These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

SMARTER T3 Rebalances, Please!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#361 - 2013-07-01 14:56:22 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Where did CCP point out they were nerfing T3s? There hasn't been anything released about it. How did this become a threadnaught with no information and a whiny OP?

The TL;DR version. Currently T3 is not anywhere near the position what that picture implies. So either there will be massive boosts to all cruisers or alterations and nerfs to some T3 abilities/combinations. It'll propably be a bit of both, but there is no way T3's can retain all the advantages they currently have.
Ager Agemo
Rainbow Ponies Incorporated
#362 - 2013-07-01 18:13:06 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Robert Harrison wrote:
Two step wrote:
Now if you were talking about allowing T3s to switch configurations in the middle of a fight, that could be compelling...


Confirming that I just pictured my Legion transforming, mid fight, into Optimus Prime.


FC: T3s switch to gang mode
inset transformer sound here...

Shocked OMG you have to do it now CCP.



"I'm about to drop the hammer and dispense some indiscriminate justice!"

THIS!! TANK LOKIS GO INTO ARTY MODE! *flight of the Valkyries song!*

Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#363 - 2013-07-01 18:22:57 UTC
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Robert Harrison wrote:
Two step wrote:
Now if you were talking about allowing T3s to switch configurations in the middle of a fight, that could be compelling...


Confirming that I just pictured my Legion transforming, mid fight, into Optimus Prime.


FC: T3s switch to gang mode
inset transformer sound here...

Shocked OMG you have to do it now CCP.


Dear god...a T3 Voltron? O_O

OHGOD!

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Zelarrs Elkoth
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#364 - 2013-07-01 20:48:23 UTC
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
Robert Harrison wrote:
Jarod Garamonde wrote:

Love your post, but it would actually be a Proteus that transforms into Optimus.... you know.... seeing as how Gallente are all about that freedom and all...


Yeah... logic and all that... But this is a legion thread soo.....

So it would transform into Megatron.


Hey wait... we are the good guys! Defending civilization from hordes of barbarians at the gates. Right? ...Right?

Oh and nerf off grid gang links. Damn things drive me crazy in small gang engagements. I don't mind them being there on some levels but damn they shouldn't make that big a difference!

PS - Voltron is obviously formed from all four T3s and a Gnosis.

Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris Captain, Head of Diplomacy, Recruiting Officer Contact on channel: "PIE Public" "I walk the razor's edge of embracing the future while protecting what we value of the past."
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#365 - 2013-07-01 21:02:43 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Did we establish that cost is not a balance?


I' fairly sure you can find some dev post after battleships balance saying something about increasing build COST to match and reflect their new performances.


But yep...lets keep this going on, makes something interesting to debate on GD for once. Lol

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#366 - 2013-07-01 21:12:36 UTC
Making the cost of a ship appropriate to its performance doesn't mean ships are balanced around their cost.

Oh god.
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#367 - 2013-07-01 21:16:12 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Did we establish that cost is not a balance?


I' fairly sure you can find some dev post after battleships balance saying something about increasing build COST to match and reflect their new performances.


But yep...lets keep this going on, makes something interesting to debate on GD for once. Lol

If the ships are less useful than their cost implies, people won't buy them. When people don't buy them, they don't get made. When ships don't get made, minerals don't get used. When minerals don't get used, they pile up. When minerals pile up, prices start to drop as people compete to try to offload. This would be far more prevalent in T3s than any other ship type as well, because T3s are the only ships that require the most expensive things used to build them.
Albert W Hicks
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry.
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
#368 - 2013-07-01 21:29:42 UTC
Here is the way I look at this...

1. T3's take a huge amount of skill points to be flown effectively in comparison it's more than any other cruiser because of the subsystem skill costs.

2. T3's are different than any other ship in the fact you can't eject if your locked.

3. When your T3 gets blown up you lose skill points (unlike any other ship in the game).

4. T3's are at least as expensive hull wise as a BattleCruiser

5. T3's are about as effective at a Battleship

To me this is pretty balanced for skill point investment and risk vs reward. Most of the T3's to get the best fit out of them are about the cost of a carrier.

