Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

We need to have a talk about the tank on the 8low legion.

http://i.imgur.com/hJJt9lg.png

This is using some modified subsystems in pyfa in order to get the slot layout correct. It is simulating the Passive Tank/Cap-PWG/RR-And-Burst/Speed-Agility subsystems. I tried my best to leave all of the rest of the numbers on the subsystems the same as they are currently on TQ seeing as we dont actually know what those are going to be yet.

This legion has High-Grade Slaves, 6% armor HP HG-1006, and max armor Damnation links applied to it. I would like to point to the base armor amount on the Augmented Plating that im using here. Yes, you read that right, I set that to 0.

This legion with an 8low pure tank loadout is getting 413k EHP from just a 1600mm Imp Navy plate. If we were to set the armor from the subsystem back up to the base 3750 it would come out to around 698k EHP or something else insane like that.

This thing can repair like 5-10% less hp/s than a guardian, while having a hilariously beefier tank on it.

Going back to just the plate and 0 armor in the subsystem, it'll still hit 170k EHP easy if we take away the damnation+Implants. Replacing the trimark rigs with ancills (To combat some extreme nerfs to its pg) takes the EHP down to 104k and 90k with faction ENAMs instead of A-types. You can problably decrease that even further by swaping the damage control for a capacitor module but this is STILL better than the guardian's tank by a wide margin and we have yet to add the subsystem's armor back on.

Lets say we do add the base armor back on. You only need 2625 base armor to hit these same numbers with just an 800mm Imp Navy plate. All in all we are talking a cut of like 33-40% to both armor amount and powergrid here. Even then I can still see ways to get armor/PG back from that.

Now im sure that they wont even remotely operate the same, but I have absolutely no idea what it would take to keep this monster in line as-is and not completly neuter the ham/neut/laser legions.

Im afraid a cursory look at the proteus reveals a similar story aswell.

Caught up on the overnight chat.... Re: Cargo, I'd love to see a dedicated bay for subsystems and potentially even deployables. Something I used to do regularly when more active was solo wormhole roaming with a Legion, carrying the appropriate refit subsystems to run a full covops setup for moving around was really tight to do and hugely limited your ability to actually carry any loot from sites. Doing the same sort of thing with a Tengu was nigh on impossible due to the amount of cargo you need just for enough missiles to clear a site. Having the dedicated cargo space for subsystems would open up this nomadic gameplay some more without really having any negative impact on a pure pvp stats perspective.

Something I also saw queried in the chat was what happens to leaving a covops cloak fitted when you remove the cloaky subsystem - it stays fitted and offline, so you don't need the cargo space for it.

I'm really hoping these changes don't impact the stats to the point where a solo wormhole site roamer becomes impossible.

Is tractor beam range/velocity on covop really that usefull? Maybe it could be switch for 10%/level hacking module range?

Agreed and i mention i am sick of this kinda thinking behind split weapon systems while i don't like pure missile system missile drone combo should be ok maybe 50m/bit for drones like legion but without drone dmg bonus or something, just don't repeat same mistakes like with typhoon no one capable of straight thinking will put guns on it or use last two high slot to put 2 guns on it.

I don't know why everyone is so focused on the kinetic damage of the missile Tengu. Most other subsystems of all races get a 10% damage bonus (with exception of missile legion and Hybrid Tengu) The missile tengu gets 7.5% damage bonus for 3 damage types and 12.5% bonus for Kinetic. So slightly less, or slightly more depending on damage type.

Overall the damage output of these changes seems a bit much anyway. Shortrange they all seem to be able to get 700+ paper dps.

My Proposal:

Cut the base damage bonus to 5% on non drone boats. Then give a overheat bonus that increases the effectiveness of overheating by 15% - 20% and you'll have a system thats synergizes a lot better with the overall overheating state of the strategic cruisers, and will have a little less impact on Hac's

Plenty of people commenting here on the function, role and performance of new T3 balances.

Some have asked about clarification on the 'cost' issue, but I didn't see it addressed much yet.

I am not going to propose what should be done, but I think the following questions should be asked at this stage, maybe after that we can discuss more.

1. What does CCP and/or focus group think about the current price of T3s and their subs?

* There has been a dramatic drop in price. Everything has ups and downs, but the degree of nose dive T3s have taken over the course of past year or so is remarkable, probably related to many other game changes not specific to T3 ships themselves.

