These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Strategic Cruiser Focus Group Working Thread

First post
Author
Anemone221
221st Support group
#161 - 2017-06-08 05:41:48 UTC
I'm glad that the remote rep blop t3c is still a thing, never got to run a fleet with them but I would think it could be hilarious for small group to gank random instance runners and still be able to tank the site using them. In my opinion I would change the 550% falloff bonus to a 20 % increase in optimal and falloff (1/3 of basilisk).
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#162 - 2017-06-08 05:45:43 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

Cov ops cloaks are very powerful on their own. Nullification is not required for exploration as can be seen with all of the other cov ops ships out there. The problem with nullification and cov ops being on the same ship is that it effectively means you can ignore any defence in your way.

God, where to start? Neither covert cloak nor nullification is required for exploration. Those subsystems are not needed to do exploration sites. It is required for travel. Some content will be harder and will propablly need to change configuration in order to be done, like ghost sites or sleeper caches, and it is a good thing. Covert cloak is remedy for insta locking ships, nullification for non targeted interdiction, with current drawbacks that configuration will not be like walk in the park as currently is. T3C are and will be special (like overpriced, and SP loss) that's why they get special abilities.
baltec1 wrote:
This not only means explorers can opt out of pvp but also means that people can and do use them to transport high value goods, offensive cyno's, hunt ratters, run escalations safe in the knowledge that they will not be caught while travelling unlike every other ship out there (including the other cov ops).

Transport good? Less safe after nerf. Offensive cynos? Because nullified ceptors can't carry them...Hunt ratters? You serious? Obscene amount of ISK in null, carrier ratting in dead end pipes hidden behind mobile bubbles. Make "dirty gate" at pipe starting system and your covert only cyno carrier is useless. Run escalation safe? Yeah, they don't be caught while traveling but they will be on site. This is valid tactics in low and just because F1 monkeys in null don't know how to use combat probes and lachesis doesn't mean those hulls will be super safe.
baltec1 wrote:
It is simply too powerful a combo. The pilgrim is never going to be much of an option so long as the legion has the power to ignore defences.

Just because we nerf proteus beyond the deimos doesn't mean the deimos will start to be usefull after. Covert+nullifing combo has very harsh drawbacks so I don't think recons will be overshadowed because T3Cs can nullifiy bubbles.

I have so concerns about cynos, if covert+nullified combo is too strong:
1) should nullified interdiction hull carry them? (both T3C and ceptors)
2) why not covert hulls only?
3) covert cyno reserved to recons only?

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#163 - 2017-06-08 09:09:45 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
With the expected nerfs to align time and sig resolution, nullification without cloak is probably a 100% chance of getting caught at a bubble camp.


Sig increase isn't going to do much for catching them. You can cloak a titan before you can lock it due to the way sever ticks work so a bigger sig isn't going to do much. Question remains on the align time, in my experience you will be looking at something like battlescruiser to battleship speed, say 8 to 9 seconds to make catching it a realistic option.

Bromum Atom
Outplayed.
#164 - 2017-06-08 09:14:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Bromum Atom
baltec1 wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
With the expected nerfs to align time and sig resolution, nullification without cloak is probably a 100% chance of getting caught at a bubble camp.


Sig increase isn't going to do much for catching them. You can cloak a titan before you can lock it due to the way sever ticks work so a bigger sig isn't going to do much. Question remains on the align time, in my experience you will be looking at something like battlescruiser to battleship speed, say 8 to 9 seconds to make catching it a realistic option.


Why gate campers should be boosted? Ususally they dont want to pvp, they can only camp the gate and run when you start pew-pew with them.
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#165 - 2017-06-08 10:47:38 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Rawketsled wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
With the expected nerfs to align time and sig resolution, nullification without cloak is probably a 100% chance of getting caught at a bubble camp.

Is that objectively a bad thing?

Beyond making the subsystem relatively useless.
That kinda defeats part of the reason they are going down to 4 sets of 3 subs, which is to have better choices and remove useless combinations.

Which subsystem?

Each one seems pretty useful... just not in that exact situation you want them for.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#166 - 2017-06-08 12:18:34 UTC
Bromum Atom wrote:

Why gate campers should be boosted? Ususally they dont want to pvp, they can only camp the gate and run when you start pew-pew with them.


