These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Tech 3, maybe a mistake.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#101 - 2012-11-12 05:05:40 UTC
CaptainFalcon07 wrote:
I like how these people with their dumb sayings like how Tech 3 is better than Tech 2 ships. How so?

-Tech 3 are rather poor logistic ships compared to Tech 2 and now the Tech 1 variants coming.

-There is no Tech 3 Hictor.

-Tech 2 Recons have superior Ewar/Neut Power compared to their Tech 3 Variants.

-Tech 2 HAC's have advantages that Tech 3 doesn't like mobility and speed, smaller sig radius, and LR advantages.

-Tech 3 Leadership boosting is already being fixed with the upcoming changes.



It's not about being better at a specific role. That's what you're missing.

Recons do ewar better, but at the huge tradeoff of speed and tank. Their survivability is **** compared to t3s... which is why players fly t3s in place of them pretty exclusively. The only real exception to that is the rapier.

Hictors have massive tank... and a very unique role.. sounds more like the types of concepts tech 3's should have been.

HAC's downright suck and anyone with half a brain would trade up to t3 fleets in an instant. You're pretty ignorant if you think hacs are faster or defensively better. Long range... barely to a certain extent on a few ships. Again, range can't make up for the 500,000 to million HP tech 3's with more dps and more speed, easier fittings, better cap, etc.

Commands are being fixed... big whoop. Only t3's that ever filled the role of commands were alt pilots that sat in towers or rolling safes. And there's no promise or history hat commands are being fix properly.... just empty promises so far
CaptainFalcon07
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#102 - 2012-11-12 05:09:53 UTC
I'm Down wrote:
CaptainFalcon07 wrote:
I like how these people with their dumb sayings like how Tech 3 is better than Tech 2 ships. How so?

-Tech 3 are rather poor logistic ships compared to Tech 2 and now the Tech 1 variants coming.

-There is no Tech 3 Hictor.

-Tech 2 Recons have superior Ewar/Neut Power compared to their Tech 3 Variants.

-Tech 2 HAC's have advantages that Tech 3 doesn't like mobility and speed, smaller sig radius, and LR advantages.

-Tech 3 Leadership boosting is already being fixed with the upcoming changes.



It's not about being better at a specific role. That's what you're missing.

Recons do ewar better, but at the huge tradeoff of speed and tank. Their survivability is **** compared to t3s... which is why players fly t3s in place of them pretty exclusively. The only real exception to that is the rapier.

Hictors have massive tank... and a very unique role.. sounds more like the types of concepts tech 3's should have been.

HAC's downright suck and anyone with half a brain would trade up to t3 fleets in an instant. You're pretty ignorant if you think hacs are faster or defensively better. Long range... barely to a certain extent on a few ships. Again, range can't make up for the 500,000 to million HP tech 3's with more dps and more speed, easier fittings, better cap, etc.

Commands are being fixed... big whoop. Only t3's that ever filled the role of commands were alt pilots that sat in towers or rolling safes. And there's no promise or history hat commands are being fix properly.... just empty promises so far


I don't see any ECM Tengus, Do you see any? A rapier has not only a superior webbing bonus but also a target painting bonus that goes well with it. You don't ever see Legions replacing Curses. Its a fair trade off for their superior electronic capability they have a fragile tank.

The Vagabond is a superior nanoship to the Loki. The ishtar is a superior nano-drone boat than the Proteus. The Cerberus can reach other to ridiculous distance with HM.
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#103 - 2012-11-12 08:12:29 UTC
CaptainFalcon07 wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
CaptainFalcon07 wrote:
I like how these people with their dumb sayings like how Tech 3 is better than Tech 2 ships. How so?

-Tech 3 are rather poor logistic ships compared to Tech 2 and now the Tech 1 variants coming.

-There is no Tech 3 Hictor.

-Tech 2 Recons have superior Ewar/Neut Power compared to their Tech 3 Variants.

-Tech 2 HAC's have advantages that Tech 3 doesn't like mobility and speed, smaller sig radius, and LR advantages.

-Tech 3 Leadership boosting is already being fixed with the upcoming changes.



It's not about being better at a specific role. That's what you're missing.

Recons do ewar better, but at the huge tradeoff of speed and tank. Their survivability is **** compared to t3s... which is why players fly t3s in place of them pretty exclusively. The only real exception to that is the rapier.

Hictors have massive tank... and a very unique role.. sounds more like the types of concepts tech 3's should have been.

