Player Features and Ideas Discussion

T3s are supposed to be really flexible ships; they can be EWar, brawlers, snipers, kiters, covert ops, scanners, fleet boosters, active tank, buffer tank, any combination of things. The impression we get from being able to switch out subsystems is that if you need a different fit. The issue with that is that many of those different fits take different rigs, so in order to switch to a different fit, you have to completely lose the (potentially very expensive) rigs. Once you rig a T3, you pretty much lose the intended flexibility. The average player will never turn a cap-warfare drone Legion into a self-rep HAM Legion, for example.

So here's my thought: Remove the rig slots from T3s and roll most of the stats from them into the stats for the modules. It will be a huge rebalancing effort, but from what I figure, CCP's going to have to put a lot of effort into the T3/subsystems rebalance, anyway.

It might be a bit tricky and a little different to how rigs are "supposed" to work but these are T3s after all but I'd rather see the option of selectable rig sets that you could swap between (not unplug).

So remove rig slots from T3 hulls and then balance the various subsystems around that?

In addition to the things mentioned above the new CCP balancing charts suggest interesting things about T3's. I made a thread in assembly hall tackling a proposal on the OHer subsystem to make it more useful but have yet to gain any traction. I genuinely think that T3's as they are, are totally broken but need to be addressed one part at a time rather than some blaze blanket changes that might ruin/OP the whole class again.

I personally don't agree with removing rigs from t3's. It's a sacrifice you make to possess the most flexible ship in the game.

Hence I use resistance/fitting rigs on my T3's as they're so universal. I guess if i wanted to go full hunter killer mode I'd fit a t2 weapon ROF rig and some other stuff and just swap subs as needed but generally the strength of a t3 lies in its super high resists etc so I tend to play off that.

I mean realistically a t2 gets max 4 bonuses, a t3 can get like 15 bonuses.

For t1's sure, rigs are just faff and you can completely bypass them (although 50k for a t1 resist rig is worth it every time) but rigs for the more expensive stuff is practically necessary.

Large Cap Battery IIs are a neat trick too.

Try harder.

Or use more slaves. More slaves always works for me.

Sometimes tourists too. They can be easier to motivate. They still have hope.

Personally, I'm trying to understand why the Loki's Immobility Drivers (long range webs) subsystem has a +1 low, -1 mid modifier.

If by capable you mean completely outclassed by any other T3 that does fit rigs, without any hope of competing, sure. And that's Okay, right? Deliberately handicapping yourself to the point where you will lose every fight, and provide inferior support to your fleetmates, in situations where you should at least have a chance at being evenly matched is what every Eve player does.

The difference is that big when you synergize your rigs with your subsystems, and with a T3 it's not just about losing a ship, it's the 3-1/2 days training that go down that same drain. Refusing to pay a few million ISK to not only have a significantly higher chance of winning fights, but keep the SP as well, just because somewhere in your mind you feel that your testicles may be growing just a bit larger by doing so?.... Do you understand the concept of Risk vs. Reward?

I can't even think of how to provide an analogy for what you just said without getting my post edited by ISD Ezwal. This is as far as this goes.