Why should you be able to ignore them?
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
Parasitic Legion.
#167 - 2017-06-08 12:33:40 UTC
Rawketsled wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Rawketsled wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
With the expected nerfs to align time and sig resolution, nullification without cloak is probably a 100% chance of getting caught at a bubble camp.

Is that objectively a bad thing?

Beyond making the subsystem relatively useless.
That kinda defeats part of the reason they are going down to 4 sets of 3 subs, which is to have better choices and remove useless combinations.

Which subsystem?

Each one seems pretty useful... just not in that exact situation you want them for.

Individually they are all useful but certain combinations quickly turn into hot garbage. There are 1024 combinations for each hull, how many have you used? Personally I use(d) about 20.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Bromum Atom
Outplayed.
#168 - 2017-06-08 13:08:41 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Bromum Atom wrote:

Why gate campers should be boosted? Ususally they dont want to pvp, they can only camp the gate and run when you start pew-pew with them.


Why should you be able to ignore them?

Why they should get free killmail? Or why I should logoff at camped system? Why carriers ratting aligned and ignore pvp when I going to catch them? What is easy: catch carrier when it warp to new rat-site (there is no othe way to catch it if carrier pilot doesn't sleep) or catch covert-nullifier t3 when it pass through gate?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#169 - 2017-06-08 13:37:56 UTC
Bromum Atom wrote:

Why they should get free killmail?


Its only free if you let them win.


Bromum Atom wrote:

Or why I should logoff at camped system?


You don't, you have a cov ops cloak, use it.

Bromum Atom wrote:

Why carriers ratting aligned and ignore pvp when I going to catch them? What is easy: catch carrier when it warp to new rat-site (there is no othe way to catch it if carrier pilot doesn't sleep) or catch covert-nullifier t3 when it pass through gate?


So you should be able to just ignore someones defences? Sounds like you wan't an I win button.
Bromum Atom
Outplayed.
#170 - 2017-06-08 13:55:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Bromum Atom
baltec1 wrote:

So you should be able to just ignore someones defences? Sounds like you wan't an I win button.

I told that. Dont know what you hear. You want camp gate killing t3 with you "win" button, but carriels still should be uncatchable?

Quote:
You don't, you have a cov ops cloak, use it.

I have cov ops cloak + nullifier. Why t3 should be nerfed, but carriers not? Null+covert is just small nice bonus for such expensive t3 ship.

Quote:
Its only free if you let them win.

I dont let them, I will refit and search for pvp at other places. Easy.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#171 - 2017-06-08 14:40:11 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
T3C are and will be special (like overpriced, and SP loss) that's why they get special abilities.


They aren't that expensive if you consider what you get out of them.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#172 - 2017-06-08 14:54:02 UTC
Bromum Atom wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

So you should be able to just ignore someones defences? Sounds like you wan't an I win button.

I told that. Dont know what you hear. You want camp gate killing t3 with you "win" button, but carriels still should be uncatchable?

Quote:
You don't, you have a cov ops cloak, use it.

I have cov ops cloak + nullifier. Why t3 should be nerfed, but carriers not? Null+covert is just small nice bonus for such expensive t3 ship.

Quote:
Its only free if you let them win.

I dont let them, I will refit and search for pvp at other places. Easy.


You seem to have an obsession with AFK carriers, if you want them nerfed then ask for it somewhere else. This does not mean however that T3C should be able to ignore PvP.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#173 - 2017-06-08 14:54:50 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
T3C are and will be special (like overpriced, and SP loss) that's why they get special abilities.


They aren't that expensive if you consider what you get out of them.


