These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
JC Mieyli
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#361 - 2017-06-22 04:43:22 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
JC Mieyli wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
JC Mieyli wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Or we can fix the 4 ships that have been causing problems or outright invalidating some 60+ other ships for years.

maybe they used to years ago but not anymore
meta changed a lot since those days


Yea, its dominated by a handful of overpowered ships, this change goes a long way to fixing that.

by removing even more ships from the meta and making the handful of ships worth flying even smaller
id prefer to see things go the other way
with more ships being viable rather than less
that isnt power creep
its equalization


Buffing some 60+ ships to deal with 4 overpowered ships is very much power creep on a massive scale.

nah its only power creep when the ships are buffed beyond the power levels already existing
a long time ago there was the tiericide
then along came pirate bs and marauder
that is power creep
now all the other ships need to be balanced against pirate bs and marauder
BESTER bm
Doomheim
#362 - 2017-06-22 05:26:46 UTC
Dior Ambraelle wrote:
BESTER bm wrote:
Separate Data/Relic is so last decade, we use Zeugma now.. :P ..

Combo scanners only had one utility slot the last time I checked, yellow and red hacks often need more.


You use the board and no,I have never needed a second slot.
BESTER bm
Doomheim
#363 - 2017-06-22 05:36:13 UTC
So the ships are on SiSi.. Thread can be closed as for some time now this means CCP is done and the changes are locked in.

Smart guys they are, the subsystems are not available so we can't start to see what can be saved from our investments and CCP won't have the 'burden' of being bombarded with negative comments.

And they cut off the nose from the Tengu.. I mean seriously. But hey, as the ship is likely to be useless now, having it defaced is only a minor issue I guess.. Quick, throw a few skins in there too to see if we can make some money off of those before ppl discover they are basically screwed..
Feka
Magellanic Itg
Goonswarm Federation
#364 - 2017-06-22 05:38:15 UTC
BESTER bm wrote:

That is what will likely happen yes. While I can fit and use a Tengu to run these sites with acceptable risk, where the risk mostly consists of me being careless or greedy, Fitting any available exploration ship to have a chance will become a huge risk even in case of getting unlucky on a hack and triggering a defense. Let alone I will no longer have the option to use the site defense to actually protect myself.

Stratios is not even close to being able to run these sites and will need to leave at the first sign of an unlucky turn or mishap.


High-end sites should be high risk.

Never not post.

Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#365 - 2017-06-22 05:45:22 UTC
Feka wrote:
BESTER bm wrote:

That is what will likely happen yes. While I can fit and use a Tengu to run these sites with acceptable risk, where the risk mostly consists of me being careless or greedy, Fitting any available exploration ship to have a chance will become a huge risk even in case of getting unlucky on a hack and triggering a defense. Let alone I will no longer have the option to use the site defense to actually protect myself.

Stratios is not even close to being able to run these sites and will need to leave at the first sign of an unlucky turn or mishap.


High-end sites should be high risk.

sure, but we need a viable hull to even start doing them. Merging analyzers bonus into covert cloak sub leave us no choice. We can't do them because of weak tank and we can't drop covert sub because of analyzers bonuses. Maybe move analzyers bonus into hull like probes fitting bonus?
Nestor is not an option and exploration is solo activity.

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

BESTER bm
Doomheim
#366 - 2017-06-22 06:11:43 UTC

So, tried building a suitable fit on SiSi but it's not possible.

Waste of skills and investment in a couple of ships soon to be worthless to me. Probably unsub two accounts and will be interesting to see how CCP is going to compensate for them moving the goalpost beyond where I can adjust.

Probably CCP won't care either way though..
Feka
Magellanic Itg
Goonswarm Federation
#367 - 2017-06-22 07:02:00 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:

sure, but we need a viable hull to even start doing them. Merging analyzers bonus into covert cloak sub leave us no choice. We can't do them because of weak tank and we can't drop covert sub because of analyzers bonuses. Maybe move analzyers bonus into hull like probes fitting bonus?
Nestor is not an option and exploration is solo activity.


Why should it be solo on all difficulty levels?

Never not post.

Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#368 - 2017-06-22 07:42:53 UTC
Feka wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:

sure, but we need a viable hull to even start doing them. Merging analyzers bonus into covert cloak sub leave us no choice. We can't do them because of weak tank and we can't drop covert sub because of analyzers bonuses. Maybe move analzyers bonus into hull like probes fitting bonus?
Nestor is not an option and exploration is solo activity.


Why should it be solo on all difficulty levels?

Because those are rare so it's unpredictable when they'll spawn. Not to mention there is no such thing as group exploration.

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

Feka
Magellanic Itg
Goonswarm Federation
#369 - 2017-06-22 08:11:12 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:

Because those are rare so it's unpredictable when they'll spawn. Not to mention there is no such thing as group exploration.


Yet.

Never not post.

BESTER bm
Doomheim
#370 - 2017-06-22 08:13:25 UTC
Feka wrote:
Why should it be solo on all difficulty levels?


Sleeper caches are solo sites, they are not designed to be run in teams and it would be pointless/make no difference if you do. Please know what you are commenting on before you do so.
Nareyan De'ath
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#371 - 2017-06-22 09:32:25 UTC
What horrifies me is that my once sleek disolution sequenced/Ab sub tengu now has been reshaped as the ecm/cloaky/nullified mismatched monstrosity...
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#372 - 2017-06-22 11:12:54 UTC
The good news is we still have the hammerhead Proteus, and the drone subsystem finally has a drone bay.
I thought the current electronics will become the core, the defense stays as it is, offensive and engineering subsystems will be merged or replaced and propulsion also stays. I also hoped that we may vote on which visuals should be kept or dropped.

