These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Strategic cruiser balance pass

Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#301 - 2017-04-23 13:10:35 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
NO ONE WILL FLY IT.


The words said before every single FOTM nerf ever made.
Salvos Rhoska
#302 - 2017-04-23 13:15:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Welp, looks like T3C are going to become inferior to Navy Cruisers despite far higher SP, subsystem cost and isk already invested in them.

Prepare your butts.
NS is about to violate you, yet again.

Firesale all T3Cs and subsystems, cos nobody will buy them, and the market will be flooded as people dump that useless crap, and re-align production to other products.

Buy extractors, cos the price is about to go through the roof as people desperately dump useless T3C skills.

Sorry WH residents, your mats just got the market legs cut off.
Maybe you should join an NS corp instead?

baltec1 said NS fleets will have no use for T3Cs anymore, nor will nomads or anyone else.

Also prepare for hundreds/thousands players leaving in disgust at how NS interests "win" yet again.

GJ.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#303 - 2017-04-23 13:25:23 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Welp, looks like T3C are going to become inferior to Navy Cruisers at far higher SP and subsystem cost.

Prepare your butts.

Firesale all T3Cs, cos nobody will buy them, and re-align production to other products.

Buy extractors, cos the price is about to go through the roof as people desperately dump useless T3C skills.

Also prepare for hundreds/thousands players leaving in disgust at how NS interests "win" yet again.

GJ.


Would these be the same people who left when the rorqual got nerfed?

Or the ones that said the cynable nerf was the death of the ship and they too were going to quit?

What about the ones that insisted the ishtar nerfs were the end of that ship and they were going to quit?

Or the ones that said the T3D were perfectly fine and were going to quit if they got nerfed.

Or the dram nerf, the interceptor nerf, the supercarrier nerf, the tracking titan nerf, the remote doomsday nerf, the carrier nerf, the cane nerf and so on. FOTM chasers never change and neither do your arguments for keeping blatantly overpowered ships.
Salvos Rhoska
#304 - 2017-04-23 13:27:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
You wanted this.

Dont whine when you finally realize the repercussions of your selfish bias, rather than the good of the game.

Apparently dropping a few thousand more players is worth it, as long as it makes you safer in NS.

So be it then.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#305 - 2017-04-23 13:34:20 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
You wanted this.

Dont whine when you finally realize the repercussions of your selfish bias, rather than the good of the game.

Apparently dropping a few thousand more players is worth it, as long as it makes you safer in NS.

So be it then.


Drama queen all you want, nobody is quitting over this.
Salvos Rhoska
#306 - 2017-04-23 13:40:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
You wanted this.

Dont whine when you finally realize the repercussions of your selfish bias, rather than the good of the game.

Apparently dropping a few thousand more players is worth it, as long as it makes you safer in NS.

So be it then.


Drama queen all you want, nobody is quitting over this.


Oh, you will be surprised.

Not just current T3C users, those disgusted by the bias, but also producers and material suppliers (WH especially).

All so you can have a comfier life in NS.

People have different forms of content, interests and playstyle in EVE, but you dont care about that.
Only your own.
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#307 - 2017-04-23 13:44:05 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
You wanted this.

Dont whine when you finally realize the repercussions of your selfish bias, rather than the good of the game.

Apparently dropping a few thousand more players is worth it, as long as it makes you safer in NS.

So be it then.


Drama queen all you want, nobody is quitting over this.


Oh, you will be surprised.

Not just current T3C users, those disgusted by the bias, but also producers and material suppliers (WH especially).

All so you can have a comfier life in NS.


You are aware that wormholers fly tech 3's as well? We are hit by the changes as well, but you don't see us crying yet as there is very little concrete information on CCP's plans and they are going to set up a focus group to get better feedback on their plans. If you are so worried about this, you should apply to give them your point of view.

Wormholer for life.

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#308 - 2017-04-23 13:46:56 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
This topic is hilarious.

But what makes it even funnier, is that I doubt baltec1 would have the stones to argue this crap unless he already knew what he is saying is already impending.

That concerns me, and is suddenly no longer funny, for numerous reasons.