See this is why I want SP loss to go, people just use it as an excuse to make them overpowered.
JC Mieyli
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#174 - 2017-06-08 15:08:42 UTC  |  Edited by: JC Mieyli
baltec1 wrote:
This does not mean however that T3C should be able to ignore PvP.

other ships are specifically designed for ignoring pvp
why shouldn't a t3c be able to when its specifically fitted to avoid it
well anyway if the gate camp is decent there si no reason not to catch a t3c
all you need is a sebo dram to decloak and point
April rabbit
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#175 - 2017-06-08 15:59:15 UTC
JC Mieyli wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
This does not mean however that T3C should be able to ignore PvP.

other ships are specifically designed for ignoring pvp

Which one in particular?
zbaaca
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#176 - 2017-06-08 16:16:46 UTC
JC Mieyli wrote:
[quote=baltec1]
other ships are specifically designed for ignoring pvp
why shouldn't a t3c be able to when its specifically fitted to avoid it
well anyway if the gate camp is decent there si no reason not to catch a t3c
all you need is a sebo dram to decloak and point

shhh . dont use secret language of logicBig smile

Bugs are opportunities to cause unprecedented amounts of destruction. --Zorgn ♡♡♡

zbaaca
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#177 - 2017-06-08 16:19:35 UTC  |  Edited by: zbaaca
April rabbit wrote:
JC Mieyli wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
This does not mean however that T3C should be able to ignore PvP.

other ships are specifically designed for ignoring pvp

Which one in particular?

jump freights . ceptors to ignore 95% of camps . bombers to choose when and where they want do die . blops that jumps , curse and friends to choose engagements . etc . i guess you get the idea

Bugs are opportunities to cause unprecedented amounts of destruction. --Zorgn ♡♡♡

Bromum Atom
Outplayed.
#178 - 2017-06-08 16:32:19 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
See this is why I want SP loss to go, people just use it as an excuse to make them overpowered.

SP is just ISK. By this logic: people just use hude price of Supercarriers as an excuse to make them overpowered.
JC Mieyli
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#179 - 2017-06-08 16:32:52 UTC  |  Edited by: JC Mieyli
zbaaca wrote:
April rabbit wrote:
JC Mieyli wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
This does not mean however that T3C should be able to ignore PvP.

other ships are specifically designed for ignoring pvp

Which one in particular?

jump freights . ceptors to ignore 95% of camps . bombers to choose when and where they want do die . blops that jumps , curse and friends to choose engagements . etc . i guess you get the idea


yeah all of those and a few others
the yacht the little mining frigs etc
after these changes t3cs will be easier to catch
they get agility nerf and nulli sub gets agility penalty
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#180 - 2017-06-08 22:46:17 UTC
Alessienne Ellecon wrote:
"Team Five O" wrote:

Dual tank bonuses for the Loki


The minmaxers are going to love this. Isn't dual tanking supposed to be a huge no-no?

*sits back and waits for the weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth*

This is my main problem with Minmatar in general. The rule - as much as I understand - supposed be that specialization is always better than flexibility/compensation... call it what you want.
The other factions picked a defense bonus for their ships: Amarr has passive armor with high resistance, Gallente has active armor with rep bonus, Caldari has passive shield with high resistance. So by logic, Minmatar should have active shield with booster bonus, and ONLY that.
But Minmatar decided to be a mess by using armor and shield systems randomly, which brings up my problem: if Minmatar isn't specialized in any one defense, then shouldn't it have significantly weaker tank than the other 3 factions?

And this brings up an even bigger problem with the Loki: surprise tank.
The fact that you don't know what kind of tank it has, the Loki should have a huge advantage over the other 3 ships. However, it's still not specialized, so the chance to be tanked against the opponent's weapons should be the main defense. This means that if the opponent failed to guess the tank then the Loki should probably win, even if it's tank isn't specialized, and therefor weaker. But if the opponent guessed the tank then the Loki shouldn't have a chance.

Other personal opinions about the new subsystems:
- still no weapon disruption, sensor dampening and target painting. Are you suggesting that only the ECM wort anything? I would make a sensor/e-war core system with these 4
- based on the previous, another core system would be the cap warfare (Amarr), warp disruption (Gallente), web (Minmatar) and __________ (Caldari). This is another interesting thing, only 3 factions seem to have a unique engineering or propulsion based tactic. In this case Caldari is way behind the other 3 factions.
- cloak and scanning in the same subsystem? Sure they are often used together, but not only used together. I would make the scanning/exploration the third core system, separated from the cloak. This way you could make a well tanked explorer/hunter without a cloak, which sometimes could be more useful.

If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!

But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.