HAC's downright suck and anyone with half a brain would trade up to t3 fleets in an instant. You're pretty ignorant if you think hacs are faster or defensively better. Long range... barely to a certain extent on a few ships. Again, range can't make up for the 500,000 to million HP tech 3's with more dps and more speed, easier fittings, better cap, etc.

Commands are being fixed... big whoop. Only t3's that ever filled the role of commands were alt pilots that sat in towers or rolling safes. And there's no promise or history hat commands are being fix properly.... just empty promises so far


I don't see any ECM Tengus, Do you see any? A rapier has not only a superior webbing bonus but also a target painting bonus that goes well with it. You don't ever see Legions replacing Curses. Its a fair trade off for their superior electronic capability they have a fragile tank.

The Vagabond is a superior nanoship to the Loki. The ishtar is a superior nano-drone boat than the Proteus. The Cerberus can reach other to ridiculous distance with HM.


Vaga, much weaker tank, and not faster/better in any way. You don't apparently know what you can do with a loki.

ishtar, 1 extra drone, tough to fit, average tank vs proteus, 1 less drone, better slot options, multiple speed benefits, better bonus combinations

cerb... range on missiles...lol... lets wait 5 years to hit something and pray it doesn't warp.... oh yeah, speed, tank, capacitor, those don't matter at all for that 60km extra range tradeoff and much much lower damage output.

Curse only advantage over a Legion is that range bonus... pilgrim gets trumped easy. However, it's more comparable to an armor hac with a massive nos/neut bonus since you can get a lot of dps while maintaining that neut bonus. So not even really comparable in most regards.

I see a lot of people fly EW tengus... but it's not a common ship b/c there's not much point to using a tengu to fill that role 99% of the time. It has much more to do with the function of that particular warfare. Come play in large Tengu fleets and you will see them.

Both PL and AAA have at times used them in mass for the offensive + defensive advantages.

CCP Falcon
#104 - 2012-11-12 09:21:04 UTC

Alright, some of the posts in here are getting pretty close to the line.

Think before you post, and keep it civil.

CCP Falcon || EVE Universe Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon

Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3
Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#105 - 2012-11-12 09:54:16 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:

Tech 3 is awesome Cool



Yes it is! No toucha my T3 preese!!
Because of Falcon P

COO - Bene Gesserit Chapterhouse  CEO - Sanctuary Pact Alliance
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#106 - 2012-11-12 10:25:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Inquisitor Kitchner
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


Spoken like a griefer and a coward.

What I post may be offensive to you, but you are not the arbiter of what is said on these forums. CCP has its own censorship team for that.
As for you teaching me some kind of lesson, think again.
I have dealt with your kind in game and in RL for a long time.

You try, quite badly at that, to hide your cowardice and bullying behind words, like "emergent gameplay", and "bad posting".
But simply put, you are a griefer. As for me quitting the game, you just may revitalize my interest in the game, because I may actually have to shoot asshats like you, when I start acquiring killrights. I say asshats LIKE you, because I am quite confident you will never look me up personally. Cowards like you never do.

Oh, and I am sitting on quite decent stack of coin, that will buy quite a few plexes and ships.
If I DO choose to leave the game at some point(I closed down all my other accounts this past summer due to Soundwave's actions), it will because of my dis-satisfaction with CCP's product, not because of some person like you.



OK

EDIT: Only 22 days to go.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
blake fallout
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2012-11-12 13:40:50 UTC  |  Edited by: blake fallout
The Only way i see T3 battleShips being usefull (or comming out) is For Some new region to Open up, and you need That Kind of FirePower to take out whats Living in thier,

with a New weapons system desinged for that region ~ (say) Ion, Plasma based weaponry that only Works on the (insert enemy here) (Because we invented it we have High resistence to it so it Dosent effect the lower class ships)

and can go off to the new region Blasting away with new weponry and T3 BS (without effecting the rest of the game)

Linkin park
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#108 - 2012-11-12 14:59:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Denmark
There are a few good indicators of wether a ship might be too much for balance :

  1. Does this ship cost a lot and yet people still pvp with it all the time?
  2. Will people pimp this ship with expensive modules even for pvp?
  3. Are people on the forums claiming balance is fine because it cost a lot?
  4. Are people training alts/characters specifically for this ship?
  5. Are players normally forced to bring the same ship or more numbers to win against this ship?