Actually no, he is trying to wind people up, he was posting earlier that the Covert Cloak and Nullifier would be one sub-system, and that was hilariously wrong, though I was concerned about CCP losing the plot on that, so perhaps he did get me on it...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Salvos Rhoska
#309 - 2017-04-23 13:47:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Wander Prian wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
You wanted this.

Dont whine when you finally realize the repercussions of your selfish bias, rather than the good of the game.

Apparently dropping a few thousand more players is worth it, as long as it makes you safer in NS.

So be it then.


Drama queen all you want, nobody is quitting over this.


Oh, you will be surprised.

Not just current T3C users, those disgusted by the bias, but also producers and material suppliers (WH especially).

All so you can have a comfier life in NS.


You are aware that wormholers fly tech 3's as well? We are hit by the changes as well, but you don't see us crying yet as there is very little concrete information on CCP's plans and they are going to set up a focus group to get better feedback on their plans. If you are so worried about this, you should apply to give them your point of view.


If changes go through as baltec1 proposes, your T3Cs will be useless in WHs.

You will be unable to clear content, and will lose to a Navy Cruiser in PVP.

baltec1 wouldnt make these claims, unless he has reliable info this is what will happen.
(which is concerning if he has insider info that he shouldnt have)

Prepare for the worst.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#310 - 2017-04-23 13:48:50 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Dracvlad wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
This topic is hilarious.

But what makes it even funnier, is that I doubt baltec1 would have the stones to argue this crap unless he already knew what he is saying is already impending.

That concerns me, and is suddenly no longer funny, for numerous reasons.


Actually no, he is trying to wind people up, he was posting earlier that the Covert Cloak and Nullifier would be one sub-system, and that was hilariously wrong, though I was concerned about CCP losing the plot on that, so perhaps he did get me on it...


Never said that, feel free to find that post.

What I did say is that nullification and cov ops cloak should not be allowed on at the same time.
Beast of Revelations
Multiverse Trading
#311 - 2017-04-23 13:48:52 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

If anything, T3Cs should cost more to build, and incur even more SP loss.

Not less.

I certainly would agree with this if no nerfs were forthcoming. Heck, under those circumstances I'd say they should cost WAY more to build, and incur WAY more SP loss.

But assuming nerfs put them where they should be and you still want increased cost and increased SP loss... who am I to argue?

I do disagree that these things don't out-DPS battleships (as well out-tank them). I currently own 3 pirate battleships (a Rattlesnake, a Nightmare, and Machariel). If a T3C ever shows up on d-scan I run like holy hell in any of the 3. And if one catches me before I can GTFO there's really no point in even fighting - might as well just self destruct.

Hell, I had a Jackdaw tackle one of my BSs, and I was perma-jammed and perma-scrammed the entire time until I was dead (never even got a shot off). Do you think I should be more afraid, or less afraid, of a Jackdaw than a T3C?
Salvos Rhoska
#312 - 2017-04-23 13:53:56 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

If anything, T3Cs should cost more to build, and incur even more SP loss.

Not less.

I certainly would agree with this if no nerfs were forthcoming. Heck, under those circumstances I'd say they should cost WAY more to build, and incur WAY more SP loss


My proposal puts the cost for replacement at double SP/isk of now, and more isk cost to build carried to market.

Thats a +1XX% cost to replacing a T3C compared to now.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#313 - 2017-04-23 13:55:28 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


If changes go through as baltec1 proposes, your T3Cs will be useless in WHs.

You will be unable to clear content, and will lose to a Navy Cruiser in PVP.

baltec1 wouldnt make these claims, unless he has reliable info this is what will happen.
(which is concerning if he has insider info that he shouldnt have)

Prepare for the worst.


T1 cruisers are perfectly able to take on and kill navy cruisers, what makes you think a new t3c could not?
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#314 - 2017-04-23 14:06:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Wander Prian
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Wander Prian wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
You wanted this.

Dont whine when you finally realize the repercussions of your selfish bias, rather than the good of the game.

Apparently dropping a few thousand more players is worth it, as long as it makes you safer in NS.

So be it then.


