These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CSM townhall and T3's

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Svodola Darkfury
Cloak and Daggers
The Initiative.
#21 - 2013-06-21 20:21:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Svodola Darkfury
Jack Miton wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Can someone explain to me why our representatives think cloaky T3's are OP?

cos zomg, T3s cant be better than T2!!!!
in all seriousness though, the probe bonus on a T3 should be less than on a covops.

To the CSM, I highly urge you to take an exaggerated 'do not nerf' stance because CCP are very clearly taking an exaggerated 'T3s are LOL op stance'.

basically, T3s are not op, T2s are just junk atm.
compare t2 to any and all other shipe, including t1, and they are severely under performing as they are. when the whole class needs a buff, it's not hard to see the T3s are op by comparison.
T3s need balancing among themselves, T2s need a buff.



Agreed. I think that to call a cloaky Legion or Tengu "OP" is a hilarious misuderstanding of how wormhole cloaky warfare is actually played. What they're REALLY concerned about is Cloaky Proteus' and Lokis, because they can do 400-575 damage with a 200k+ buffer tank (or potentially a nice shield tank in the Loki's case).


T1: Very powerful right now due to rebalancing
T2: Resists are great, but they're out-dated by 6 years.
T3: Very strong in several areas that I think is slightly unnecessary.

Reasonable T3 nerfing? Bring the DPS in line on non-cloaky subsystems so that they're a little under par on a command ship of their race (the 700-900 dps range). Maybe consider removing some of the bonus from the pure buffer fits (7.5% instead of a full 10% to armor/shields).

Currently in cloaky warfare T3 so heavily out-weighs recon that not flying a T3 makes you a joke to deal with. Legion and Tengu both suffer from poor bonuses in their Cloaky fits, Legion much more so. Legion can supplement this by being a cloaky neut legion, but really that shouldn't be their only choice.

I don't think any of those changes would be game-breaking to T3s unless T2s turned into monsters again. 7.5% bonus change would net 2.5%x5 (12.5%) change in total armor/shield. While significant, my current Proteus fit has more armor than my triple plated Dominix, which is silly.

And as several others have said, command ships should be 5% boosting, T3s should be 3% boosting.


Svo.

Director of Frozen Corpse Industries.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#22 - 2013-06-21 20:37:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Lloyd Roses
What Axloth said.

In addition: Would love to see a revamp, pushing them from tanking nightmares that they are right now together with logistics to those jack-of-all-trades and complement of your wormhole-smallscale-fleet.
In my opinion, the resistances of a T3 are the smaller problem, but 1-2 LSE / 1-2 1600 plates AND 50% buffer bonus AND CDFEs or trimarks is just nuts.
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#23 - 2013-06-21 22:44:33 UTC
Any sane person surely has to agree that T3s cannot be balanced until T2 ships have been balanced. (oh and ogb...)
HACs in particularly are rubbish on the whole.

I'm happy for T3s to be rebalanced between themselves, but they cannot have fundamental changes in relation to lower tech ships until everything else has been balanced from the ground up.

The thing I'd love to see most is some subsystem tweaks, some subs are just absolute no brainers, whilst there are others I cannot fathom a use for.
Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#24 - 2013-06-22 01:05:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Quinn Corvez
I hate the word "nerf", especially when we are talking about the class of ship that I have sunk a lot of sp into.

I would be more welcoming of the idea to reinvent the T3 line to give them stronger bonuses in some area and perhaps some new abilities in exchange for less dps, for example. What I will never be okay with is a simple reduction in dps and tank.

The new navey BC are pretty close to T3s in terms of dps and tank and I'd assume that when the command ships are rebalanced, they will be even better.
TurboX3
Pulling The Plug
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#25 - 2013-06-22 08:08:34 UTC
Chitsa & James, maybe speak with your community before you go and purpose T3 nerf's as you shouldn't encourage CCP dev team for any excuse to downgrade us WH-dwellers...
They are all 0.0 carebears in the Reykjavik office from my personal experience! ;-)
Meytal
Doomheim
#26 - 2013-06-24 14:30:54 UTC
Rroff wrote:
From looking at more general posts on the subject of cloaky T3s it seems a lot of the reason people are asking for a wholesale nerf to cloaky T3s is due to small areas of the game where they are overpowered, just that small area of the game makes up a large part of those people's day to day life in Eve. i.e. people who like to camp null entry gates see dozens of cloaky nullified t3s escape them daily and are bitter about it.

If they can't catch cloaky nullified T3s, they need to set up a better camp. While you can't guarantee a kill, if done right, it can be difficult for even a CovOps (to say nothing for a cloaky T3) to get away.

"Wahh, I'm not good enough to do something. Make it so that I don't have to do that!"
"Okay!"

Icarus Able wrote:
Only T3 that needs a bit of balancing is the Tengu imo. Its DPS output and its potential to tank seems to outweigh the other T3s.

One thing I will agree about a Tengu that needs nerfing is that there is little reason to use any sub other than the Dissolution Sequencer unless you are flying jams. That's basically a free Sensor Strength boost to Tengu pilots.

The Tengu, like the others, is capable of good (not earth-shattering) DPS or admittedly amazing tank, but not both at the same time. With most other ships, you either get tank or you get DPS; Tengu, like other T3s, you can choose your poison. The rest of sub-BS Caldari just sucks so badly that the Tengu seems grossly out of place. Fix that problem, and then re-compare the Tengu.

