them. Any idea on when this patch is supposed to launch? |
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions
2269
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 22:52:03 -
[430] - Quote
@Focus group, am I reading right that Fozzie has moved the warp speed bonus to the nullification subsystem?
Why was it removed from the non-nullified sub? This removes the ability for a T3 to travel fast.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
|
|
Lelob
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
250
|
Posted - 2017.06.28 03:18:28 -
[431] - Quote
6 gun legion still has 200k+ dps with beams with great range with 600 dps with a sig under 200m that perma-runs on cap....this is very, very broken STILL. Please continue nerfing the legion as I have no desire to see years and years more of t3 cruisers being the only ships people fly. |
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
129
|
Posted - 2017.06.28 03:55:43 -
[432] - Quote
Tyrant's Bane wrote:Well, After 4 years I have decided to come back and one of the first things I notice is the discussion on upcoming changes to T3 cruisers. I really like the proposed changes and am looking forward to them. Any idea on when this patch is supposed to launch?
July 12th is the planned release, though if they have any sense they'll work on it longer. |
Matsu Fumiko
Know your Role
League of Unaligned Master Pilots
2161
|
Posted - 2017.06.28 07:01:02 -
[433] - Quote
Mhari Dson wrote:
July 12th is the planned release, though if they have any sense they'll work on it longer.
Just a reminder: we are talking about CCP 
Teilnahme ab 18! Glücksspiel kann süchtig machen!
www.spielen-mit-verantwortung.de
|
Blazemonger
Omni Galactic
Central Omni Galactic Group
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.28 09:23:58 -
[434] - Quote
Reading the focus group logs there's definitely some changes still being made, good to see some of the more concerning issues being discussed and addressed (from what it seems). Still not entirely happy about the need to refit in space between travel and running sites in NS..
One of the suggestions seen here that I miss in the discussion on the FC is the option to allow T3C to refit without the need for a Mobile depot. There may be technical reasons which prevent this, but it would make things a lot more smooth. I'd understand this would induce a timer where the ship is immobilized due to re-calibration or whatever you want to make the reason. It would however offer some 'protection' when on DScan only the ship is visible and not a MD as well (kind of gives away the refit).
Overall I do feel it is disappointing that offensive application of the T3C seems to be hardly affected by the changes while Defensive options such as needed for exploration are hit hard. Especially with no real alternatives outside of T3C being available. |
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
516
|
Posted - 2017.06.28 16:13:27 -
[435] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:@Focus group, am I reading right that Fozzie has moved the warp speed bonus to the nullification subsystem?
Why was it removed from the non-nullified sub? This removes the ability for a T3 to travel fast.
The logs linked in the first page show the reasoning. But there's a lot of discussion still around this. Essentially it's a tip to the nullified subs agility sucking. |
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions
2269
|
Posted - 2017.06.28 16:48:55 -
[436] - Quote
Noxisia Arkana wrote:Rek Seven wrote:@Focus group, am I reading right that Fozzie has moved the warp speed bonus to the nullification subsystem?
Why was it removed from the non-nullified sub? This removes the ability for a T3 to travel fast. The logs linked in the first page show the reasoning. But there's a lot of discussion still around this. Essentially it's a tip to the nullified subs agility sucking.
I understand that the warp bonus is being added to the nullification sub because there were concerned that the align time penalty associated with that sub would kill hunter killer gameplay in null sec...
What i do not understand is why the warp speed bonus had to be removed from the chassis optimisation subsystem, at the same time?
This completely removes the ability for T3s to travel quickly across multiple systems. Currently on TQ the bonus to warp speed is too weak, so that sub hardly ever got used. With the re-balance it should have been buffed to something like 15% per level to make it a useful bonus... but instead it's just going to be removed?
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
93
|
Posted - 2017.06.28 18:52:53 -
[437] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Noxisia Arkana wrote:Rek Seven wrote:@Focus group, am I reading right that Fozzie has moved the warp speed bonus to the nullification subsystem?
Why was it removed from the non-nullified sub? This removes the ability for a T3 to travel fast. The logs linked in the first page show the reasoning. But there's a lot of discussion still around this. Essentially it's a tip to the nullified subs agility sucking. I understand that the warp bonus is being added to the nullification sub because there were concerned that the align time penalty associated with that sub would kill hunter killer gameplay in null sec... What i do not understand is why the warp speed bonus had to be removed from the chassis optimisation subsystem, at the same time? This completely removes the ability for T3s to travel quickly across multiple systems. Currently on TQ the bonus to warp speed is too weak, so that sub hardly ever got used. With the re-balance it should have been buffed to something like 15% per level to make it a useful bonus... but instead it's just going to be removed?
