These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Command ship vs. T3

Author
Daniel AtwardsonII
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2012-07-19 16:02:05 UTC
Reading the forums I learned that many people consider the strategic cruisers as being far more superior to command ships. I don't want to give quotes, but everywhere you look you see that every T3 outclasses not only it's racial CS, but also every CS in existence. So be it, although I'm not sure at all. What do I know is that I'm watching the alliance tournament and see strategic cruisers popping like crazy, just like any other common ship, every single game, while command ships and especially Sleipnirs are popping far less often and mostly they actually don't pop at all. Could anyone please explain this to me?
Capt Retard
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2012-07-19 16:25:17 UTC
Well fit Sleippies!

Crap fit T3.

My alt is a T3 whore and IRL (that means TQ) wouldn't swap it for anything save a command ship.

I suspect there a whole world of fits where T3s better their command counterparts (who'dve thunk it flexibility FTW). Whereas for Command ships with fixed fitting ... not a lot to do there.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#3 - 2012-07-19 16:41:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
One of the most amusing aspects of this issue is both a Strategic Cruiser and Command ship can be used on grid.

What do I mean? Pilots are able to fly a "Field Command Strategic Cruiser". These setups have very large hit points, resistance, Interdiction nullifier and can use covert operations cloak.

Not to long ago; you could say Strategic Cruisers could not be used effectively on grid or while jumping threw gates into another fleet. Now, the real difference is Strategic Cruisers do not have the hit points, resistence and cost 2 - 3 times the price of a command ship. Mind you, these setups tend not to use weapons or do little to no damage @ alll. However, some have dual purposes as recons/command ships.


- end of transmission

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ![/u]

Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#4 - 2012-07-19 16:59:45 UTC
there are several differences between the tournament and everyday life on TQ. for once, you can fit as much shinies on your ship as you want and the T3s really profit from this. secondly, some of the T3 outrage is PVE related. for example, people probably wouldn't lose their **** so much over the tengu if it wasn't such a good PVE platform. i was going to write some more but you get the picture: TQ != ATX

I should buy an Ishtar.

Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#5 - 2012-07-19 17:01:45 UTC
Daniel AtwardsonII wrote:
Reading the forums I learned that many people consider the strategic cruisers as being far more superior to command ships. I don't want to give quotes, but everywhere you look you see that every T3 outclasses not only it's racial CS, but also every CS in existence. So be it, although I'm not sure at all. What do I know is that I'm watching the alliance tournament and see strategic cruisers popping like crazy, just like any other common ship, every single game, while command ships and especially Sleipnirs are popping far less often and mostly they actually don't pop at all. Could anyone please explain this to me?


I feel like the major benefits of a T3 aren't really showcased in the alliance tournament. Consider:
- The covops cloak and interdiction nullifier are completely useless in the AT
- The cruiser based kiting abilities are severely hampered
- T3 gang boosters are going to be inferior to the Fleet Commands because they're impossible to tank properly with the requisite number of gang mods.

However, note that:
- We see lots of Proteus (Proteii?), but we see no Astartes.
- We see lots of Tengus, but we see no NHs
- We see lots of Absolutions, but we see no Legions.
- We see lots of Sleips but we see few Lokis (and those we do see are there for the web bonus).

I guess that means that Astartes and NHs are both under performing a bit, while Legions and perhaps DPS Lokis are as well. I'm sure there's also a points difference for bringing a CS vs a T3, but I don't know what it is.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#6 - 2012-07-19 17:11:08 UTC
T3s have about the same number of slots, have more bonuses, better bonuses, full t2 resists, lower sp requirment, smaller sig, faster align time, generally faster speed although t3s are kinda slow for cruisers, as well as 3 rigs vs 2. You add that all up and you generally can see why t3s are superior to their field command counter parts. There are still certain situations where field commands are superior (max gank) but overall yeah... Poor balancing.


There is good news though! BCs are soon to be rebalanced by most probably increasing slot numbers and general fitting/hp values on tier1s to be more similar to tier 2 bcs. It would only make sense that the t2 ships based on these hulls would see adjustments shortly after if not at the same time as buffed tier 1s would have more slots and higher base hp values than field commands if ignored.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#7 - 2012-07-19 17:16:30 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
T3s have about the same number of slots, have more bonuses, better bonuses, full t2 resists, lower sp requirment, smaller sig, faster align time, generally faster speed although t3s are kinda slow for cruisers, as well as 3 rigs vs 2. You add that all up and you generally can see why t3s are superior to their field command counter parts. There are still certain situations where field commands are superior (max gank) but overall yeah... Poor balancing.


There is good news though! BCs are soon to be rebalanced by most probably increasing slot numbers and general fitting/hp values on tier1s to be more similar to tier 2 bcs. It would only make sense that the t2 ships based on these hulls would see adjustments shortly after if not at the same time as buffed tier 1s would have more slots and higher base hp values than field commands if ignored.


