These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

What do we want from the Tech 3 rebalance?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#81 - 2013-07-01 10:56:11 UTC
what i want out of the T3 rebalance

I would like all T3s be more close to eachother in options not that the Tengu is supreme in every way as it is now.
I also think its better for the game if the T2 variants are better in their specialty then the T3 this can be archieved with a boost on T2 ships and or nerf on T3s or a combination on both.

also i would love to see some industrial/mining sub systems and maybe even some new rigs

this way the T3s are still good for a lot of things

1. do everything ok and if needed can be covert ops and or nullified
2. scan with good tank and have more options in modules and ofc can be covert ops and or nullified
3. be an asset to miners/indutrialists aswell

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#82 - 2013-07-01 11:22:23 UTC
Vassal Zeren wrote:
Ahhhh! Stay away from my Tengu!


tengu is highly overpowered and that needs to be fixed (not nerfed but fixed) i love the ship myself dont get me wrong its just too good in everything as the other T3s are not. enjoy your tengu while you can because it will be fixed with the rebalance i am sure

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#83 - 2013-07-01 11:43:05 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:
Vassal Zeren wrote:
Ahhhh! Stay away from my Tengu!


tengu is highly overpowered and that needs to be fixed (not nerfed but fixed) i love the ship myself dont get me wrong its just too good in everything as the other T3s are not. enjoy your tengu while you can because it will be fixed with the rebalance i am sure


Specifically: the Accelerated Ejection Bay needs the RoF bonus bringing down to 5%.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#84 - 2013-07-01 12:36:46 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:
Vassal Zeren wrote:
Ahhhh! Stay away from my Tengu!


tengu is highly overpowered and that needs to be fixed (not nerfed but fixed) i love the ship myself dont get me wrong its just too good in everything as the other T3s are not. enjoy your tengu while you can because it will be fixed with the rebalance i am sure


Experience shows this isn't true. Maybe for solo exploration? maybe in Null sec? Maybe for most PVE? Not seeing it in gang PVP for sure.
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#85 - 2013-07-01 13:58:15 UTC
Onomerous wrote:
Ellendras Silver wrote:
Vassal Zeren wrote:
Ahhhh! Stay away from my Tengu!


tengu is highly overpowered and that needs to be fixed (not nerfed but fixed) i love the ship myself dont get me wrong its just too good in everything as the other T3s are not. enjoy your tengu while you can because it will be fixed with the rebalance i am sure


Experience shows this isn't true. Maybe for solo exploration? maybe in Null sec? Maybe for most PVE? Not seeing it in gang PVP for sure.


so we agree its overpowered Smile

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#86 - 2013-07-01 14:53:32 UTC
T3's were really the experiment of CCP. It suceeded in some ways (creating a T2 type ship, not requiring T2 materials/moongoop to build, that is customizable). It failed in other ways (overshadowed T2 ships, DPS based cloak type vessels, etc).

Well you could just go nuts and universally nerf all T3's by removing their ability to fit normal T1 and T2 rigs, and create a set of Sleeper Rigs that are fittable on T3's. They can be balanced between the T1 and T2 rigs, but can be restricted to just 1 style (meaning no T1 and T2 sleeper rig). They would be removable unlike Normal Rigs. The reason for the removal ability of the T3 rigs would be that T3's are modular, the subsystems can be swapped out for different (sometimes Dramatically different) setups, the rigs should be able to follow suit.

That would probably be the fastest way to both nerf and "balance" T3's. New BPC's can be reversed engineered off the sleepers which allow the creation of sleeper rigs that can now be fit on T3's, the T3's are balanced inbetween the T1 and T2 Rigs.

It makes more sense that the T3's use sleeper materials to build the T3 ship, then sleeper materials to build the T3 subsystems, but Kspace crap to build the Rigs for the ship. The guns, modules, etc I see as fine. The T3's could get a new set of T3 only rigs.
The ships would now be able to be dynamically balanced based off of the rigs, instead of trying to change the hulls, modules and bonuses themselves.