Unfortunately we can't mix and match bonuses and trade-offs as we would like. For example giving more points to defense and exploration and less to offense (similar to this completely unrelated image just to give a visual illustration, I'm really not really good when I need to explain things) - subsystems are not good for this, even if it could work better in some cases, and skills could give more points to distribute.
Multiple subsystems of the same ship giving redundant bonuses feels kind of uncreative and lazy.
If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!
But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
|
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
129
|
Posted - 2017.06.28 21:53:17 -
[438] - Quote
Dior Ambraelle wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Noxisia Arkana wrote:Rek Seven wrote:@Focus group, am I reading right that Fozzie has moved the warp speed bonus to the nullification subsystem?
Why was it removed from the non-nullified sub? This removes the ability for a T3 to travel fast. The logs linked in the first page show the reasoning. But there's a lot of discussion still around this. Essentially it's a tip to the nullified subs agility sucking. I understand that the warp bonus is being added to the nullification sub because there were concerned that the align time penalty associated with that sub would kill hunter killer gameplay in null sec... What i do not understand is why the warp speed bonus had to be removed from the chassis optimisation subsystem, at the same time? This completely removes the ability for T3s to travel quickly across multiple systems. Currently on TQ the bonus to warp speed is too weak, so that sub hardly ever got used. With the re-balance it should have been buffed to something like 15% per level to make it a useful bonus... but instead it's just going to be removed? Unfortunately we can't mix and match bonuses and trade-offs as we would like. For example giving more points to defense and exploration and less to offense (similar to this completely unrelated image just to give a visual illustration, I'm really not really good when I need to explain things) - subsystems are not good for this, even if it could work better in some cases, and skills could give more points to distribute. Multiple subsystems of the same ship giving redundant bonuses feels kind of uncreative and lazy.
Unimaginitive and uncreative has ruled this abbreviated process, frankly the biggest waste of my time to follow since the RML threadnaught. I had hoped to get back to using these ships as I did enjoy flying them before the content lockout in HS. With the min/max leaning towards overheat always and the cold stats getting shoved steadily closer to the toilet, I don't think this will do anything meaningful, unless of course you live in null.
And where is the industry info? |
Val Mech
New April Moon
6
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 11:50:38 -
[439] - Quote
Hello All! I want to pay my 5 cents.
In current WiP meta I cant reproduce 2 mostly popular pve Proteus fits:
[Proteus, PVE Rails]
Corpum C-Type Medium Armor Repairer
Reactive Armor Hardener
Coreli A-Type Adaptive Nano Plating
Dark Blood Energized Explosive Membrane
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Gistum C-Type 50MN Microwarpdrive
Tracking Computer II
Republic Fleet Large Cap Battery
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I
Medium Nanobot Accelerator II
Proteus Offensive - Hybrid Propulsion Armature
Proteus Defensive - Nanobot Injector
Proteus Engineering - Power Core Multiplier
Proteus Electronics - Dissolution Sequencer
Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors
Hornet II x5
Vespa II x5
and
[Proteus, PVE Rails+Drones]
Corpum B-Type Medium Armor Repairer
Coreli A-Type Adaptive Nano Plating
Dark Blood Energized Explosive Membrane
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Gistum C-Type 10MN Afterburner
Tracking Computer II
Republic Fleet Large Cap Battery
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
Auto Targeting System II
Medium Ancillary Current Router I
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II
Medium Nanobot Accelerator II
Proteus Offensive - Hybrid Propulsion Armature
Proteus Defensive - Nanobot Injector
Proteus Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
Proteus Electronics - Dissolution Sequencer
Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors
Gecko x1
Hornet II x3
Vespa II x1
Current WiP Nanobot sub give +1M +1L against Plating sub +2L.
-1 low slot for active armor tanking sub? Are you seriously?! Why, CCP? WHYYYY???!!!
