These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Strategic Cruiser

Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Predator BOA
Kenshin.
Fraternity.
#1 - 2016-09-02 02:01:41 UTC
The Sub Systems is still a good idea for these ships. Makes them do a role that the sub system allocates. What I'm supposing is make the high, mid and low slots set for all Strategic Cruiser. You can still have the Covert cloak if you like or the scanner prob sub system to do site and so on but have a set high, mid and low slot layout.

Example

Legion
6H 4M 6L Only

Proteus
6H 4M 6L Only

Tengu
6H 6M 4L Only

Loki
Can be armor or shield so either the shield sub system or armor sub system will get you either of these.
Armor Sub System
6H 4M 6L Only
Shield Sub System
6H 6M 4L Only

So the sub system you pick will determined how the ship performs.
But there set on the high, med and low slots like every other ship in the game.

Like to here what you guys think of this idea. It will make the Strategic Cruiser a lot simple to fit over all.

Kind Regards
Predator BOA
Kalido Raddi
Crown Mineworks
#2 - 2016-09-02 02:05:01 UTC
Why?
Predator BOA
Kenshin.
Fraternity.
#3 - 2016-09-02 02:34:57 UTC
Because CCP is making everything more simpler to get into and to fit. Why not Strategic Cruiser as well. If you really think of it , it's not a bad idea with the set layout format.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#4 - 2016-09-02 03:26:58 UTC
So the exploration and e-war set ups have the same slots as combat set ups? And you get no extra highs for a neut legion?

Seems a bit strict.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Lugh Crow-Slave
#5 - 2016-09-02 04:33:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
the layout isn't even the issue with them though....


and how exactly has ccp been going around making things simpler to fit?

Quote:

If you really think of it , it's not a bad idea with the set layout format.


no if you think about it it really is as different jobs need different slots

an rr tengue needs a different layout to an ECM tengue

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#6 - 2016-09-02 05:02:40 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
the layout isn't even the issue with them though....


and how exactly has ccp been going around making things simpler to fit?

Quote:

If you really think of it , it's not a bad idea with the set layout format.


no if you think about it it really is as different jobs need different slots

an rr tengue needs a different layout to an ECM tengue


The whole tiericide project has been about making clearer fitting choices like removing superfluous gun slots from missile boats, mining bonuses from logistics ships, defining actual roles for other ships, etc etc. Simpler to fit by virtue of a clearer direction to start in.

And RR tengu can go DIAF tbqh, I wouldn't be surprised if during T3C rebalance we lose 1/3rd of our subsystems (the ones that aren't used anyway) and they just become either tanky, cloaky or shooty but not all 3 at the same time.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#7 - 2016-09-02 05:11:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
the layout isn't even the issue with them though....


and how exactly has ccp been going around making things simpler to fit?

Quote:

If you really think of it , it's not a bad idea with the set layout format.


no if you think about it it really is as different jobs need different slots

an rr tengue needs a different layout to an ECM tengue


The whole tiericide project has been about making clearer fitting choices like removing superfluous gun slots from missile boats, mining bonuses from logistics ships, defining actual roles for other ships, etc etc. Simpler to fit by virtue of a clearer direction to start in.

And RR tengu can go DIAF tbqh, I wouldn't be surprised if during T3C rebalance we lose 1/3rd of our subsystems (the ones that aren't used anyway) and they just become either tanky, cloaky or shooty but not all 3 at the same time.



the changes have made them cleaner yes but not simpler. it is harder now to fit some ships even like logistics for example

good sir the RR t3s are quit important to blops and the rebalance to rr finally gave a reason to use the shield ones not just armor

but yes i do hope the fix the t3s they should be able to do what other cruisers can do but not do it as well w/o heat but then do it just as well or better with heat.(like now with e-war) they also should not just have lower bonuses than the t2 of the same role they should do it different (like now with the RR)

but yes it has always bugged me that a T3 while cloakey fit can get more DPS than a bomber and more tank than a BB

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
FT Cold
FT Cold Corporation
#8 - 2016-09-03 00:28:15 UTC
This proposal is needless. The only things that need to happen are that the OP subsystems need to have their bonuses lowered. That's it.
Wimzy Chent-Shi
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2016-09-03 16:30:35 UTC
Yeah tengu shouldn't be OP for PvE, otherwise silly thread.

Come get some cancer @ my blog !

"This clash of opinions is like cutting onions. We are creating something here, that's productive, ...and then there is also salt." -Wimzy 2016