For the sake of Eve T3 cruisers has to be balanced. At the same time I think CCP have a huge task actually making the strategic cruisers more versatile and fun for people. Having more than 3.000 configs available on a ship and only seing 5-6 of them used by experienced gamers is such a shame. Especially when most of those configs are obsoleting other ships...
But it's tricky to make ships versatile when the ultimate versatility require a player to carry around 25 submods, 2-3 weapon types and possible 2 types of tanks and rigs cannot be changed...

I think I would merge all the submods into 1 unit and enable people to config it in the fitting screen while docked or near a fitting possibility in space... As an alternative I would create a special submod hangar in the ship only for these and cut production price to 20%, however I think people won't buy the modules in the first place.

I would make the ship skill a bit more important not only having a bonus for overheating but also a bonus to the effectivity of the submod(s) themself.... Cut submod bonus in half and let each skill level on the shipskill give a 20% bonus.
Also I would have the slot layout almost fixed to the hull, but allow some submod options to add slots.
Then just give each submodule 1 bonus, 1 slot and maybe a bonus to some stats...

EG a LOKI:

The hull itself would have a fixed 5/4/4 slot layout 5 turrets/0 launchers

Then weapons submod could have 5 options:
  1. Autocannons: 2,5% RoF pr. submod level (remember hull bonus doubles this at lv 5)
  2. Artillery: 2,0% damage pr. lv, +1 hi-slot (w/ turret slot)
  3. Missile launchers: 2,0% damage pr. lv, +1 hi-slot (-5 turrets, +6 launchers)
  4. Extra Firepower: +1 lowslot, half reload time
  5. Drones: +25 drone bandwith and +25 drone bay

...and the sensor submod could have these 5 options:
  1. Tracking: 5,0% projectile tracking pr lv. / better explosion velocity for missiles
  2. Range: 2,5% falloff pr lv / better flight time for missiles
  3. Explorer: Probing bonus and +1 hi-slot (maybe +1 medslot)
  4. Eccm: 5% better sensor strength pr lv.
  5. Commander: Warfare Link bonus

...and the engineering submod could have these 5 options:
  1. Cloaking: +1 hi-slot and ability to warp cloaked, cpu reduction pr level to proper cloak
  2. Interdiction Nullifier (someone will HAVE to make a choice now)
  3. Enlarged capacitor: 2,5% bigger capacitor pr lv.
  4. Extra cooling: extra bonus to overheating
  5. Extra power: bonus to powergrid, but I'd make the hull have a rather limited base to avoid oversized mods

etc etc etc with defensive and propulsion submods as well as other ships

Something to play with....
Vilnius Zar
SDC Multi Ten
#109 - 2012-11-12 15:12:55 UTC
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


1. I am not the one being the coward using the new bounty mechanic to try to grief players out of the game.
2. Somehow suggesting suicide ganking someone for a bounty rings rather hollow when talking about cowards and honour.





1. If you left the game because I placed a bounty on you, that is a bonus side effect. You cant make someone quit.

2. I don't care about honour.

Dinsdale: I would like you to learn that your posting and your arguments are terrible, and people take exception to that and there are consequences for your actions. I don't intend to actually spend my time hunting you down personally because you haven't offended me personally. Hunting someone down for forum posts not even aimed at you, however terrible they may be, is a lot of pointless effort.

If I place a massive bounty on you (everyone else feel free to contribute) and you stop spouting inane rubbish on the forums in such a way that is actually quite offensive to some and not at all what the rest of the community wants to see, it achieves its goal. If you decide to quit the game because of said bounty, then the goal has also been achieved. I'm happy for you to start posting like a rational, decent and polite human being with no desire for you to quit the game in particular. However from experience if either of these happens it'll be the latter before the former.

I don't care how it happens, I'd just like to think you'll learn that spouting off this sort of inane rubbish has consequences.


Not at all coming to the defense of Dinsdale here but for someone with such a big mouth on the forums, you sure have some horrible lossfits and a terrible KB.
Dar Manic
Dirt Road Services
#110 - 2012-11-12 15:16:32 UTC
Demolishar wrote:
Hathrul wrote:
tech 3 do all off the above, at 3 times the price of any of them. you pay for it if you loose them (sp loss....:( )

im not sure how much they are really used. the cost is very high and im not sure it warrants the increase in price over effectiveness in most areas of space.

i like em :)


Have you SEEN nullsec fleet compositions? They fly swarms of faction fit Tengus like they were tech 1 frigates.




