These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

So who wants T3's nerfed then?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#41 - 2013-01-17 18:49:58 UTC
Think a part of the problem in balancing T3s is the skill loss. In terms of raw skill stats, how much dps/tank is really worth that skill loss? The skill point part is odd too, getting a fully skilled T3 pilot is a lot quicker than getting a fully skilled HAC pilot if I remember correctly.

Roime makes a good point with the Prot vs Deimos comparison, there does need to be movement in both directions, but personally I'm worried about a potential change to T3 that might mean they have less dps/tank than a HAC, whilst being 4x the price AND having a skill loss.

With the Prot you don't really have to make any compromise to have a massive tank, massive dps and a mwd you can perma run, can even chuck in a cap booster to make you fairly immune to cap warfare with barely any effort. The Diemost is extremely restrictive in comparison. Legion / Zealot are far closer in comparison.

It's a bit of a shame that mass limitations mean Battleships are so impractical for the vast majority of wormhole fights. When was the last time you saw something other than a Bhaalgorn in an enemy fleet that wasn't within it's own wormhole?!
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#42 - 2013-01-17 19:00:09 UTC
Mr Floydy wrote:
there does need to be movement in both directions, but personally I'm worried about a potential change to T3 that might mean they have less dps/tank than a HAC, whilst being 4x the price AND having a skill loss.


HACs could have smaller sigs and be more mobile?

.
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#43 - 2013-01-17 19:08:54 UTC
Would work for me! That combined with a bit more fitting room would work wonders. Would need to see it in person to say how that would pan out in most wormhole engagements mind. Far more interesting that just increasing the ehp/damage either way.
Narzis
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2013-01-17 21:08:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Narzis
Roime wrote:
Narzis,

my HAC Proteus:

1100 dps
142K EHP

Do we need a cheap T2 cruiser with no SP loss that has higher stats? Really?






In my opinion T2's must be better than T3's for ONE purpose. I mean, the most of them has the good bonuses (the arazu and lachesis has better point range than the proteus, just like the other recons vs T3's). All that recons need is some hp (no, they dont need 150k ehp), speed, pg, cpu etc. revamp (just like the new bc revamp).
The T2 hulls have become outdated. Novadays a frigate can do 3-400 dps, a single destroyer can do 500-550. With that dps increase, many ships have become obsolete (for example the haulers and transports are too weak).

The HAC's need a bigger revamp, because they have more problems (easy to notice, these ships are rare in space but you can see recons day by day). A simple 1600plate deimos with electrons can has 56k ehp, 800 dps and can go with 2k. Not that bad. The proteus has more hp, more dps, but slower and it's price is at least 3 times as much.
Thats what i'm talking about. Your proteus is slow? Buy a deimos, its cheaper, faster and fits perfectly into an armor gang but at the moment it's not fast enough. That speed and price difference not worth the 2/3 hp loss. Revamp these ship. Boost their bonuses, or give them new type of bonuses (5% web velocity modifier / lvl, a bit more optimal or a bit less cap penalty... i don't know).
I dont think that the good way to balance is nerfing popular(=good, useable) ships. Is better to rethink the rarely used ships.

How I look like when I win a fight? https://dl.dropbox.com/u/32571986/out-2.gif
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#45 - 2013-01-17 21:37:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Problem is with HACs the deimos especially the role its supposed to be specialised for is one that either is no longer relevant in the game or an idea that sounds great on paper but doesn't actually work the way the game is played.

There is no way really to fix the deimos for its supposed role without nerfing the prot into oblivion or turning the deimos into an adrestia which is just plain ******** - tho the adrestia does fit the role the deimos is supposed to pretty well (tho both need a little more EHP). The only future really for it is as a cheaper prot substitute with its EHP bumped up a fair bit (tho not to prot levels).
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#46 - 2013-01-18 02:18:09 UTC
I`m surely missing something here. Versatility Vs. Specialization. But how can I make a T3 versatil if I can`t change its subsystems?
I`m sure Nullsec dwellers have it a little more easy than us, but still...