And secondly, I cant reproduce very popular pve Incursion HQ Loki fit:
[Loki, HQ LFAF]
Damage Control II
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Imperial Navy 800mm Steel Plates
Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer
Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer
Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer
Gistum C-Type 10MN Afterburner
Tracking Computer II
Federation Navy Stasis Webifier
Federation Navy Stasis Webifier
720mm Howitzer Artillery II
720mm Howitzer Artillery II
720mm Howitzer Artillery II
720mm Howitzer Artillery II
720mm Howitzer Artillery II
720mm Howitzer Artillery II
Medium Anti-Explosive Pump I
Medium Anti-Kinetic Pump I
Medium Projectile Burst Aerator II
Loki Offensive - Projectile Scoping Array
Loki Defensive - Adaptive Augmenter
Loki Engineering - Power Core Multiplier
Loki Electronics - Immobility Drivers
Loki Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst
Acolyte II x5
If you dont make changes, then you will destroy a huge sphere of pve GÇïGÇïgameplay on T3Cs.
Devs, what you think about this? |
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
93
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 17:24:38 -
[440] - Quote
Blazemonger wrote:One of the suggestions seen here that I miss in the discussion on the FC is the option to allow T3C to refit without the need for a Mobile depot. There may be technical reasons which prevent this, but it would make things a lot more smooth. I'd understand this would induce a timer where the ship is immobilized due to re-calibration or whatever you want to make the reason. It would however offer some 'protection' when on DScan only the ship is visible and not a MD as well (kind of gives away the refit).
Making them able to refit on their own would give them a huge advantage over everyone else. There should be serious limitations for this.
For example:
- the cooldown time of the self-fit mode is 1 hour (at least) that may or may not can be modified by T3C related skills
- while in self-fit mode, the ships shouldn't be able to move, dock or activate any modules, and I think the level-based bonuses shouldn't apply either
- after a short setup time (10 seconds maybe) the self-fit mode is unlimited, but you can't exit (which also takes 10 seconds) it if your fit is invalid - having modules in non-existing slots, having modules fit that the new subsystems don't allow, having too many or the wrong kind of weapons etc...
The only way of doing this is making the ship a too easy target while it's in refit mode, so a mobile depot would be much safer, rendering the self-fitting ability almost worthless.
If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!
But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
|
|
|
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions
2269
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 21:06:03 -
[441] - Quote
Nah the only limitation would need to be that you can't activate it while you have a combat timer.
@ CCP & focus group - Glad to see that the warp speed bonus is being kept on the proteus chassis optimisation sub. However, don't you think it is a bit weak? The warp bonus is a great idea but Ithink it needs to be at least a 15% per level bonus to make it worth riging/implanting for.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Blazemonger
Omni Galactic
Central Omni Galactic Group
10
|
Posted - 2017.06.30 10:43:10 -
[442] - Quote
Dior Ambraelle wrote:Blazemonger wrote:One of the suggestions seen here that I miss in the discussion on the FC is the option to allow T3C to refit without the need for a Mobile depot. Making them able to refit on their own would give them a huge advantage over everyone else. There should be serious limitations for this. .
I do not agree on this being a huge advantage. the nerf will in many cases where a refit would (now) be needed be a penalty compensated by this option IMO.
That there needs to be a balance is obvious but I think these should be sufficient:
- Use of this option will have a cooldown of 30 minutes before it can be used again
- Immobility for 30 seconds post refit (call it recalibration or whatever)
- Not possible while on (aggression) timer
|
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
211
|
Posted - 2017.06.30 13:41:35 -
[443] - Quote
SP losses remained...
So besides losing a ship that will cost probably around 500m if not more, I will need to pay additionally 1,5 b Isks to recover a SP loss or wait around 5 days training again the same skill...
Good move CCP. Guess I will pass again. 2B to fly a ship in small gangs is not worth it.
Tec3 were good for hotdrops or the blob warfare. Guess they will continue to be good for that but not for my kind of play.