Good thing nullsec corps have all their alts in hi-sec where the big isk is made. ;)

I just don't understand null sec players.

**Please note: **Anytime I use the phrase PvP in a post, I'm talking about shooting/combat/killing things/blowing things up. Thank you.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#111 - 2012-11-12 15:19:21 UTC
Dar Manic wrote:
Demolishar wrote:
Hathrul wrote:
tech 3 do all off the above, at 3 times the price of any of them. you pay for it if you loose them (sp loss....:( )

im not sure how much they are really used. the cost is very high and im not sure it warrants the increase in price over effectiveness in most areas of space.

i like em :)


Have you SEEN nullsec fleet compositions? They fly swarms of faction fit Tengus like they were tech 1 frigates.




Good thing nullsec corps have all their alts in hi-sec where the big isk is made. ;)


So, are you going to make a snippy passive-aggressive remark every time someone mentions null sec?

That's a mighty big chip you got on your shoulder.
Dar Manic
Dirt Road Services
#112 - 2012-11-12 15:24:09 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dar Manic wrote:
Demolishar wrote:
Hathrul wrote:
tech 3 do all off the above, at 3 times the price of any of them. you pay for it if you loose them (sp loss....:( )

im not sure how much they are really used. the cost is very high and im not sure it warrants the increase in price over effectiveness in most areas of space.

i like em :)


Have you SEEN nullsec fleet compositions? They fly swarms of faction fit Tengus like they were tech 1 frigates.




Good thing nullsec corps have all their alts in hi-sec where the big isk is made. ;)


So, are you going to make a snippy passive-aggressive remark every time someone mentions null sec?

That's a mighty big chip you got on your shoulder.


I can always depend on you jenn. I got my chip by learning from the best. :)

I just don't understand null sec players.

**Please note: **Anytime I use the phrase PvP in a post, I'm talking about shooting/combat/killing things/blowing things up. Thank you.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#113 - 2012-11-12 15:28:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


Spoken like a griefer and a coward.

What I post may be offensive to you, but you are not the arbiter of what is said on these forums. CCP has its own censorship team for that.
As for you teaching me some kind of lesson, think again.
I have dealt with your kind in game and in RL for a long time.

You try, quite badly at that, to hide your cowardice and bullying behind words, like "emergent gameplay", and "bad posting".
But simply put, you are a griefer. As for me quitting the game, you just may revitalize my interest in the game, because I may actually have to shoot asshats like you, when I start acquiring killrights. I say asshats LIKE you, because I am quite confident you will never look me up personally. Cowards like you never do.

Oh, and I am sitting on quite decent stack of coin, that will buy quite a few plexes and ships.
If I DO choose to leave the game at some point(I closed down all my other accounts this past summer due to Soundwave's actions), it will because of my dis-satisfaction with CCP's product, not because of some person like you.



OK

EDIT: Only 22 days to go.


Dinsdale never learned a very simple life lesson, the idea that HOW you say something is every bit as important as WHAT you say. Couple that with his persecution complex and paranoia (case in point) and you get a poster who just rubs people the wrong way.

Like Dinsdale, I'm one of the people who thinks the NPC AI stuff is being badly mishandled, but not a day goes by that I don't wish that Dinsdale was on someone Else's side lol
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#114 - 2012-11-12 15:30:47 UTC
Dar Manic wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dar Manic wrote:
Demolishar wrote:
Hathrul wrote:
tech 3 do all off the above, at 3 times the price of any of them. you pay for it if you loose them (sp loss....:( )

im not sure how much they are really used. the cost is very high and im not sure it warrants the increase in price over effectiveness in most areas of space.

i like em :)


Have you SEEN nullsec fleet compositions? They fly swarms of faction fit Tengus like they were tech 1 frigates.




Good thing nullsec corps have all their alts in hi-sec where the big isk is made. ;)


So, are you going to make a snippy passive-aggressive remark every time someone mentions null sec?

That's a mighty big chip you got on your shoulder.


I can always depend on you jenn. I got my chip by learning from the best. :)


I don't see how you cold learn from me, I don't mention high sec in EVERY post (just the important ones where some high sec "solo player in an MMO" tells CCP that EVE would get so many more subs if they'd just make it a more solo game......)

lol
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#115 - 2012-11-12 15:36:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Inquisitor Kitchner
Vilnius Zar wrote:


Not at all coming to the defense of Dinsdale here but for someone with such a big mouth on the forums, you sure have some horrible lossfits and a terrible KB.