I do accept that it's free market, supply/demand, players will find the price balance, etc, but there is a reason why I ask what CCP/focus group think about the current prices of T3s

a) Strat cruisers are made from resources that are harvested from very specific and quite different form of space - WH. What the final end product of resources harvested in such specific space will be priced at will have some impact on the 'value' of such space. Blue loot is probably the main portion of income now and traditionally valuable WH stuff like melted nano ribbons are pretty much at their lowest price point I remember since release of Apocrypha.

b) This may be a bigger WH balance discussion if we cover the whole topic of resource harvesting and such from supply point of view, but what the T3s will end up as final product will have an impact on demand, and if the supply remained constant then the changes in demand (due to ship balancing) will play a role in the price. If there are both changes in supply and demand to some degree (as in 'increase in cost' expression mentioned here a few times), that will obviously also affect.

2. How wide spread/popular do you want T3cs to be in use?

a) This is tied to ship balance that is being actively discussed here, but also relates to supply and demand side of things too.

b) People have been saying that T3s are 'too good' at some things that T2 does, such as force recons and HACs roles. But have you seen such dramatic drop in price for force recon and HACs in the same period? T3s are 'too good' but their price has been crashing? What do you think about that?

c) Do you want these 'nerfed' or 'rebalanced' T3 cruisers to be flown a lot en masse? or become main stay of doctrines? Or do you want them to be a jack of all trades that has good utility for a very small gang with limited number of pilots but not necessarily needed in big numbers, etc.

d) Are we going for the early phase T3D scenario where T3 cruisers become cheap and jolly ships that you see everywhere in every space? Not necessarily as OP as some T3D had been but being so cheap and versatile that they can be a go-to ship for most pilots?

e) if 'price of a ship' is not a balancing factor, I do not know what is the reason to fly any T1 class ship for which there is a T2 version (except for BL Ops maybe), and I do not see any reason to fly T1 cruiser than any of the T3s, unless you nerf T3 to be somehow worse than T1 cruiser, which I don't believe will be the direction this is heading or neither has this ever been intended/implied.

On the pure merits of their performance, role and specialisation, yes, I can see scenarios where T2 could be preferred over T3 in some specific roles. But again, if price was not an issue, do you think balancing T3Cs will stop them from obsoleting many other ships that are not as specilised as T2 cruiser classes? (i.e. will the new T3 balance reverse how most of the BCs became not so desirable?)

TBH, I never bought this 'price is not a factor' argument. I have completely stopped flying T1 cruisers once I could fly HACs, Recons and Logistics. When T3s first came out and there was even less reason to look at T1 hulls and that remained the same even after all that tiercide stuff.

Price of a ship does matter, and I feel it has been proved multiple times, through situations like T3Ds having great value for money and pirate faction ships being so cheap, that high performance ships available for very cheap prices will have great effect on the kind of ships you see regularly in space.

so tl'dr;

1) What do people think about how easily available T3s should be? (in terms of supply, shortage/abundancy depending on demand, end product price, and their usefulness in terms of performance and role - all these things considered together)

2) in other but similar vein, how many T3s do you wish to see in space?


end note: I'm just curious what you think strategic cruisers' 'place' should be in the whole game meta, not just from pound per pound comparison with another cruiser hull in terms of role and performance only. The efficiency and quality of the end product (i.e. desirability - demand) after the balance will play a role, maybe as much as any changes in supply side could. Sorry to butt into a ship balancing topic with this but the visions you have and the end product that T3s become will have very wide spread implications.

If it cannot be answered I just wish to know that such things are being considered together, not just how many turrets or mid slots a ship should have.

one big issue that i see here is the tengu missile kinetic damage bonus still remains.

I think this should just be a straight 5% damage, you have gotten rid of the specific damage bonus on many other caldari ships and this one should be no different.

Proteus/Tengu/Loki with EWAR sub dont need extra cap/PWG, but Legion with EWAR sub should fit neuts which require extra PWG and cap. But now Legion cannot use any cap/pwg sub with EWAR sub...

Good post, T3D's are in a good spot people are still using them all but none are really that oppressive.

Fozzie admited it's all about SP sinks and extractors market.