Yaay!!!!
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2013-07-01 15:21:34 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
Then whats the point? You have to dock up to switch to a new config, so you can just as easily get a new ship, and it can be a ship that is better, costs less and doesnt cost skill points when you lose it.

IF you have achieved bittervet nirvana with all5 on all T2 subcaps, then sure. For everyone else, there are (or could be) T3s. If each T3 hull had eight possible fits, and each of those fits can do what a particular T2 ship can do at 90% of the performance level of the equivalent T2 hull, then that is a valid balance.

If you only want to max out one role, then the T2 hull is the obvious choice. It will do the job better and probably take about as long or not much longer to train. If you want to do two or three or eight things reasonably well, then the T3 is attractive because you can get 9/10ths of the performance for every role with 1/10th the training time.

That makes the T3 ideal for noobs in general and for any case where you want to be able to train one hull and one weapon line and do several different things on demand. Plenty of people "will bother" to fly T3s if this is the reason to fly them. People also "will bother" to fly T2s again either because they want the best performance for one role or just because they can, when they have been around long enough to join the 100m SP club.

The problem right now is that the T3 does everything better than anything else you might fly, which makes it the only choice for anyone, and makes T2s look like a total waste of SP except for the niche roles that T3s cannot fill at all. That is not balance, it's an iWin button.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#88 - 2013-07-01 15:50:59 UTC
Being able to use the fitting window in space, to swap sub systems or modules You happen to have in cargo would be cool.

Or something like that. Something that actually lets You facilitate on the much complimented versatility of the T3 ships.

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#89 - 2013-07-01 17:25:41 UTC
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
Then whats the point? You have to dock up to switch to a new config, so you can just as easily get a new ship, and it can be a ship that is better, costs less and doesnt cost skill points when you lose it.

IF you have achieved bittervet nirvana with all5 on all T2 subcaps, then sure. For everyone else, there are (or could be) T3s. If each T3 hull had eight possible fits, and each of those fits can do what a particular T2 ship can do at 90% of the performance level of the equivalent T2 hull, then that is a valid balance.

If you only want to max out one role, then the T2 hull is the obvious choice. It will do the job better and probably take about as long or not much longer to train. If you want to do two or three or eight things reasonably well, then the T3 is attractive because you can get 9/10ths of the performance for every role with 1/10th the training time.

That makes the T3 ideal for noobs in general and for any case where you want to be able to train one hull and one weapon line and do several different things on demand. Plenty of people "will bother" to fly T3s if this is the reason to fly them. People also "will bother" to fly T2s again either because they want the best performance for one role or just because they can, when they have been around long enough to join the 100m SP club.

The problem right now is that the T3 does everything better than anything else you might fly, which makes it the only choice for anyone, and makes T2s look like a total waste of SP except for the niche roles that T3s cannot fill at all. That is not balance, it's an iWin button.


QFT

also you got a small advantage that you cant see what the ships "role" is just by the hull

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#90 - 2013-07-01 17:29:07 UTC
Debora Tsung wrote:
Being able to use the fitting window in space, to swap sub systems or modules You happen to have in cargo would be cool.

Or something like that. Something that actually lets You facilitate on the much complimented versatility of the T3 ships.


no you NEED fitting service to be able to refit in space that is a task for capitals, because they have support as role being able to refit a T3 in space without anything like that is way too powerfull

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
supernova ranger
The End of Eternity
#91 - 2013-07-01 17:38:42 UTC  |  Edited by: supernova ranger
I want to be able to shoot the subsystems in addition to attacking the ships hull once armor and shields are down... Leaves a world of possibilities in altered game play/ tactics

Carriers could pick up damaged T3's after you force the pilot into only having 2 options eject/ self destruct
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#92 - 2013-07-01 18:24:10 UTC
FFS stop with all the 'fitting in space' as the new thing for T3 ships. If you nerf the ship and make it more 'flexible' with fitting in space, you just f*cked the T3 up.