T3's can EASILY be blown up in PVP by a handful of frigates and one recon ship (done it a number of times with 6-7 frigates and a pilgrim), shoot we killed 2 T3's with 7 frigates and a pilgrim!

So unless you make it so every other ship makes you lose skill points when you get blown up, or remove the skill point loss entirely, then if T3's become less effective I will simply no longer fly a T3 and seriously consider selling both the characters I have that can fly T3's. This will be rather painful as one of them is my sub-cap main and I just had gotten him to the point were he could start flying something other than a T3 effectively. At this point in time about 1/2 of his skill points in non-support skills is in everything to make him the most effective Tengu pilot possible.

I also find the Legion on my other T3 pilot to be very lacking in comparison. I honestly would rather fly a BC for most things than a Legion, but I had been working up to him flying a HAM Legion since it seems vastly superior (though it's about 3x the cost, and as much as a fitted battleship).

So CCP keep in mind for some people a nerf to T3's means you might as well as take them out of the game since to me at the moment other then the Tengu in level 4 missions they seem fairly well balanced and who really cares if someone is flying a Tengu in level 4's a bit better than a Drake, or a Raven?

Just bump up the T2 ships (HAC's, etc...) and leave the T3's alone for the most part... Unless you remove the dang skill point loss or just remove them from the game and give us a skill point refund. This isn't like other skills were you can use your missile skills on other ships, etc. If I stop flying a T3 all those subsystem skills become worthless and just a waste of training time. Right now HAC's need love, and T3's need left alone.

Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#369 - 2013-07-01 21:29:55 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
So speaking of nerf at this point is just plain premature. When we get to them we'll discuss the changes through the proper channels, like the CSM and the Features & Ideas Discussion sub-forum section, so you'll have plenty of time to see them coming and voice your concerns.

Sure. And the past balancing passes prove that players have in fact "seen it coming" and "voiced their concerns" in every case. I would say that you forgot to mention the third thing, but I don't think you did. You left that third thing out, in this post and in practice. When a pass goes off really really well, nobody notices that it's missing. But it's still missing.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#370 - 2013-07-01 21:38:27 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


No, no, actually that's not true. We have a "trolling" contest going on between CCP Fozzie, Rise, Tallest and myself to see who can create the biggest rage threadnought on the forums, while we keep scores on a whiteboard. Oops


The T1 hauler thread was a suprise high scorer, btw

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#371 - 2013-07-01 21:54:48 UTC
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Where did CCP point out they were nerfing T3s? There hasn't been anything released about it. How did this become a threadnaught with no information and a whiny OP?

The TL;DR version. Currently T3 is not anywhere near the position what that picture implies. So either there will be massive boosts to all cruisers or alterations and nerfs to some T3 abilities/combinations. It'll propably be a bit of both, but there is no way T3's can retain all the advantages they currently have.

Well, the other problem is that graphic shows "Tech 3" next to "Navy." "Navy" is a category of ships that applies to every hull class. "Tech 3" ships represent a single line of cruiser hulls. If by "Navy" they mean "Navy Cruisers," then "Tech 3" is literally not even on the same page in that infographic. If by "Navy" they mean "Navy Battleships," then they're still not in the right spot. They're closer really to Pirate battleships in their overall power and efficiency, leaving aside the "flexibility."

For many applications they are literally the only choice that results in an ISK to Risk ratio that is acceptable and still achieves the required level of performance. That seems like the thing that has to change.

The payoff should be that they can do many things well, not everything better than anything else. The tradeoff should be that they can perform all their available roles only 90% as well as the alternatives (Tech 2) at best.

And CCP needs to be clear about what "the alternatives" are that they're measured against. Are they measuring against the CNI . . . or against the SNI? Cause right now, it sure as heck is not the former. And it matters where that bar is set, because getting them "in line" with "Navy X" is a whole different goal depending on what "X" is.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Toriessian
Helion Production Labs
Independent Operators Consortium
#372 - 2013-07-01 22:03:31 UTC
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Robert Harrison wrote:
Two step wrote:
Now if you were talking about allowing T3s to switch configurations in the middle of a fight, that could be compelling...