I always knew that CS5 on every character I have would be useful!

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#8 - 2012-07-19 17:24:29 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:


I always knew that CS5 on every character I have would be useful!

-Liang


Our time is almost upon us Twisted

Traejun DiSanctis
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#9 - 2012-07-19 18:03:42 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
T3s have about the same number of slots, have more bonuses, better bonuses, full t2 resists, lower sp requirment, smaller sig, faster align time, generally faster speed although t3s are kinda slow for cruisers, as well as 3 rigs vs 2. You add that all up and you generally can see why t3s are superior to their field command counter parts. There are still certain situations where field commands are superior (max gank) but overall yeah... Poor balancing.


How often do T3's stand in for command ships, though. I would love to know since I'm training into a Nighthawk right now.

Quote:
There is good news though! BCs are soon to be rebalanced by most probably increasing slot numbers and general fitting/hp values on tier1s to be more similar to tier 2 bcs. It would only make sense that the t2 ships based on these hulls would see adjustments shortly after if not at the same time as buffed tier 1s would have more slots and higher base hp values than field commands if ignored.


Jesus. BC's need no love. In fact, they could probably use some nerfs ('Cane and DRAEK, I'm looking at you). A rebalancing of some T2 hulls would be a welcome change.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#10 - 2012-07-19 18:12:58 UTC
Traejun DiSanctis wrote:
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
T3s have about the same number of slots, have more bonuses, better bonuses, full t2 resists, lower sp requirment, smaller sig, faster align time, generally faster speed although t3s are kinda slow for cruisers, as well as 3 rigs vs 2. You add that all up and you generally can see why t3s are superior to their field command counter parts. There are still certain situations where field commands are superior (max gank) but overall yeah... Poor balancing.


How often do T3's stand in for command ships, though. I would love to know since I'm training into a Nighthawk right now.

Quote:
There is good news though! BCs are soon to be rebalanced by most probably increasing slot numbers and general fitting/hp values on tier1s to be more similar to tier 2 bcs. It would only make sense that the t2 ships based on these hulls would see adjustments shortly after if not at the same time as buffed tier 1s would have more slots and higher base hp values than field commands if ignored.


Jesus. BC's need no love. In fact, they could probably use some nerfs ('Cane and DRAEK, I'm looking at you). A rebalancing of some T2 hulls would be a welcome change.


I'd say that there's no realistic reason to use a NH over a Tengu unless you're afraid of losing SP.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#11 - 2012-07-19 18:26:33 UTC
Daniel AtwardsonII wrote:
Reading the forums I learned that many people consider the strategic cruisers as being far more superior to command ships. I don't want to give quotes, but everywhere you look you see that every T3 outclasses not only it's racial CS, but also every CS in existence. So be it, although I'm not sure at all. What do I know is that I'm watching the alliance tournament and see strategic cruisers popping like crazy, just like any other common ship, every single game, while command ships and especially Sleipnirs are popping far less often and mostly they actually don't pop at all. Could anyone please explain this to me?



1st: T3's command subs are not all "OMGFPWNBLAZORINTHAHOUSE", Loki and Tengu are the ones that need a real nerf hammer, I'd even say get those T3 rid of all command subs RIGHT NOW !!
We don't have Bombing subs, or Interdiction subs and we perfectly deal with, I completely disagree on the fact T3's are op, but some subs are just silly, be it OP or useless, T3's are in need of a good take a look at.

2nd Sleipnirs, wel what to say about such an awesome ship, does it deserve nerfs? -NO, of course not, other Command ships of same tiers are in need to get at this efficiency level but not the other way around so haters and nerf amateurs gtfo of my game and go play kitty on line. Diversity doesn't mean a terrible bad choice and an ubber choice (at least it shouldn't) balance means you should be able to perform differently for the same task witch respects diversity argument perfectly.

CS's, well you have field command ships and fleet command ships, those need to be different and I can't see it another way than make the Fleet command ship able to link 2 bonuses to all the fleet then add field command ships to fill those wings with different bonuses however seems those roles are sometimes completely borked, be it by T3's or by bad design witch is debatable since the game got older, mechanics and numbers game have changed, weapon systems and tactics have evolved, the birth of T3's was also a huge and nice evolution, but Command ships just became the red haired not desired child because lack of balance, witch is about to change hopefully.

brb

Lady Naween
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2012-07-19 19:23:11 UTC
Thing with the alliance tournament, you cant have offgrid boosting alts which we have on TQ all the time. that is where you see most of us that have leadership skills unless it is on a roam where it is more handy to have the booster on grid for instant boosts.

Otherwise, far easier to sit in a deep safespot and mash dscan for proves and gtfo when you see someone to a secondary spot you already have ready.