I actually hate anyone using killboards to measure pretty much anything, they are totally pointless and easily manipulated. For example the last 3 fleets I FC'd resulted in kills, but I didn't get on the KM's. Therefore I'm a bad EVE player (I am a bad EVE player but that isn't why).

For anyone not sure what he's on about, over 3 months in null my KB stats are: 117 ships killed, 24 ships lost with a 98% efficiency. Of those 24 losses 10 of those are frigates, 1 is a BS i got killed stupidly when I first went to Null and the rest are drakes.

In terms of terribad fits he's probably on about these:

http://www.executive-outcomes.net/edk/index.php/kill_detail/298728/ (Frist ship in null, was given to me by a friend as he had it laying around)

http://www.executive-outcomes.net/edk/index.php/kill_detail/306850/ (kestrel i bought in the middle of a sloshop frig fleet I was leading as a blue bombed me, I didnt care what the ship was or what was on it).

If you look on EVE kill there are probably a few times (3 iirc) where I wasn't paying attention and died to rats because Drake vOv

Of course if you look up the guy posting this he doesn't have a KB at all, probably because he's posting under an alt to make snide comments about other people's killboard stats in a discussion where they aren't relevant without even revealing his own.

I'd guess you're probably in -A-, they love their KB stats when they don't matter too.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Alundil
Rolled Out
#116 - 2012-11-12 16:09:01 UTC
Azrin Stella Oerndotte wrote:

Because a battleship can totally apply full "1000" DPS on almost any ship and zip around at a couple of km/s with a tiny sig and a +80km range.


You're not going to get all 3 of those things on a T3 Strat Cruiser either so holding that up as the "Pièce de résistance" is faulty at best.

I don't think I've ever seen a T3 Cruiser with 1000 DPS with +80km range (applied dps otherwise it doesn't matter at all).

It's a trade off to fit these for 1000 DPS. To do so you lose some of the mobility (there goes the + km/s) and a LOT of the range you speak of. At that point you have to be very specific about how you engage in them otherwise you can't apply much of that paper DPS.

You can brick tank them like a mofo (600k EHP proteus comes to mind) but you're relegated to brick tackle or bait tackle (or some other non-DPS and non-mobile role as you're fat and slow at that point).

You can make them cloaky and scanny - but in order to do that you, again, lose some of the tank and gank. 1 v1 in that scenario against some unlucky PVE fit ship will go in the T3 favor. But cloaky/scanny T3 against a comparably piloted PVP setup won't fair so well.

Point being that T3 is not the "Easy Butan" that people make them out to be. One of the huge benefits of the platform is the ability to customize and in that customization lies it's strengths. But that customization doesn't make the ship unbeatable or even the best choice for all engagements.

Add in the bonuses from gang links etc etc and that changes the argument(s) fairly significantly but then that's a separate topic.

I'm right behind you
Vilnius Zar
SDC Multi Ten
#117 - 2012-11-12 17:03:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Vilnius Zar
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
Vilnius Zar wrote:


Not at all coming to the defense of Dinsdale here but for someone with such a big mouth on the forums, you sure have some horrible lossfits and a terrible KB.



I actually hate anyone using killboards to measure pretty much anything, they are totally pointless and easily manipulated. For example the last 3 fleets I FC'd resulted in kills, but I didn't get on the KM's. Therefore I'm a bad EVE player (I am a bad EVE player but that isn't why).

For anyone not sure what he's on about, over 3 months in null my KB stats are: 117 ships killed, 24 ships lost with a 98% efficiency. Of those 24 losses 10 of those are frigates, 1 is a BS i got killed stupidly when I first went to Null and the rest are drakes.

In terms of terribad fits he's probably on about these:

http://www.executive-outcomes.net/edk/index.php/kill_detail/298728/ (Frist ship in null, was given to me by a friend as he had it laying around)

http://www.executive-outcomes.net/edk/index.php/kill_detail/306850/ (kestrel i bought in the middle of a sloshop frig fleet I was leading as a blue bombed me, I didnt care what the ship was or what was on it).

If you look on EVE kill there are probably a few times (3 iirc) where I wasn't paying attention and died to rats because Drake vOv

Of course if you look up the guy posting this he doesn't have a KB at all, probably because he's posting under an alt to make snide comments about other people's killboard stats in a discussion where they aren't relevant without even revealing his own.

I'd guess you're probably in -A-, they love their KB stats when they don't matter too.


KB can give a good indication of a player's actual prowess, ofcourse a lack of a KB means nothing at all (as in my case atm) but on the upside it doesn't have any terrible losses either. See, I don't look at superficial numbers like most people, I actually look a bit deeper and all I see on your kb is kills in bigger fleets leeching onto the km (thus pretty much worth nothing at all) and crap fitted losses (CPR on a drake wtf?), almost all your latest losses are flawed showing a lack of actual understanding.

I like your passive/aggressive defence with the "lol must be AAA", sadly for you you're very much wrong but keep trying. The thing is you berate Dinsdale about his "posting manners" but if we take a better look at your posts then all we can say is "lol".
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#118 - 2012-11-12 17:22:48 UTC
Vilnius Zar wrote:


KB can give a good indication of a player's actual prowess, ofcourse a lack of a KB means nothing at all (as in my case atm) but on the upside it doesn't have any terrible losses either. See, I don't look at superficial numbers like most people, I actually look a bit deeper and all I see on your kb is kills in bigger fleets leeching onto the km (thus pretty much worth nothing at all) and crap fitted losses (CPR on a drake wtf?), almost all your latest losses are flawed showing a lack of actual understanding.

I like your passive/aggressive defence with the "lol must be AAA", sadly for you you're very much wrong but keep trying. The thing is you berate Dinsdale about his "posting manners" but if we take a better look at your posts then all we can say is "lol".



No they don't, killboards show nothing. I could have an alt which I use for l33t PvP solo, or I could be like Snot Shot and hang around cloaked and launch bombs onto people when they are fighting each other. There's a whole host of reasons why killboard stats are rubbish.

Yes my kills have been in bigger fleets, but so what? When I fly in roams I prefer to FC rather then fly along, and when I FC I don't care about getting on killmails, I care about my fleet going out and killing people.

The CPR is necessary because I am flying in a doctrine of my coalition and I wasn't able to fit all the modules on as required. I believe I've dropped a Ballistic Control mod for it meaning I lose DPS but not tank, when you have 256 drakes in a fleet you don't need to be so concerned about dropping some DPS. Then again of course you'd know this talking from a knowledgeable position of a blank killboard in some corp no-one has ever heard of?

Considering my losses are either drakes that I didn't pay attention to when ratting, drakes I lost as a part of a big fleet or frigates that I've taken out on drunken roams or not cared about, I would love to hear how my latest losses show a lack of understanding.

Trying to palm off my comment as a "passive/agressive defence" is a poor show. The comment is correct, -A- are notorious for failing to do anything strategic or meaningful and going "But hey, the killboards are green amirite?".

Anyone who has at least 2 ounces of grey matter and is actually involved in anything in a proper nullsec alliance knows that killboards prove nothing whatsoever. You think solo kills are pro? OK, what about the guy in my alliance who has built himself a cyno trap? Nearly everything that jumps into it gets killed with like no effort from his part, but hey they are all solo right? Or how about that 6 man gang that have all ganged up on one person? Does the killmail show how they perfectly executed a bubble in front of him mid warp, then someone scanned him down and warped in on him?

No, killboards and killmails are pointless chest beating. If you'd like to tell me why you think any of my losses unequivocally prove a lack of understanding I'd be grateful. If you're correct I'd have learn a valuable lesson to percent future losses. I suspect you wont be though, which means I get to laugh at your straw man arguments again.

If it was for the fact that I reckon you're probably not even being ironic with your posts I'd say you were a good troll. Sadly i actually think you believe what you type.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Vilnius Zar
SDC Multi Ten
#119 - 2012-11-12 17:24:59 UTC
Alundil wrote:
Azrin Stella Oerndotte wrote:

Because a battleship can totally apply full "1000" DPS on almost any ship and zip around at a couple of km/s with a tiny sig and a +80km range.


You're not going to get all 3 of those things on a T3 Strat Cruiser either so holding that up as the "Pièce de résistance" is faulty at best.

I don't think I've ever seen a T3 Cruiser with 1000 DPS with +80km range (applied dps otherwise it doesn't matter at all).

It's a trade off to fit these for 1000 DPS. To do so you lose some of the mobility (there goes the + km/s) and a LOT of the range you speak of. At that point you have to be very specific about how you engage in them otherwise you can't apply much of that paper DPS.

You can brick tank them like a mofo (600k EHP proteus comes to mind) but you're relegated to brick tackle or bait tackle (or some other non-DPS and non-mobile role as you're fat and slow at that point).

You can make them cloaky and scanny - but in order to do that you, again, lose some of the tank and gank. 1 v1 in that scenario against some unlucky PVE fit ship will go in the T3 favor. But cloaky/scanny T3 against a comparably piloted PVP setup won't fair so well.

Point being that T3 is not the "Easy Butan" that people make them out to be. One of the huge benefits of the platform is the ability to customize and in that customization lies it's strengths. But that customization doesn't make the ship unbeatable or even the best choice for all engagements.

Add in the bonuses from gang links etc etc and that changes the argument(s) fairly significantly but then that's a separate topic.


Good post, still as it stands T3 are "too good" (at least some of them, in many situations). They do need balancing and iteration, if only to make all the sub systems (and T3s themselves) viable and on par with the others and overall they do need to be toned down a tad in most cases. I'd rather have a lot more ship diversity due to everything being viable than having a small selection of "must have" ships making it all rather dull and boring.
Vilnius Zar
SDC Multi Ten
#120 - 2012-11-12 17:29:14 UTC
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
Vilnius Zar wrote:


KB can give a good indication of a player's actual prowess, ofcourse a lack of a KB means nothing at all (as in my case atm) but on the upside it doesn't have any terrible losses either. See, I don't look at superficial numbers like most people, I actually look a bit deeper and all I see on your kb is kills in bigger fleets leeching onto the km (thus pretty much worth nothing at all) and crap fitted losses (CPR on a drake wtf?), almost all your latest losses are flawed showing a lack of actual understanding.

I like your passive/aggressive defence with the "lol must be AAA", sadly for you you're very much wrong but keep trying. The thing is you berate Dinsdale about his "posting manners" but if we take a better look at your posts then all we can say is "lol".



No they don't, killboards show nothing. I could have an alt which I use for l33t PvP solo, or I could be like Snot Shot and hang around cloaked and launch bombs onto people when they are fighting each other. There's a whole host of reasons why killboard stats are rubbish.

Yes my kills have been in bigger fleets, but so what? When I fly in roams I prefer to FC rather then fly along, and when I FC I don't care about getting on killmails, I care about my fleet going out and killing people.

The CPR is necessary because I am flying in a doctrine of my coalition and I wasn't able to fit all the modules on as required. I believe I've dropped a Ballistic Control mod for it meaning I lose DPS but not tank, when you have 256 drakes in a fleet you don't need to be so concerned about dropping some DPS. Then again of course you'd know this talking from a knowledgeable position of a blank killboard in some corp no-one has ever heard of?

Considering my losses are either drakes that I didn't pay attention to when ratting, drakes I lost as a part of a big fleet or frigates that I've taken out on drunken roams or not cared about, I would love to hear how my latest losses show a lack of understanding.

Trying to palm off my comment as a "passive/agressive defence" is a poor show. The comment is correct, -A- are notorious for failing to do anything strategic or meaningful and going "But hey, the killboards are green amirite?".

Anyone who has at least 2 ounces of grey matter and is actually involved in anything in a proper nullsec alliance knows that killboards prove nothing whatsoever. You think solo kills are pro? OK, what about the guy in my alliance who has built himself a cyno trap? Nearly everything that jumps into it gets killed with like no effort from his part, but hey they are all solo right? Or how about that 6 man gang that have all ganged up on one person? Does the killmail show how they perfectly executed a bubble in front of him mid warp, then someone scanned him down and warped in on him?

No, killboards and killmails are pointless chest beating. If you'd like to tell me why you think any of my losses unequivocally prove a lack of understanding I'd be grateful. If you're correct I'd have learn a valuable lesson to percent future losses. I suspect you wont be though, which means I get to laugh at your straw man arguments again.

If it was for the fact that I reckon you're probably not even being ironic with your posts I'd say you were a good troll. Sadly i actually think you believe what you type.



That's a lot of words trying to say "nuh uh". Still if you really feel that checking a person's fitting choices (through losses on his KB in this case) doesn't give some sort of indication on his actual knowledge&experience (even more if you can't even get fleet fits right or worse yet, tell others that they should use it as a fleet fit) then uhm... yeah. I guess that would explain a lot.