Confirming that I just pictured my Legion transforming, mid fight, into Optimus Prime.


FC: T3s switch to gang mode
inset transformer sound here...

Shocked OMG you have to do it now CCP.


Dear god...a T3 Voltron? O_O


Fear us for we are legion....

Every day I'm wafflin!
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#373 - 2013-07-01 22:04:46 UTC
Toriessian wrote:

Fear us for we are legion....

My god...now it all makes sense...nerf Legion, gas thread, ban op.
Alexander McKeon
Perkone
Caldari State
#374 - 2013-07-01 22:47:58 UTC
Wait, what's this about Legions being under-powered? They have approximately half the neut capability of a Bhaalgorn in a much smaller / cheaper hull that's easier to keep repaired, or can be setup to do very nice DPS with HAMs. They don't get the same DPS figures as the Proteus of course, but their range is actually respectable.

Tengus are great in PvE (either self-rep or RR gangs), but I'd hardly call them over-powered in PvP based upon my experiences; you can't fit DPS, significant ewar and a solid buffer / resist tank all at once like you can with the armor-tanked ones.
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#375 - 2013-07-01 22:48:58 UTC
Alexander McKeon wrote:
Wait, what's this about Legions being under-powered? They have approximately half the neut capability of a Bhaalgorn in a much smaller / cheaper hull that's easier to keep repaired, or can be setup to do very nice DPS with HAMs. They don't get the same DPS figures as the Proteus of course, but their range is actually respectable.

Tengus are great in PvE (either self-rep or RR gangs), but I'd hardly call them over-powered in PvP based upon my experiences; you can't fit DPS, significant ewar and a solid buffer / resist tank all at once like you can with the armor-tanked ones.

But all the mission runners say Tengu is OP, so it must be true.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#376 - 2013-07-01 23:22:17 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


No, no, actually that's not true. We have a "trolling" contest going on between CCP Fozzie, Rise, Tallest and myself to see who can create the biggest rage threadnought on the forums, while we keep scores on a whiteboard. Oops


The T1 hauler thread was a suprise high scorer, btw


My missile thread from Retribution still has a commanding lead.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#377 - 2013-07-01 23:24:27 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


No, no, actually that's not true. We have a "trolling" contest going on between CCP Fozzie, Rise, Tallest and myself to see who can create the biggest rage threadnought on the forums, while we keep scores on a whiteboard. Oops


The T1 hauler thread was a suprise high scorer, btw


My missile thread from Retribution still has a commanding lead.


and it was well deserved too :P

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
TheButcherPete
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#378 - 2013-07-02 02:03:46 UTC
Man... you guys complain pretty hardcore about T3 prices....

yet, you scream you want T3 BATTLESHIPS?!

How many more times is a t1 BS more expensive than a t1 cruiser? ;)

[b]THE KING OF EVE RADIO

If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs?[/b]
Makoto Priano
Kirkinen-Arataka Transhuman Zenith Consulting Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#379 - 2013-07-02 02:40:12 UTC
Gods. I would -kill- for T3 battleships! Hell, more T2 ones, even...

Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries: exploring the edge of the known, advancing the state of the art. Would you like to know more?
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#380 - 2013-07-02 14:52:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
...
Oh well, hope that helps a bit.


Well, my life would be complete if the Legion T3 rebalances included some cosmetic design tweaks that weren't done by someone graduating the Helen Keller school for the blind for animal-influenced art...

Fowl Variant:
- Putting a tactical targeting network on a Legion today makes it looks like a plucked fricken chicken from the side. Who thought that looked good? Seriously??

Pachyderm Variant:
- Put an emergent locus analyzer on a legion and you have a bloody elephant from the front view.

Seriously guys, the dissolution sequencer subsystem is the only variant that looks win, IMHO.

Would you like to know more?