Now I personally would LOVE if command ships give better boost while t3s could be more generic say.. less boost to one specific area but in more areas. That would at least give command ships a nice boost.

Oh and bring up the EHP on all the fleet command ships to damnation level, active tank bonus on a fleet command ship? yeah i live long under that kind of firepower with a repper or two.. eyeroll
Hatsumi Kobayashi
Perkone
Caldari State
#13 - 2012-07-19 21:46:16 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
[

I'd say that there's no realistic reason to use a NH over a Tengu unless you're afraid of losing SP.

-Liang


Swagger is a very realistic reason, I'll have you know.

No sig.

Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#14 - 2012-07-19 22:04:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerick Ludhowe
Traejun DiSanctis wrote:


How often do T3's stand in for command ships, though. I would love to know since I'm training into a Nighthawk right now.





Jesus. BC's need no love. In fact, they could probably use some nerfs ('Cane and DRAEK, I'm looking at you). A rebalancing of some T2 hulls would be a welcome change.



I'm going to go to your second point first... If you would like to go back and read what i wrong you will notice that the buff that is inevitable will be geared at tier 1 bcs and will most certainly be bringing them inline with the higher tier BCs when it comes to fitting potential and number of slots. Tier1 base hp values are generally lower as well as less relative fitting. You will also notice that the tier1s all have 2 less slots than the tier 2s except the cyclone which already has +1 slot compared to other tier 1s and the brutix because the myrmidon has -1slot because of a "large ish?" drone bay.

As for the drake and cane being OP, it's all in what is available as competition within that price bracket to be honest. BCs have shown themselves to be of the ideal risk vs reward balance in a pvp ship when it comes to brawling or fleet dps for the majority of eve players. Many people are willing to loose them, and their effect on a fight is rather significant making them a popular ship class regardless if the drake or cane were there. Those two ships being arguably the best of the lot for overall solo and gang work is the reason there is so many. Once tier 1s are buffed to a level where they are comparable on fitting and slots to the tier 2s you will see a much larger variety in the bc lineup ending this Cane/drake op BS once and for all.



About t3s vs Commands... there are reason's why commands are not commonly used in pvp compared to t3s... The list i posted in my original post pretty much states the obvious, there is no need for me to post the same rable again.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#15 - 2012-07-19 22:20:40 UTC
Hatsumi Kobayashi wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
[

I'd say that there's no realistic reason to use a NH over a Tengu unless you're afraid of losing SP.

-Liang


Swagger is a very realistic reason, I'll have you know.




Yes, but "Swagger" can be jacked! Which is a realistic reason to keep it secure.

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ![/u]

chris elliot
Treasury Department
Plug N Play
#16 - 2012-07-19 22:21:03 UTC
Tournament pvp =/= TQ pvp.

A lot of people seem to be missing the connection between the two lately.




Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#17 - 2012-07-19 22:23:18 UTC
chris elliot wrote:
Tournament pvp =/= TQ pvp.

A lot of people seem to be missing the connection between the two lately.


Happens every tournament.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#18 - 2012-07-20 03:07:18 UTC
chris elliot wrote:
Tournament pvp =/= TQ pvp.

A lot of people seem to be missing the connection between the two lately.



People basically use the tournament in their arguments because it supports their arguments. When it doesn't support their arguments, suddenly we get Tournament PvP =/= TQ pvp.

Funny how it works init?
Caitlyn Tufy
Perkone
Caldari State
#19 - 2012-07-20 10:08:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Caitlyn Tufy
Liang Nuren wrote:
I guess that means that Astartes and NHs are both under performing a bit, while Legions and perhaps DPS Lokis are as well. I'm sure there's also a points difference for bringing a CS vs a T3, but I don't know what it is.

-Liang


They're both are worth 16 points.

There is, however a whole pile of restrictions on AT (though that has nothing to do with CS being left out - more with T3 being awesome :)). You may read the rules here:

http://community.eveonline.com/en/tournament/tournament-info/rules

Paikis wrote:
People basically use the tournament in their arguments because it supports their arguments.


Tbh, I like to use tournaments for fresh ideas (for instance, Blaster Ferox's exceptional performance has made me look at the ship once again, trying to put together a fit that I'd like), but one must always consider the fact that TQ isn't as clean as AT rules.
Rel'k Bloodlor
Federation Front Line Report
Federation Front Line
#20 - 2012-07-20 11:10:09 UTC
Well in FW no one uses command ships, but loki/prot/legion/tengu bonuses are every were........even in your raccoon wounds.


see comman ships give a +3% per level on a skill that has a 9001X skill time modifier well T3's get %5 a level on a skill you can train to 5 well taking a medium to large size dump. Now the Command ship dose get a little more HP but flys way slower is subject to bubbles and cant cloak

so one your going out on a roam what do you want a T3 or a command ship with ya?

I wanted to paint my space ship red, but I couldn't find enough goats. 

12Next page