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7
Winthorp
#47 - 2013-01-18 02:47:43 UTC
I think it is inevitable that T3's will get looked at and changed and yeah there is some possibility some aspects could be nerfed but there is also so many good things we could get out of it also like some useful subsystems and taking away skill losses especially if they are nerfed there will be no reason to have a rather expensive balanced ship and a skill loss. Could definitely see some fleet doctrines being swapped around.
Inkarr Hashur
Skyline Federation
#48 - 2013-01-18 03:30:19 UTC
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
I`m surely missing something here. Versatility Vs. Specialization. But how can I make a T3 versatil if I can`t change its subsystems?
I`m sure Nullsec dwellers have it a little more easy than us, but still...


The POS issue is getting a little ridiculous, I agree. If they won't revamp the POS system, then CCP really owes it to use to at least expand the capabilities of the current system.
PavlikX
Scan Stakan
HOLD MY PROBS
#49 - 2013-01-18 03:59:50 UTC
T2 needs boost.
T3 don't need a nerf at all (Only Drake must be nerfed P)
Utsen Dari
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#50 - 2013-01-18 08:22:50 UTC
Hoping T3 refitting at poses happens before T3 re-balancing happens. Flying out every T3 one owns individually and rebuilding them one by one in hisec because the old fit is now 0.01 teraflops over in CPU or something sounds like such busywork
AP John
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2013-01-18 08:39:29 UTC  |  Edited by: AP John
Paikis wrote:

EDIT: Gas prices are down, mag loto prices are down, Radars have been crap for quite some time. W-Space is drying up :(


We are just picky that we already have billions in our wallet.. :) but that is still true, Instrumental Gas sites are down over 25%, and radars are just worth for the Talocan, Mags... what mags.. ho runs mags anymore?

Roime wrote:
Narzis,
my HAC Proteus:

1100 dps
142K EHP

Do we need a cheap T2 cruiser with no SP loss that has higher stats? Really?


I run a Proteus, so I'm pretty sure this thing costs more then a freaking Dred or a Carrier fully fitted :D, so this kind of makes up for the high stats, and let's admit that it can't do what a cap ship can... but it costs the same.. I don't see why it is an issue that we can afford to fly them..

T3's work as intended, they are better then any medium hull, they are not better then a BS hull, but they cost as much as a cap ship.

Proteus - verry good tank and DPS, extremely poor range
Legion - good overall, very heavy around W-space, doesn't excel at anything
Loki - haven't seen one in WH space for ages, but i know it's used a lot in PVP in k-space
Tengu - mostly seen in K-space
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#52 - 2013-01-18 09:00:32 UTC
Paikis wrote:

EDIT: Gas prices are down, mag loto prices are down, Radars have been crap for quite some time. W-Space is drying up :(


I don't think we should be defining the value of space by its PVE content. OTOH, the T3/logi/Archon/Moros gangs are too repetitive, more PVP diversity is needed.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#53 - 2013-01-18 10:36:38 UTC
AP John wrote:

I run a Proteus, so I'm pretty sure this thing costs more then a freaking Dred or a Carrier fully fitted :D, so this kind of makes up for the high stats, and let's admit that it can't do what a cap ship can... but it costs the same.. I don't see why it is an issue that we can afford to fly them..


Sorry, my stats we're off my head, these are checked from pyfa with my skills and implants, (all Vs are even higher):

1224 dps w/Void+heat & Hammers (1247) at point blank (3.8km), w/Null and Hammers deals about 700 dps @ 15km (834)
143K EHP (149)

Paid approx 1.18bil, pyfa shows 1.4bil

Fairly standard issue AHAC Proteus if you ask me, can fit either MWD or AB. Non-pimped stats are dangerous when discussing T3s, they are not as impressive, but also not as common on Tranquility.

Quote:
they are not better then a BS hull


Comparable BS has much more range, utility, and sensor strength bit higher dps and less tank when you count in the sig. Unfortunately this comparable BS has 5 times more mass, if you need to get ******** amounts of gank with as much EHP as possible on the field, nothing really compares to a Proteus.