WHY? Follow along closely. I'll try to go slow.

1) New T3 is nerfed but is more flexible because you can fit in space. A big reason to fly the T3 now is this flexibility (otherwise fly something else).

2) To fit in space, you need the subsystems in your hold.

3) To fit in space, you need the weapons and other mods in your hold.

4) Now get blown up.

5) What just happened? Your expensive ship loss is an even greater loss because you have to carry all the d*mn mods and subsystems in your cargo hold.

6) What else happens? You lose skill points too.


So, NO TO FRIGGING FITTING IN SPACE AS A TRADE-OFF.

You are bad and should feel bad with that idea.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#93 - 2013-07-01 19:31:58 UTC
I want to be capable of making a boosting logi ecm tengu that has 0 tank, cloak, or prop bonuses.

I want an active tanking bonused covert ops logi tengu.

I want a active tanking ecm tengu.

I want a drone equipped sensor dampening proteus.

AND I WANT THEM TO NOT SUCK.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#94 - 2013-07-03 10:52:35 UTC
Onomerous wrote:

5) What just happened? Your expensive ship loss is an even greater loss because you have to carry all the d*mn mods and subsystems in your cargo hold.


lol, funny. Because of that I think it's a good idea. :)

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#95 - 2013-07-03 12:12:19 UTC
Debora Tsung wrote:
Onomerous wrote:

5) What just happened? Your expensive ship loss is an even greater loss because you have to carry all the d*mn mods and subsystems in your cargo hold.


lol, funny. Because of that I think it's a good idea. :)


If you are trying to make EVE better then I would say you weren't thinking (at all). If you are only in it for yourself then I could see where you would think that. ;)
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#96 - 2013-07-03 13:20:51 UTC
Onomerous wrote:
Debora Tsung wrote:
Onomerous wrote:

5) What just happened? Your expensive ship loss is an even greater loss because you have to carry all the d*mn mods and subsystems in your cargo hold.


lol, funny. Because of that I think it's a good idea. :)


If you are trying to make EVE better then I would say you weren't thinking (at all). If you are only in it for yourself then I could see where you would think that. ;)


It's quite easy:

Let's presume You have all that mods and Subsytems You want in Your cargo hold, so You can use Your hypothetical shape shifter ship to it's fullest extend.

So long as You have the posibility to refit Your ship (aka time not under fire) You can be everything at once.

You COULD have decided to just take that one configuration with You, minimizing any losses You MIGHT have suffered through volatile pod ejection.

But You didn't and so since You decided, You wanted to be a cloaky scanner to find some juicy sites, a PVE ship to harvest those sites, maybe even a ship with a hacking setup for those new and nice little hacking sites and (just in case You encounter someone you actually want to fight) a pvp setup... well You see the thing, he more stuff You carry, the more You loose when You loose, just as with everything else.

Your only advantage then will be that You can actually use all that stuff, on the fly and not just the ammo, but also that nice little deadspace mod You just found or whatever You carry with You that fits in Your ship.

I really think it could be great and really cool, if done right.

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#97 - 2013-07-03 14:03:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Onomerous
Debora Tsung wrote:
Onomerous wrote:
Debora Tsung wrote:
Onomerous wrote:

5) What just happened? Your expensive ship loss is an even greater loss because you have to carry all the d*mn mods and subsystems in your cargo hold.


lol, funny. Because of that I think it's a good idea. :)


If you are trying to make EVE better then I would say you weren't thinking (at all). If you are only in it for yourself then I could see where you would think that. ;)


It's quite easy:

Let's presume You have all that mods and Subsytems You want in Your cargo hold, so You can use Your hypothetical shape shifter ship to it's fullest extend.

So long as You have the posibility to refit Your ship (aka time not under fire) You can be everything at once.

You COULD have decided to just take that one configuration with You, minimizing any losses You MIGHT have suffered through volatile pod ejection.

