These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

CCP's new exploration direction and T3

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sjaandi HyShan
Overheated Industries
#1 - 2014-03-20 01:30:11 UTC
After hearing of CCP's new galaxy exploration theme that they have planned for the next several expansions, it got me thinking of the role of T3 in the game.

T3 Strategic Cruisers are awesome customizable ships (the only ones in the game) whose extreme versatility is balanced by their high price from the only places in the game where their resources come from: wormholes. Because of the limited usefulness of battleships and above in wormholes, it gives the ships a place to shine without unbalancing the rest of the game.

I think T3 battleships would be a great idea. The catch would be their availability. Because we don't want to imbalance the game as it is currently (especially for new players), but want to give the veterans new ways to play with the game, how about the materials for the T3 battleships be in the new galaxy? This would keep their price high, as the materials would have to be brought back (if that would even be possible), and give players new ways of adapting to the unique challenges that I'm sure will be there.
For some great ideas that would complement this well, check out the Eve Evolved article: http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/07/28/eve-evolved-colonising-deep-space/

T3 frigates would, of course, be the natural expansion. However, as there price should be less than the T3 strategic cruisers, but much greater than the T2 versions, how to make it consistent with the others would be a challenge. Maybe there could be a main spiral galaxy (where the main conflict and lore go), while there are orbiting dwarf galaxies that have rare minerals in which the T3 frigates could be made from. Or maybe the outside of the new galaxy could have T3 frigate resources, and the interior T3 battleship resources. Or, maybe there are C7 wormholes that only frigates are small enough to go into, and they can bridge our galaxy with the next... Obviously some of these are outlandish, but this is also food for thought for CPP (hopefully they'll read this).

Let me know what you guys think, but please add your own ideas, not tear any down.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#2 - 2014-03-20 02:27:23 UTC
Ytterbium stated years back that t3 frigates will never be made. They just add nothing to the game. T3 battleships under current balance would be so horribly broken on release that they will be the go to ship. Just like current t3s are.

This is a recurring thing I see in the forums from daytrippers who do more typing than reading. I don't intend for this to sound preachy but you need to lurk more because this question has been asked
so
many
times
Sjaandi HyShan
Overheated Industries
#3 - 2014-03-20 03:31:33 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Ytterbium stated years back that t3 frigates will never be made.

Hmm. I looked but never found where he said that. Perhaps if you could link it so other people could find it?

Caleb Seremshur wrote:
They just add nothing to the game. T3 battleships under current balance would be so horribly broken on release that they will be the go to ship. Just like current t3s are.

Which is why I recommended not putting them in this current area of the game. Developing them along with a new area designed to handle them would fix that problem. As for the go-to ship, I would say they are for certain applications, yes, but the high price (+risk) negates them in common use everywhere (so it has a role like every other ship)

Caleb Seremshur wrote:
This is a recurring thing I see in the forums from daytrippers who do more typing than reading. I don't intend for this to sound preachy but you need to lurk more because this question has been asked so many times

It wasn't really a question but a detailed suggestion of how they could be implemented without upsetting the current balance of the game. Even things that are thought to never be done may be implemented if a good enough idea is presented. That's why I'm hoping people respond with actual ideas.
Willmahh
#4 - 2014-03-20 03:56:49 UTC
T3 battleships would simply become another uber-tool only large alliances could afford to keep their stranglehold on Sovereign space.

i would rather see expansions over the next 5 years bring stuff everyone can use and benefit from; not just a privileged few.
Conjaq
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2014-03-20 09:48:17 UTC
Where did you read about their new exploration theme?

Also, while t3 battleships, would be awesome, it would probably. Be very hard to balance
Joshua Foiritain
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#6 - 2014-03-20 13:55:10 UTC
Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
They just add nothing to the game. T3 battleships under current balance would be so horribly broken on release that they will be the go to ship. Just like current t3s are.

Which is why I recommended not putting them in this current area of the game. Developing them along with a new area designed to handle them would fix that problem. As for the go-to ship, I would say they are for certain applications, yes, but the high price (+risk) negates them in common use everywhere (so it has a role like every other ship)

Cost is never a balance for anything in eve, just look at titans. Tech 3's in their current form are already unbalanced, they step on several other ship categories and have no actual role of their own. CCP cant even figure out how to balance these things you want to add ubertanked battleship versions?

Also how exactly do you see something not being used the "current area of the game", if players can get somewhere they can export stuff out of there...?

Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
It wasn't really a question but a detailed suggestion of how they could be implemented without upsetting the current balance of the game. Even things that are thought to never be done may be implemented if a good enough idea is presented. That's why I'm hoping people respond with actual ideas.

Well you posted a rather poorly thought out idea and its not really all that detailed :p

The Coreli Corporation is recruiting.
Charlie Firpol
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2014-03-20 15:54:36 UTC
Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
As for the go-to ship, I would say they are for certain applications, yes, but the high price (+risk) negates them in common use everywhere (so it has a role like every other ship)


Price has never been a good balancing tool. If T3 battleships become a thing and be as broken as everyone (including the devs) expects them to be, people would grind days and weeks to get into them, use them, lose them and hate the game for it.

