|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
![Muad 'dib Muad 'dib](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1000516780/portrait?size=64)
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
230
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 22:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
Every other role that infringes on other t2 specialized ships that the t3 can do, it does worse. eg EW bonuses are always less.
Why are tech 3 ships so much better at links than CS (while command ships are obviously fore-filling no other role)? http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
![Muad 'dib Muad 'dib](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1000516780/portrait?size=64)
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
231
|
Posted - 2012.03.30 00:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
Headerman wrote:-1 too.
Why give a better bonus to a cheaper ship?
because a tengu does out do a falcon because a loki doesn't out range a rapier etc
why would a command ship for all its flaws and cheaper price also not out play a t3
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
![Muad 'dib Muad 'dib](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1000516780/portrait?size=64)
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
235
|
Posted - 2012.03.30 22:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
But the extra subs for the t3s over the supposedly gang specialist ships mean it can make its self very hard to scan down, or have the covert sub for travel - the more skill intensive command ships not only lack this but have a worse bonus.
Its not like anyones complaining about ONLY a CS boosting at 3% instead of a t3 at 5%, make the change and give command ships some love its silly.
This is not a thread about weather links should give bonuses off grid, this is a change for the current no brainer t3 which shouldnt exist.
compare a loki to a huggin and come back to me when you realise its not as good as a huggin and thats why people fly them still.
poor poor command ships. http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
![Muad 'dib Muad 'dib](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1000516780/portrait?size=64)
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
236
|
Posted - 2012.03.31 22:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:axxeessee wrote:People are really not thinking this change through. As much as it technically makes sense to have the dedicated t2 ship be better at it, when it comes to how it is actually used in game it would be terrible.
Right now, small (and solo) players can safely roam with a T3 which gives them the advantage they need to be able to fight with odds against them.
Giving the strong links to the T2 would mean that a small roaming gang would be at a disadvantage when they would go and fight off someone bigger, since the big fleet / defending fleet would be able to field the command ship, which would not be really possible for the small fleet / solo player.
Only thing it would do is give an advantage to people that stay in their home system because they could park a Claymore/Vulture/etc on their pos or home station, and disadvantage the people actually coming to fight them.
(Yes, you can have your T2 command ship in the fleet, but everyone knows their DPS is really subpar and youd rather have pretty much anything instead of them, and this applies specially for solo'ers, these kind of people will have to still take a t3 with them, and they will be already at a disadvantage going in against people).
All in all, does it ''make sense with ship roles'', yes, would it be good for the game, not at all. This guy is right. Basically you are nerfing the small gang pvp that still is alive in this game. Terribad idea OP.
No that is not the point, you are missing it completely a small gang with LESS bonus is a GOOD thing, while a BIG bonus for BIG fleet is better.
garmon agrees here and i know this is a different concept but i belive it to be a real and worth while trade.
tasty full bonus (5%) are CS only and thus are harder to use with a light fleet, the T3 version with its 3% is way easier to use, safer and can keep up with a small gang.
The idia is to change NOTHING about the T3 or the CS other than swap the bonus amounts to it makes more sense, more committed = biger bonus THATS eve - not the way it is now.
wake up. http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
![Muad 'dib Muad 'dib](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1000516780/portrait?size=64)
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
238
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 05:05:00 -
[5] - Quote
Artemis Ahab wrote:axxeessee wrote: this applies specially for solo'ers, these kind of people will have to still take a t3 with them Quoting for amusement.
but thats the point, more mobile safer hard to probe = not the best bonus.
Balls out CS with gang = top link bonuses for the t2 specialist focused bc http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
![Muad 'dib Muad 'dib](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1000516780/portrait?size=64)
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
238
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 05:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Artemis Ahab wrote:Muad 'dib wrote:Artemis Ahab wrote:axxeessee wrote: this applies specially for solo'ers, these kind of people will have to still take a t3 with them Quoting for amusement. but thats the point, more mobile safer hard to probe = not the best bonus. Balls out CS with gang = top link bonuses for the t2 specialist focused bc Actually I agree with you. I was amused at the fact that "solo" these days means "dps ship + T3 link alt +falcon alt +cyno alt in case things go pear shaped".
Oh no i get your sarcasm, just pointing out to people who say "haharr t3 is more isk and is best and so best bla bla bla" and competently miss the point, then whine about grid boosting - NOT WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT HERE.
Just swap it already, if garmon and "solo" pvpers like such want the best then they have to work out another ingenious way to get their CS about for those best boosts.
Its unbalanced having the best stuff so mobile WHILE making the specialized ship useless, ccp really didnt make a mistake, they couldn't have predicted the player trend (as per usual:P) http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
![Muad 'dib Muad 'dib](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1000516780/portrait?size=64)
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
239
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 05:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
why are people discussing on grid boosting when this thread as got FUnK ALL TO DO WITH FUnKING ON GRID BOOSTING I DO NOT GIVE A STINKING RATS ASS ABOUT ON GRID BOOSTING.
The difference is by swapping the boost levels of the t3 and the CS you FORCE people who want the better boost to WORK for it, they DO NOT need to on grid to get them but they WILL need to keep them safe while moving etc
christ you people are annoying can you not read a single damned post.
omg swap t3 and cs boost levels LETS SPAM ABOUT WEATHER OR NOT THEY ARE ON GRID..... sigh http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
![Muad 'dib Muad 'dib](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1000516780/portrait?size=64)
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
240
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 20:43:00 -
[8] - Quote
axxeessee wrote: Id really like you to tell me how a small gang with less bonus is a good thing. I mean, youre with 3 friends in BCs and you go attack the main system of a big alliance, why should they have the upper hand, on top of actual numbers and possibility to reship/refit, youre already at a pretty good disadvantage in my opinion. Giving CS the bigger bonus gives a defenders advantage, which seems ''logical'' yes, but is pretty bad for the game.
why on earth do you think that a small skirmish fleet requires the biggest boosts to invade the larger group? The big alliance if they are running links in their own space will be whatever the best links are regardless of mobility or covops unscanable etc.
I bet if you ask garnom if the links would be better balanced if the best skirmish link ships were not as good, he would agree.
He might also just come up with a daft CS fit and use that and get top bonuses anyway... sure but it wont have a covops cloak or be practically unscanable but thats the price one should pay for the best stuff.
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
|
|
|