And this is why simple "buff Deimos dps & EHP" without nerfing Proteus is not really a realistic option IMHO- if we stick to the principle that T2 > T3 in specialized role, which I assume in this case is dealing damage while receiving reps. Question remains whether simply making HACs even more mobile, but with weaker tank/gank would be enough to make them viable options.

Maybe, at least different and possibly more fun.









.
AP John
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2013-01-18 12:30:55 UTC
Roime wrote:

Comparable BS has much more range, utility, and sensor strength bit higher dps and less tank when you count in the sig. Unfortunately this comparable BS has 5 times more mass, if you need to get ******** amounts of gank with as much EHP as possible on the field, nothing really compares to a Proteus.


Totally agreeing with this ^.

I was comparing the T3 hull with BS hull from overall game perspective, were mass is not an issue.

Roime wrote:

Paid approx 1.18bil, pyfa shows 1.4bil.


My point, can't you buy a cap ship for 1 bil these days?
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#55 - 2013-01-18 12:45:13 UTC
No idea, I can't roam around in a Moros even if it costs 200mil.

.
Narzis
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2013-01-18 13:08:51 UTC
AP John wrote:
Roime wrote:

Comparable BS has much more range, utility, and sensor strength bit higher dps and less tank when you count in the sig. Unfortunately this comparable BS has 5 times more mass, if you need to get ******** amounts of gank with as much EHP as possible on the field, nothing really compares to a Proteus.


Totally agreeing with this ^.

I was comparing the T3 hull with BS hull from overall game perspective, were mass is not an issue.

Roime wrote:

Paid approx 1.18bil, pyfa shows 1.4bil.


My point, can't you buy a cap ship for 1 bil these days?


Cap ship prices are much higher these days. Especially if you want to buy a meta 2 fit.

How I look like when I win a fight? https://dl.dropbox.com/u/32571986/out-2.gif
Chitsa Jason
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#57 - 2013-01-18 14:16:31 UTC
T3s are in the right place right now. The only issue with them is that they have many useless subs.

Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me
Nemo deBlanc
Resource Acquisition Unlimited
#58 - 2013-01-18 14:30:25 UTC
Imo, T3's are fine as they are, but CCP obviously disagrees. All I can do is hope that when they nerf them, it's not so hard that they make the ships -and therefore whspace- utterly worthless.
AP John
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2013-01-18 14:59:36 UTC  |  Edited by: AP John
Nemo deBlanc wrote:
Imo, T3's are fine as they are, but CCP obviously disagrees. All I can do is hope that when they nerf them, it's not so hard that they make the ships -and therefore whspace- utterly worthless.


It actually increases wh value, because it will take some time for many to reorganize in new ships/fleet, and run stuff properly.
This will result in fewer ops with a longer time to complete, we all know how long it takes to do it in BC's.
So by economic definition the offer of wh stuff will drop on the market, as the wh resources will take longer to get on the markets, which results in less and less wh stuff on the market and so prices for wh resources will increase, slowly at first as many have great stashes of stuff, but eventually prices will go up.
Qvar Dar'Zanar
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#60 - 2013-01-18 17:08:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Qvar Dar'Zanar
AP John wrote:
Nemo deBlanc wrote:
Imo, T3's are fine as they are, but CCP obviously disagrees. All I can do is hope that when they nerf them, it's not so hard that they make the ships -and therefore whspace- utterly worthless.


It actually increases wh value, because it will take some time for many to reorganize in new ships/fleet, and run stuff properly.
This will result in fewer ops with a longer time to complete, we all know how long it takes to do it in BC's.
So by economic definition the offer of wh stuff will drop on the market, as the wh resources will take longer to get on the markets, which results in less and less wh stuff on the market and so prices for wh resources will increase, slowly at first as many have great stashes of stuff, but eventually prices will go up.


Ah I see, we will leave T3s because they are worthless, so we won't be making that much nanoribbons, and that will drive the prices up (even more) for that same T3s that nobody will want to fly with the current prices. Makes sense.