These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Next Ships to be rebalanced?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Good Posting
Doomheim
#21 - 2013-12-19 17:32:48 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:


I have actually since started flying Drakes now and then, but it's mostly because I'm a space hipster and everyone thinks Drakes suck now, so I get fights. Drakes do not, in fact, suck. Especially HAM Drakes.


Ahh, all right. I didn't know that part, i apologize then. Yeah i like the HAM drake too.

James Amril-Kesh wrote:
When a cruiser sized ship can get over 1000 dps at 25 km with a battleship sized tank, somethings a little off balance.


This is a conspiracy against my Proteus now that James Amril is posting here.

DAMN IT!!
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#22 - 2013-12-19 17:35:54 UTC
T3, Capitals and Pirate ships are in the bottom of the list. expect to see more T2 rebalance, we still have to see what wil they do to AFs and Recons, along with T2 industrials and Blops..
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2013-12-19 17:43:52 UTC
Good Posting wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
When a cruiser sized ship can get over 1000 dps at 25 km with a battleship sized tank, somethings a little off balance.


This is a conspiracy against my Proteus now that James Amril is posting here.

DAMN IT!!

Not talking about the Proteus.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Good Posting
Doomheim
#24 - 2013-12-19 17:58:30 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Good Posting wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
When a cruiser sized ship can get over 1000 dps at 25 km with a battleship sized tank, somethings a little off balance.


This is a conspiracy against my Proteus now that James Amril is posting here.

DAMN IT!!

Not talking about the Proteus.


I assume you are talking about the HAM Tengu loaded with Rage ammo then? I don't think the Tengu needs another nerf.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2013-12-19 18:05:43 UTC
I'd be fine with them not nerfing it, but I'm not holding out hope. The HAM Tengu is extremely powerful.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#26 - 2013-12-19 18:17:31 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
When a cruiser sized ship can get over 1000 dps at 25 km with a battleship sized tank, somethings a little off balance.


INB4 "But it cost a lot and you lose SP when it dies!!!!"


The criticism of t3's is that when fit as hacs, they do better than hacs. (blaster prot vs blaster deimos, cerb vs tengu, legion vs zealot, etc.)
This is the role where they are most likely to die, making ISK and SP loss relevant, compared to other applications where risk is greatly mitigated.
Making t3's worse than HACs in the HAC role would relegate them to big tanky covops ships (moreso than they already are), because any time you have a combat fit t3, you'd be better off with a HAC that both performs better, costs less, and doesn't lose you SP.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#27 - 2013-12-19 18:28:09 UTC
HACs do see use, so it's not like they're completely marginalized by T3s.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#28 - 2013-12-19 18:28:36 UTC
Silivar Karkun wrote:
T3, Capitals and Pirate ships are in the bottom of the list. expect to see more T2 rebalance, we still have to see what wil they do to AFs and Recons, along with T2 industrials and Blops..


AF HAVE been balanced to near death. i think like 3-4 balance passes. they need no further adjustments me thinks... at the most a polish pass but thats it.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#29 - 2013-12-19 18:32:19 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
HACs do see use, so it's not like they're completely marginalized by T3s.


i think what makes t3 op is bubble imune and able to fit covert cloaks and still do great dps and great tank.

there should be tradeoffs like if you fit a bubble imune sub section then it reduces the total damage output or something like that...

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#30 - 2013-12-19 18:37:20 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
HACs do see use, so it's not like they're completely marginalized by T3s.


i think what makes t3 op is bubble imune and able to fit covert cloaks and still do great dps and great tank.

there should be tradeoffs like if you fit a bubble imune sub section then it reduces the total damage output or something like that...

What. Nobody I know of uses combat covops nullified T3s.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Deacon Abox
Black Eagle5
#31 - 2013-12-19 18:38:54 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Silivar Karkun wrote:
T3, Capitals and Pirate ships are in the bottom of the list. expect to see more T2 rebalance, we still have to see what wil they do to AFs and Recons, along with T2 industrials and Blops..


AF HAVE been balanced to near death. i think like 3-4 balance passes. they need no further adjustments me thinks... at the most a polish pass but thats it.

That polishing would include doing something about dual asb hawks. And somehow making the mwd sig bonus worth using?

CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting off button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.

Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#32 - 2013-12-19 18:42:27 UTC
Batelle wrote:

Making t3's worse than HACs in the HAC role would relegate them to big tanky covops ships (moreso than they already are), because any time you have a combat fit t3, you'd be better off with a HAC that both performs better, costs less, and doesn't lose you SP.

An example of CCP's goal for T3s:


  • A Vagabond is a great HAC for falloff-kiting, but does little else. A Loki is almost as good, but is somewhat slower and does less damage. However, the Loki does this while also being bubble immune and having 30 km webs.
  • A Rapier is great for webbing things from far away, but sucks at doing damage. A Loki is not quite as good as a Rapier at long-range webbing... but it also can still be covert ops, do damage, and have notable tank while doing it.
  • A Sleipnir is great at brawling and boosting, but tends to cause panic in enemies and lacks mobility. A Loki is a more mobile option with somewhat less damage/boosting strength, much better suited to certain fleets.


Not all the above stuff is true right now, but the Loki is the closest to being in the T3 "niche" out of all the T3s.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#33 - 2013-12-19 18:44:15 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:

there should be tradeoffs like if you fit a bubble imune sub section then it reduces the total damage output or something like that...

I'm not sure if you're being serious. The bubble immunity subsystem has serious drawbacks which end up impacting overall ship performance (less fitting resources, one or two fewer slots). Whether you shunt these penalties into living with lower damage, lower tank, worse mobility or whatever is up to you while you're fitting the ship.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#34 - 2013-12-19 18:46:11 UTC
Deacon Abox wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
Silivar Karkun wrote:
T3, Capitals and Pirate ships are in the bottom of the list. expect to see more T2 rebalance, we still have to see what wil they do to AFs and Recons, along with T2 industrials and Blops..


AF HAVE been balanced to near death. i think like 3-4 balance passes. they need no further adjustments me thinks... at the most a polish pass but thats it.

That polishing would include doing something about dual asb hawks. And somehow making the mwd sig bonus worth using?


yes.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
crononyx
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2013-12-19 18:49:47 UTC
Damn, right as I'm close to getting into a Proteus :(
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#36 - 2013-12-19 18:53:12 UTC
crononyx wrote:
Damn, right as I'm close to getting into a Proteus :(

T3s getting rebalanced from their current state of "gods at one thing" to "do several things well at the same time" is (at least in my mind) a reason to want to fly T3s. More variety, more utility, more interesting roles and stuff to do.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#37 - 2013-12-19 18:55:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Khergit Deserters
Please bring the Rifter back to its rightful place as baddest frig. It's an icon and it has its own USB port, for crying out loud.
MestariBation
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#38 - 2013-12-19 19:12:37 UTC
NERF RAIL TENGU TOO STRONK

Send me isk im poor
Abdullah Bahdoon
Doomheim
#39 - 2013-12-19 19:17:40 UTC
Hurricane. Oh, but wait ... it was rebalanced and it's working as intended for now. I use it for gas mining.
DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#40 - 2013-12-19 19:23:01 UTC
I think one of the goals with a T3 rebalance is to also make other options viabale. From what ccp has said, most t3's have standard configurations. If the market is any news, you can see what weapons systems and other systems are hardly used. It would also give them a chance to add new subsystems if they wanted for other such operations. But boo knows

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.
Previous page123Next page