But You didn't and so since You decided, You wanted to be a cloaky scanner to find some juicy sites, a PVE ship to harvest those sites, maybe even a ship with a hacking setup for those new and nice little hacking sites and (just in case You encounter someone you actually want to fight) a pvp setup... well You see the thing, he more stuff You carry, the more You loose when You loose, just as with everything else.

Your only advantage then will be that You can actually use all that stuff, on the fly and not just the ammo, but also that nice little deadspace mod You just found or whatever You carry with You that fits in Your ship.

I really think it could be great and really cool, if done right.


I don't see it as a good trade off at all. If you play solo as in exploration then maybe. But remember, there are many people who don't. As stated before, if the trade off is a nerf of performance for fit in space... I'm absolutely 110% against it.

And as stated: If the reason to fly the new t3 (after any nerf which might happen) is because you fit in space then why fly it?? You are missing my point completely. The reason to fly the damn thing would be the fit in space. Your argument is similar to saying if you don't like flying Amarr ships because of the lazor bonus on the hull then just put projectiles on them... you lose the value of the ship.
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#98 - 2013-07-03 14:08:06 UTC
Debora Tsung wrote:
Onomerous wrote:
Debora Tsung wrote:
Onomerous wrote:

5) What just happened? Your expensive ship loss is an even greater loss because you have to carry all the d*mn mods and subsystems in your cargo hold.


lol, funny. Because of that I think it's a good idea. :)


If you are trying to make EVE better then I would say you weren't thinking (at all). If you are only in it for yourself then I could see where you would think that. ;)


It's quite easy:

Let's presume You have all that mods and Subsytems You want in Your cargo hold, so You can use Your hypothetical shape shifter ship to it's fullest extend.

So long as You have the posibility to refit Your ship (aka time not under fire) You can be everything at once.

You COULD have decided to just take that one configuration with You, minimizing any losses You MIGHT have suffered through volatile pod ejection.

But You didn't and so since You decided, You wanted to be a cloaky scanner to find some juicy sites, a PVE ship to harvest those sites, maybe even a ship with a hacking setup for those new and nice little hacking sites and (just in case You encounter someone you actually want to fight) a pvp setup... well You see the thing, he more stuff You carry, the more You loose when You loose, just as with everything else.

Your only advantage then will be that You can actually use all that stuff, on the fly and not just the ammo, but also that nice little deadspace mod You just found or whatever You carry with You that fits in Your ship.

I really think it could be great and really cool, if done right.


no its dumb and should not be possible is what it is... if you want to reship a ship you need a fitting service from another ship that ship must be a capital as only capital ships have fitting service and you cant use your own!

if a carrier cant refit himself in space (if alone) it would be beyond ret*rderd to let a T3 ship do that.

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#99 - 2013-07-04 08:35:48 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:

no its dumb and should not be possible is what it is... if you want to reship a ship you need a fitting service from another ship that ship must be a capital as only capital ships have fitting service and you cant use your own!

if a carrier cant refit himself in space (if alone) it would be beyond ret*rderd to let a T3 ship do that.


A carrier is a completely different class of ship that touches T3 Strategic Cruisers only marginally, at best. I really don't get why You bring that one up all the time.

Seems a little dumb to me...

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#100 - 2013-07-04 08:41:15 UTC
Debora Tsung wrote:
Ellendras Silver wrote:

no its dumb and should not be possible is what it is... if you want to reship a ship you need a fitting service from another ship that ship must be a capital as only capital ships have fitting service and you cant use your own!

if a carrier cant refit himself in space (if alone) it would be beyond ret*rderd to let a T3 ship do that.


A carrier is a completely different class of ship that touches T3 Strategic Cruisers only marginally, at best. I really don't get why You bring that one up all the time.

Seems a little dumb to me...


because a carrier is a ship with a fitting service and it has a fitting service (just like all the other capitals) because its a part of their role... now you get it? a ship cant refit out of thin air that is my point you need a ship like a carrier to refit period

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]