I guess we have to deal with the fact that nothing is good enough for us.

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.

BESTER bm
Doomheim
#373 - 2017-06-22 11:47:42 UTC
Dior Ambraelle wrote:
I guess we have to deal with the fact that nothing is good enough for us.


That's not the issue here.. CCP has been fumbling and releasing half baked updates and patches for a while now. Most of what they do is not finished at release and it appears devs are pulled off and on to the next nerf/'improvement'/redesign instead of fleshing things out.

The fact that legacy code does hinder optimisations and performance improvements as well as coming competition (!) is not a good sign for CCP. Will be an interesting EVE Vegas (and I would not be surprised it to be the last CCP organised one), especially with DU on the laptop..
Sterling Blades
Windstalker Security Corp
United Neopian Federation
#374 - 2017-06-22 13:52:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Sterling Blades
Time for me to voice my first real complaint after fiddling a bit with the subsystems and Loki that I already had over on the test server. Why in the name of the gods above and below would you apply the old model for the Loki's emergent locus analyzer subsystem to the new immobility driver subsystem? Why not make it become the enhanced nuclear reactor model? Or even have it be the new look for the disolution sequencer?

Pardon me just venting steam and hoping that these visual changes will be worked out a bit more. I'm whining over something ultimately inconsequential, but I wish that the old locus analyzer model would be on something I'd fit to my ship more often if these end up being the final design choices.

Edit: in all other cases but the visual aspect, I've been able to more or less recreate my current setup without difficulty, and in certain cases, with better results than I had previously(also, I want that Minmatar Exoplanets skin that the loki has on the test server. I want it very much.)

The gods are out there. They watch us. They guide, they manipulate. We rally behind the ones we adore, and rain fire against those who rally behind the ones we hate. The question now is, to whom does your allegiance fall behind, dear Empyreans?

Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#375 - 2017-06-22 13:54:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Jeremiah Saken
Tried Tengu on SiSi. It's worse than Stratios currently, far worse. No point of using it as exploration vessel at current state. For data/relics site in null ceptor exploration will be better and cheaper. For anything less - Stratios. I really don't care how much high slots I have on it. Tank is laughable, not enough utility slots, stupid amount of useless highslots ( for cloaky hunters sure, but othewise meh). It that is generalisation then good luck - useless overpriced hull. CCP has good idea to release them in summer when ppl are on vacations, s***storm will hit with far less damage.

Edit: Visuals are bull**** btw. Where is iconic Tengu beak?

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

caldari MJ
Inner Hell
#376 - 2017-06-22 14:19:42 UTC
SO what results of last changes (last year) with wh:
1) wh pvp - DEAD
2) wh pve - mostly DEAD
3) wh industry - will DEAD (we already see falling of t3 orders on market)

Armor t3 fleet againist null-sec carriers/supers was killed. Why we need fight on ****-tanked-fitted t3 with lose skill-point againist null sec. Wh-industry will be killed after this patch. Now we see drop of t3 market. We have nothing left to sit on talos/nagas and make trash pvp. Best regards to incompetent ccp and focus group.
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#377 - 2017-06-22 15:26:27 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Where is iconic Tengu beak?

The current obfuscation manifold? I always thought it looks dumb.
And this is exactly why we were supposed to vote! Not a big deal really, show the pictures of the current art labeled with letters, then ask people to order them from favorite to least favorite. The one that most people dislikes gets dropped.
Personally I'm more interested in the Proteus: why keep the capacitor regeneration matrix instead of the power core multiplier?

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.

Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#378 - 2017-06-22 16:00:28 UTC
Dior Ambraelle wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Where is iconic Tengu beak?

The current obfuscation manifold? I always thought it looks dumb.
And this is exactly why we were supposed to vote! Not a big deal really, show the pictures of the current art labeled with letters, then ask people to order them from favorite to least favorite. The one that most people dislikes gets dropped.
Personally I'm more interested in the Proteus: why keep the capacitor regeneration matrix instead of the power core multiplier?

I don't like visual changes at all. The look should be decided by a player flying T3C not by arbitrary subsystem bonus. It would make sense from a hull personalization perspective.

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

Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#379 - 2017-06-22 16:10:45 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Dior Ambraelle wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Where is iconic Tengu beak?

The current obfuscation manifold? I always thought it looks dumb.
And this is exactly why we were supposed to vote! Not a big deal really, show the pictures of the current art labeled with letters, then ask people to order them from favorite to least favorite. The one that most people dislikes gets dropped.
Personally I'm more interested in the Proteus: why keep the capacitor regeneration matrix instead of the power core multiplier?

I don't like visual changes at all. The look should be decided by a player flying T3C not by arbitrary subsystem bonus. It would make sense from a hull personalization perspective.

It works like this because you have the right to know what ship the other player is flying. In any other cases you can see both on d-scan and on the overview the name of the ship, so you immediately know what you're against. But the name "Tengu" currently covers 1024 ships. You need to actually look at it to predict the possible abilities of the ship.

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.

Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#380 - 2017-06-22 16:21:47 UTC
Just dropping in on account of curiosity, but how will the T3C's be handled from a visual standpoint? Since we're going to a 4-category system from a 5-category one, will they look the same as they do now or will they be visually reworked given that would essentially mean part of the cruiser hulls would be literally missing?

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."