The Butcher of Black Rise - eve-radio.com
Sjaandi HyShan
Overheated Industries
#8 - 2014-03-20 17:31:38 UTC
Conjaq wrote:
Where did you read about their new exploration theme?

In the article I linked.

Conjaq wrote:
Also, while t3 battleships, would be awesome, it would probably. Be very hard to balance

True, I didn't say it would be easy. The best solution would probably make it exclusive to the new area. That way existing balance wouldn't be affected. Maybe make T3 modules be transferable back (because they are alloyed with current materials or something), but there could be a reason introduced that would keep the ships from traveling back here/being used (the materials that make them would decay under stargate travel, or they need a certain radiation from the other galaxy to keep their bonuses.)

Joshua Foirtain wrote:

Cost is never a balance for anything in eve, just look at titans. Tech 3's in their current form are already unbalanced, they step on several other ship categories and have no actual role of their own. CCP cant even figure out how to balance these things you want to add ubertanked battleship versions?

Also how exactly do you see something not being used the "current area of the game", if players can get somewhere they can export stuff out of there...?

Cost is absolutely a balance. It's what keeps everyone from owning the same ship type, and forces them to band together to protect their resources. As long as the ships have weaknesses (can be killed with good tactics), then the risk will keep the costs high. Making sure the materials are hard to get will ensure their rarity (and keep everyone form using them thoughtlessly).
As for ubertanks, I never mentioned that. Maybe that's how you would use them. I don't think that T3's weakness is in being T3 or customizable. The problem is in the subsystems that make it up. Limit certain combinations or make other options more viable to provide balance.

As for the second part, did you read the article I linked? It mentions how to prevent that.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#9 - 2014-03-20 18:57:56 UTC
Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
Cost is absolutely a balance. It's what keeps everyone from owning the same ship type, and forces them to band together to protect their resources.


If there was a single type of ship that was best than everyone would get one, regardless of the cost.

"**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.
Joshua Foiritain
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#10 - 2014-03-20 19:46:47 UTC
Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
Joshua Foirtain wrote:

Cost is never a balance for anything in eve, just look at titans. Tech 3's in their current form are already unbalanced, they step on several other ship categories and have no actual role of their own. CCP cant even figure out how to balance these things you want to add ubertanked battleship versions?

Also how exactly do you see something not being used the "current area of the game", if players can get somewhere they can export stuff out of there...?

Cost is absolutely a balance.

lol. Lol If something is worth having people will build a fuckton of them simply because they can, making isk is so easy these days that most of eve wont have a problem flying these things regularly.

Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
Making sure the materials are hard to get will ensure their rarity (and keep everyone form using them thoughtlessly).

You mean rare like tech 3 cruisers? Yeah those are really rare. Also expensive which is why nobody uses them. Wait... Ugh

Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
As for ubertanks, I never mentioned that. Maybe that's how you would use them. I don't think that T3's weakness is in being T3 or customizable. The problem is in the subsystems that make it up. Limit certain combinations or make other options more viable to provide balance.

Tech 3 cruisers are recons, heavy assault cruisers, logistics cruisers and covert ops frigates rolled into one package with a brick tank glued on top. It overlaps with so many different classes that it fucks up the game balance quite a bit. Its also why CCP said we wont be seeing any more tech 3 ships anytime soon because they last thing they want is to **** up game balance even further by adding more ships that overlap with a bunch of others.

Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
As for the second part, did you read the article I linked? It mentions how to prevent that.

I skimmed over it and didnt see anything useful that would prevent these things from being shipped into Jita en-mass and being sold there.

The Coreli Corporation is recruiting.
Sjaandi HyShan
Overheated Industries
#11 - 2014-03-20 23:02:06 UTC
Joshua Foirtain wrote:

lol. Lol If something is worth having people will build a lot of them simply because they can, making isk is so easy these days that most of eve wont have a problem flying these things regularly.


I should probably correct my statement to "cost is a great indirect balance." The real balance comes from the ability (or lack of it) to get the materials.I agree with you: ISK should not be the main limiting factor.

Joshua Foiritain wrote:

Tech 3 cruisers are recons, heavy assault cruisers, logistics cruisers and covert ops frigates rolled into one package with a brick tank glued on top. It overlaps with so many different classes that it fucks up the game balance quite a bit. Its also why CCP said we wont be seeing any more tech 3 ships anytime soon because they last thing they want is to **** up game balance even further by adding more ships that overlap with a bunch of others.

Like I said, the variability is too much. Make those combinations less viable, and others more so. Make it so that combinations that are already covered in other ships do not give as big bonuses as ones that are not. Or....JUST GET RID OF THEM. I love the idea, but if they are not working, take them out and reintroduce them later in an environment that is meant to handle them. Such as in the new galaxy. Introduce T3 versions of all the "classes" we have now, but make it so their bonuses only work in the new area. Then they could be used there, and used well for challenges designed for them. Who knows, maybe instead of high sec and null sec, we could have normal and wild space...