Drama queen all you want, nobody is quitting over this.


Oh, you will be surprised.

Not just current T3C users, those disgusted by the bias, but also producers and material suppliers (WH especially).

All so you can have a comfier life in NS.


You are aware that wormholers fly tech 3's as well? We are hit by the changes as well, but you don't see us crying yet as there is very little concrete information on CCP's plans and they are going to set up a focus group to get better feedback on their plans. If you are so worried about this, you should apply to give them your point of view.


If changes go through as baltec1 proposes, your T3Cs will be useless in WHs.

You will be unable to clear content, and will lose to a Navy Cruiser in PVP.

baltec1 wouldnt make these claims, unless he has reliable info this is what will happen.
(which is concerning if he has insider info that he shouldnt have)

Prepare for the worst.


I'm relatively sure his information is based on what is publicly available in the form of dev-posts, fanfest-recordings and some brainwork from his part. While I find you conspiracy-theories cute, there is no point in getting angry until CCP reveals the details of their plan.

Am I worried? A bit, but also I'm really looking forward to see what they have planned for the rebalance.

Wormholer for life.

Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#315 - 2017-04-23 16:09:21 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
You wanted this.

Dont whine when you finally realize the repercussions of your selfish bias, rather than the good of the game.

Apparently dropping a few thousand more players is worth it, as long as it makes you safer in NS.

So be it then.


I don't think baltec has a bias and can't be called selfish. Does have a different view on how the cruiser role overlaps other roles.

I do think CCP is going to have to make game design level decisions about what (and who) is supposed to do exploration content in this process. Like it or not, its a factor in the balancing.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#316 - 2017-04-23 16:19:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


If changes go through as baltec1 proposes, your T3Cs will be useless in WHs.

You will be unable to clear content, and will lose to a Navy Cruiser in PVP.

baltec1 wouldnt make these claims, unless he has reliable info this is what will happen.
(which is concerning if he has insider info that he shouldnt have)

Prepare for the worst.


T1 cruisers are perfectly able to take on and kill navy cruisers, what makes you think a new t3c could not?

It makes no logical sense to have a ship that's between T1 and faction cruiser. It makes even less logical sense to have T3 destroyers in their position and T3 cruisers in that position.

I doubt the devs would do this even with their abysmal history of making aweful design decisions. Whatever happens it'll be an awesome laugh either way :)

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..... :)

Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#317 - 2017-04-23 16:38:09 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
This topic is hilarious.

But what makes it even funnier, is that I doubt baltec1 would have the stones to argue this crap unless he already knew what he is saying is already impending.

That concerns me, and is suddenly no longer funny, for numerous reasons.



Yeah when they get their CSM/dev buddies to yield they start the forum brigading ahead of times for the usual gaslight/red herring tactics. It's all part of the game to them. This is why a combination of getting rid of the CSM and forbidding players to become devs and devs to become players (even after leaving the job) would have helped back when it mattered.

Once something seems rigged, it all appears pointless. It does not even have to be actually rigged. Just the appearance is enough.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#318 - 2017-04-23 17:37:10 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:



It makes no logical sense to have a ship that's between T1 and faction cruiser. It makes even less logical sense to have T3 destroyers in their position and T3 cruisers in that position.


They made the exact same mistake with T3D so yea, they need fixed too.
Arcturus Ursidae
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#319 - 2017-04-23 18:47:07 UTC
There is a lot of leeway in how the view of these could be balanced and how specialisation and power level are defined.

Generally these things come down to raw stats but even now if you look at the navy live up in certain ways that power level is almost there.

Is the navy exeq a better blaster boat than a proteus? In some ways yes it is, it is much faster and technically has more blaster DPS. Is the navy Vexor a better drone boat? Again in some ways as a pure drone boat it is but can either get the simultaneous tank and gank numbers or flexibility. No.

Now things do need adjusting, fittings down a bit, sigs up, but to suggest they need nerfing into the ground will harm the game more than help.
Starrakatt
Celtic Anarchy
Dead Terrorists
#320 - 2017-04-23 20:24:59 UTC
Only got one thing to say over this whole thread: DOOMSAYERS!