Another nail in the coffin I guess...  |
Pflepsen
Conquering Darkness
16
|
Posted - 2017.06.30 19:17:08 -
[444] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone! If you've read the previous thread asking for applications or our recent dev blog you'll know that we have spun up another community focus group to help refine plans for a Strategic Cruiser rebalance this summer. We almost have the whole group in the channel now and we're starting in earnest. The basic outline of our goals and early plans can be found in the balance presentation from Fanfest as well as the dev blog. We'll be using this thread as a location for general community discussion and Q&A as we go through this process. Anyone can observe the logs of the discussion in the focus group slack through https://focusgrouplogs.tech.ccp.is/
We'll also link other working documents in this thread as we go forward so the whole community can take a look. Thanks!
|
Pflepsen
Conquering Darkness
16
|
Posted - 2017.06.30 19:21:39 -
[445] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone! If you've read the previous thread asking for applications or our recent dev blog you'll know that we have spun up another community focus group to help refine plans for a Strategic Cruiser rebalance this summer. We almost have the whole group in the channel now and we're starting in earnest. The basic outline of our goals and early plans can be found in the balance presentation from Fanfest as well as the dev blog. We'll be using this thread as a location for general community discussion and Q&A as we go through this process. Anyone can observe the logs of the discussion in the focus group slack through https://focusgrouplogs.tech.ccp.is/
We'll also link other working documents in this thread as we go forward so the whole community can take a look. Thanks!
Every single fit for T3 cruisers need a choice of active or passive tank! just because some F1 monkey cant deal with it you have to remove it? |
Pflepsen
Conquering Darkness
16
|
Posted - 2017.06.30 19:31:53 -
[446] - Quote
Pflepsen wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone! If you've read the previous thread asking for applications or our recent dev blog you'll know that we have spun up another community focus group to help refine plans for a Strategic Cruiser rebalance this summer. We almost have the whole group in the channel now and we're starting in earnest. The basic outline of our goals and early plans can be found in the balance presentation from Fanfest as well as the dev blog. We'll be using this thread as a location for general community discussion and Q&A as we go through this process. Anyone can observe the logs of the discussion in the focus group slack through https://focusgrouplogs.tech.ccp.is/
We'll also link other working documents in this thread as we go forward so the whole community can take a look. Thanks! Every single fit for T3 cruisers need a choice of active or passive tank! just because some F1 monkey cant deal with it you have to remove it?
The T3 cruisers ARE for Wormhole space! Not for some F1 monkey to shoot red houses! Cloaky, probing, nullified, PASSIVE TANK!!! |
Nexus Omni
Sardaukar Merc Guild
General Tso's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2017.07.01 00:30:26 -
[447] - Quote
I am voiceing my distress over the visual changes to t3c mostly toward the tengu. It at the moment appear you guys have chosen to make the pvp setup tengu a collection of the worset looking subsystems. For one i dont understand why you need to change the visuals. Secoundly why have you chosen to keep the uglest looking subsystems over getting rid of them. The tengu offensive system visual for coverops was the only one that didnt fit with the caldari down ward slopeing design. the 100mn PVP wh PVE fit i currently use is still viably with the new bonuse and subsystem layout but currently on the test server this set up makes the tengu look the uglyest it can be, This maybe a petty complaint to some of you but visuals and gfx are a big thing these days to get people intrested in a game, If you make the most popular layouts the worst looking layouts it depresses people and makes them less intrested. I understand the ships are being balanced and we are exspecting to see more covert ops set ups but again i dont understand why you have chosen to make the non cloaky pve set up the unglest thing ive ever seen rather then getting rig of the uglyest missmatched sub systems, Pleese tell me they are just place holders and what we see visualy right not is just a place holder. I realy dont want to be flying a ship i cant bear to look at. CCP have so far done a good job in remodeling some of the older designed ships but this seems like a giat leap backwards,,,, what gives? If players don't find the game asteticly pleaseing they are more likely to go ealse where for there ezscapeisum and relaxation. I personally have never flown a buffer tengu so the blance to me is just a huge bufff to the cloaky tengu, it would have been nice to see the visuals kept the same and mabye an improvement on the looks rather then a buff to an underused set up and a slap with an ugly stick to the most used. If the changes on sisi are correct visualy i realy am starting to loose intrest. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
829
|
Posted - 2017.07.01 14:12:21 -
[448] - Quote
Fozzie asking for feedback with visuals when there are already SKINs for them on SiSi. Legit as f***.
"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
|
Uriam Khanid
New Machinarium Corporation
88
|
Posted - 2017.07.01 17:03:33 -
[449] - Quote
visialy T3C sucks! very sucks!!! especially Loki !!!
SKINs are OK. |
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
93
|
Posted - 2017.07.01 17:31:25 -
[450] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Fozzie asking for feedback with visuals when there are already SKINs for them on SiSi. Legit as f***.
Those are probably test skins, they are using the basic ship pattern masks like the old skins.
If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!
But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |