EVE General Discussion

I think the heavy assault ships line could do with more changes to make them viable against T3s. The way I see it each race's heavy assault ships are split into two categories: a fast, agile attack ship or a heavy brawler with massive DPS and tank for a cruiser sized ship.

The way I see it, HACs could be rebalanced around the T3s such that the T3 is kind of the middle ground between the two, not excelling in either category but rather a jack of all trades. I think the Vagabond/Muninn/Loki are a good example of this balance. The only thing I'd really change here is that the Muninn should have a couple more low slots and/or change the optimal range bonus to an armor resist bonus.

Therefore: the Vagabond would be more mobile than the Loki but with less tank and DPS, and the Muninn would have more DPS (and potentially more tank) but less mobility than the Loki. Both would be less versatile than the Loki.

Space-transformers, hehe.

I think T3 cruisers are going to be a pain to balance. We're putting these ships together and choosing bonuses, slots, grid/cpu, everything, but really the ships are desirable only because they either offer immunities/abilities that other ships don't have, or overpowered DPS for a "cruiser" hull. I don't think the draw is that they're customizable; in fact if we could buy the popular configurations as non-changeable T2 hulls we would.

On the other hand, being able to change roles, in space, from a HAC to a recon to a logi (and being able to fit the appropriate modules for each role from the cargo hold), may make a cruiser-sized ship like that desirable to players, without the ship being any more powerful than a HAC, recon, or logi (respectively) and without any over-powered ability or immunity. Matter of fact, if we could have the fittings for each role prepared before undocking, and then be able to change roles (pre-fitted) during combat, that would be super-kickass. Now I'm a HAC, now I'm a Recon, now I'm a logi, now I'm a HAC again; what will I be when you come out of warp on top of me at the next gate?

And CCP would just have to balance the T2 hulls, and make sure that the T3 configurations match the corresponding T2 hull capabilities and slot layouts.

So, space-transformers.

dear God, please dont add any more tech 3 hulls before you have balanced EVERY ship in the game

tech 3 ships were a jesus feature that we have to deal with as its not going away

here is somebody who gets it.. HAC line definately needs rebalnacing. As it is right now, the Loki does strike a good middle ground cus honestly the DPS is not something to write home about. It does have good web range and can fit a decent tank but people dont grab the Loki for its dps. Muninn should be a bit sturdier and a bit more dps imo.

tech 3 battleships

used for four different roles

-stabilizing wormholes: so other ships can enter/exit (bs is vulnerable throughout this operation as it cannot move/ activate modules

-vacuuming - similar to salvaging- but the t3 battleships slowly pulls all ships towards it holding them within a 20-30 km radius the bigger the other ship the faster the pull, smaller ships can gtfo + mwd'd ships can escape the pull (again depending on the speed/agility of said mwd's ship) . (again t3 battleship cannot move or activate modules)- the strength of the pull would need to be balanced

- Flagship - providing fleet bonuses for all freindly ships within 30-40 km range + automatic rep (the bigger the friendly ship the more armor OR shield rep it recieves (small/ none existant rep for freindly frigs) (can launch 15 drones) (t3 bs canot move/ activate modules)

pegasus A ship named after the battlestar gallactica equivalent :) - a ship designed to explode on contact with an enemy captial/ pos/ poco that deals considerable damage. also effects all ships within 20km range (ship cannot activate modules or change direction i.e ship must be 'aimed' to fly at enemy object, but it cannot turn when this suicide run is activated. (if ship fails to bump the target, it must wait another 5 minutes before being aimed at said object again or retreated from the battlefied)

None of these T3 ships can enter Highsec due to illegality

All of the above ships would be expensive 1.5bil + and would need considerable balancing lol

Edit* feel free to troll the hell out of this^ - just throwing some concepts out there.

I want my T3 TITAN

The industry around Tech3 manufacture is stunted because they aren't flown/lost as much as they should be.

I'd like to see this:

- Double the number of wormhole systems and double the number of wormhole links to normal space
- Increase sleeper spawns so that each system is more rewarding, this should bolster T3 industry
- Increase the number of ships using Tech 3 components (frigates, destroyer, BS, cap etc.)
- Remove the skill loss upon death mechanic to encourage people to fly in vulnerable situations

I think this would help justify more T3 ships but balance would need to ensure that they aren't the default best ship in any situation. You'll probably see many more players hit and run in zerosec WH space from hisec to take advantage.
Good luck.

+wormhole systems, yes this would be awesome. More sites and difficulty but with entries only depleting with time and no longer by mass passing through, this should be available for all WH types. Large fleets should be able to jump in to higher WH classification with whatever ship type or amount and kick or be kicked. Fun for everyone.

-WH systems are already very rewarding, if players concentrate their activity only around sleeper sites it's because nanoribonds are already very profitable and don't need more rewards on top of the best planets for PI, ladar sites with ABC, specific Gaz clouds and artefacts.

+indeed we need more T3 platforms but not frigates for god sake, everything in this game is about frigates and a 25+swarm of those being far more dangerous than a 50man battlecruiser small fleet with support.
Frigates are already far too powerful alone and profit of stacking almost better than every other ship type.
We need T3 transport ships, carriers and battleships. The fact it's the new fashion mode of screwing with market by all means by a couple of nerds it's not a balance factor for their price, it's up to players to find ways to make them cheaper, to compete for low mineral prices and ships, not the other way around.

-against the removal of skill point loss. The reward for flying such versatile ships after toying with expensive fits and implants is fantastic in very specific conditions but can become a nightmare if you get caught because of your laziness.
There must be a drawback for such versatility, the extra skilling while being a prerequisite to profit of those extra fittings and dmg/tank bonus is not a drawback, nor their price that once again it's because of players laziness for competition, the only and real drawback is SP loss and should stay as it is.
However for higher T3 class if those were to be implemented at some point the drawback must probably be different, I can't see the point or interest in a 30D skill loss for a slightly different battleship that is not better that T1/T2/Navy/Pirate one.
We're not there yet.

I lived in WH space for 8 months, this was at a time when I was addicted to EVE and farmed relentlessly- unfortunately my efforts alone haven't changed the manufacturing and ship development structures of EVE.

There's also, of course, me being concerned about my ISK/hr when ratting in nulllsec. Nerfing the T3s to make them more in line with HACs will also severely hurt their ability to make ISK. It's a nerf to nullsec income more than anywhere else in the game.