Joshua Foiritain wrote:

Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
As for the second part, did you read the article I linked? It mentions how to prevent that.

I skimmed over it and didnt see anything useful that would prevent these things from being shipped into Jita en-mass and being sold there.

Hmm, I would guess one-way stargates would do the trick. I wonder how you missed that? Of course, my above suggestion would make them less valuable in certain parts of space. Such as Jita.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#12 - 2014-03-20 23:31:35 UTC
Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
Joshua Foirtain wrote:

lol. Lol If something is worth having people will build a lot of them simply because they can, making isk is so easy these days that most of eve wont have a problem flying these things regularly.


I should probably correct my statement to "cost is a great indirect balance." The real balance comes from the ability (or lack of it) to get the materials.I agree with you: ISK should not be the main limiting factor.



There was 34 battleship classes in the game last I looked. There is no point or reason for adding another 4, and obsoleting everything is the hallmark of the WoW experience, not the EVE experience.
Mister Tuggles
Dickhead Corner
#13 - 2014-03-20 23:48:23 UTC
Willmahh wrote:
T3 battleships would simply become another uber-tool only large alliances could afford to keep their stranglehold on Sovereign space.

i would rather see expansions over the next 5 years bring stuff everyone can use and benefit from; not just a privileged few.



Hey video game welfare rat, go preach your hippy babble somewhere else.


Everyone can obtain any ship if the put the time and effort into it.
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#14 - 2014-03-21 00:05:20 UTC
This thread has been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#15 - 2014-03-21 00:39:40 UTC
Batelle wrote:
If there was a single type of ship that was best than everyone would get one, regardless of the cost.


So why aren't you out flying an officer/deadspace fit Adrestia right now?
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2014-03-21 00:48:32 UTC
Rather than T3 BC and BC's I'd like to see them changed to use the T3 style fittings using subsytems, then redefine the existing BS/BC's using the subsystems to allow for player customization of the layouts...any role bonuses etc would be balanced so that the existing BS/BC's are the same but could now be customized by players to their particular combat style
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#17 - 2014-03-21 00:52:20 UTC
Sal Landry wrote:
Batelle wrote:
If there was a single type of ship that was best than everyone would get one, regardless of the cost.


So why aren't you out flying an officer/deadspace fit Adrestia right now?

Because there are cheaper versions that do the job just as well as i need them to. And some people do fit deadspace mods on their ships. Hell, if you don't faction fit your rapier/arazu during fleets, they wonder why you didnt and demand you switch.

The only factor that cost affects is the relationship between usefulness and cost. If its very useful and cheap, everyone will use them. If its very useless and exspensive, you'll see a drop in use.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2014-03-21 08:35:01 UTC
Willmahh wrote:
T3 battleships would simply become another uber-tool only large alliances could afford to keep their stranglehold on Sovereign space.

i would rather see expansions over the next 5 years bring stuff everyone can use and benefit from; not just a privileged few.

Not necessarily.

T3 Battleships could be viable as long as they followed the rules of T3 - that they are reconfigurable, have good tanks but do not encroach on other battleships specialised roles. The idea would be to create a, for example, Gallante BS hull, that could be configured to be a nerfed less than 100% effective Dominix, or a less than effective 100% Megathron or a less than effective marauder or BLOP's.

One would not think they would have cov ops ability since there are no covert ops battleships. The reason T3 cruisers have that is because some cruisers have that.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#19 - 2014-03-21 09:36:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Infinity Ziona wrote:
T3 Battleships could be viable as long as they followed the rules of T3 - that they are reconfigurable, have good tanks but do not encroach on other battleships specialised roles. The idea would be to create a, for example, Gallante BS hull, that could be configured to be a nerfed less than 100% effective Dominix, or a less than effective 100% Megathron or a less than effective marauder or BLOP's.

I guess it all depends on how much T3 Strategic Cruisers get nerfed later this year… Personally, I'd love to see a series of modular T3 Battleships.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Sjaandi HyShan
Overheated Industries
#20 - 2014-03-22 13:41:54 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Rather than T3 BC and BC's I'd like to see them changed to use the T3 style fittings using subsytems, then redefine the existing BS/BC's using the subsystems to allow for player customization of the layouts...any role bonuses etc would be balanced so that the existing BS/BC's are the same but could now be customized by players to their particular combat style


Arthur Aihaken wrote:
I guess it all depends on how much T3 Strategic Cruisers get nerfed later this year… Personally, I'd love to see a series of modular T3 Battleships.


Exactly! I think that would be a great way to add variability to the game, while keeping the game balanced and not obsoleting any of the roles/ships. As for nerfs, I guess we'll see....

What would you guys think about shifting role bonuses for the same ship based on different areas of the game? I'm not talking about random shifts, but carefully thought out changes to the ship based on what space they are in. Kind of how wormholes now influence ships stats, could different areas of space have different effects on ships and their role bonuses? I think this would allow for re-adaption of play style and tactics based on where the fleet is at. (And I'm NOT recommending changes to the current areas of the game, I think that would destroy any benefit gained. At least for now)
12Next page