The cost and drawback difference between the T3 and T2 basically means that T2 is disposable and T3 is not. When this changes, then T3 can be more inline with T2.

TurboX3 wrote:
Chitsa & James, maybe speak with your community before you go and purpose T3 nerf's as you shouldn't encourage CCP dev team for any excuse to downgrade us WH-dwellers...
They are all 0.0 carebears in the Reykjavik office from my personal experience! ;-)

Very true. Nullsec is CCP's baby, and without stiff opposition from CSM and a sizeable portion of the playerbase, CCP will more than happily stomp all over WH, High, and Low to benefit Null.
Casirio
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2013-06-24 16:51:55 UTC
Yea our wh csm were elected to help keep us wspace ppl represnted. surpised this is the first discussion brought up in the wh forum about the changes. I would like to see chitsa and james start these discussions themselves and discuss them with tour community.

And to be a broken record for god sakes ******* fix t2 before you nerf t3 to ****. hence why they started with the t1 ships and have moved up. its just fuckin stupid to do this out of order.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2013-06-24 17:27:11 UTC
Casirio wrote:
Yea our wh csm were elected to help keep us wspace ppl represnted. surpised this is the first discussion brought up in the wh forum about the changes. I would like to see chitsa and james start these discussions themselves and discuss them with tour community.


Pushing close to Page 3 and not a peep yet from our elected representatives.
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#29 - 2013-06-24 17:29:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Onomerous
A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.

It's funny reading the different 'nerf T3' threads on the forums. According to posts, every T3 is OP and every T3 is underpowered. I'm really getting the feeling most of the people don't know much about T3 but hate them because they have to go against them.



** THIS JUST IN**
You can fly a T3 without a cloak!!! Try it and see how well it works!!
Elepherious
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2013-06-24 17:34:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Elepherious
The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.

Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.

You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.

... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens.
stup idity
#31 - 2013-06-24 17:36:30 UTC  |  Edited by: stup idity
Onomerous wrote:
A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.



never mind, i am too stupid to read...

I am the Herald of all beings that are me.
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#32 - 2013-06-24 17:40:27 UTC
Elepherious wrote:
The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.

Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.

You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.

... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens.


A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.
stup idity
#33 - 2013-06-24 17:54:54 UTC
Onomerous wrote:
Elepherious wrote:
The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.

Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.

You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.

... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens.


A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.


this one has >200k ehp with passive boost, no implants, all 5:

[Loki, covops]
Loki Defensive - Adaptive Augmenter
Loki Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration
Loki Electronics - Immobility Drivers
Loki Engineering - Power Core Multiplier
Loki Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst

Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
5x Dual 180mm AutoCannon II (Hail M)

2x Stasis Webifier II
Faint Warp Disruptor I
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I

2x 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
2x Centum C-Type Energized Explosive Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Kinetic Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

2x Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

I am the Herald of all beings that are me.
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#34 - 2013-06-24 18:17:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Onomerous
stup idity wrote:
Onomerous wrote:
Elepherious wrote:
The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.

Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.

You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.

... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens.


A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.


this one has >200k ehp with passive boost, no implants, all 5:

[Loki, covops]
Loki Defensive - Adaptive Augmenter
Loki Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration
Loki Electronics - Immobility Drivers
Loki Engineering - Power Core Multiplier
Loki Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst

Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
5x Dual 180mm AutoCannon II (Hail M)

2x Stasis Webifier II
Faint Warp Disruptor I
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I

2x 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
2x Centum C-Type Energized Explosive Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Kinetic Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

2x Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I


nice fit... weak on DPS but I guess if this is your scouting guy. Wouldn't fly that as a normal line member though. Very interesting.
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2013-06-24 18:42:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Kidd
Nix Anteris wrote:
The goal with T3 was versatility - the ability to change subsystems depending on the situation encountered.

They were introduced at the same time as wormholes.

CCP never expected people to live in wormholes permanently.

T3s are not versatile for many wormholers because subsystems cannot be changed at a POS.

Before any nerfs can occur (and I agree there should be some), refitting at a POS must be implemented first.

Otherwise they will be sub-par to T2 and not versatile.


This is complete BS that came out 2 years after w-space was introduced and it's impact on null was being felt. Tell me, how are you going to live a nomadic existence in deep w-space? Look at the assets you have to commit to do so. Carriers, dreads, sub-caps, POS's and multiples of them all with specific fits.

And were you expecting that you would have to spend days probing out a route to w-space or from it with your caravan of freighters carriers and dreads in tow waiting in w-space, lowsec or nullsec tying up half a dozen accounts or moredoing nothing for days? How were you ever expected to get your assets in and out intact with even the slimest of chance when that wh is crit massed in the middle of your exodus?

And how about all the ore/gas sites? Are you expected to haul all this stuff out daily as well at full volume?

CCP "nomadic" doctrine is riddled with so many hole that is doesn't serve to indicate what w-space should have been but what they want it to be.

The nails for w-space are starting to add up. The T3 nerf, to "remove overlap" and to balance them off their "overpowered" pedestal will crash the w-space economy since everything but ore depends upon the T3's current demand to support current price levels. But, CCP also put the nail in the coffin for ore sites in w-space as well when they made them anoms. The T3 nerf is the final nail if they're rebalanced to reflect CCP's current diagrams and dev-blogs.

Don't ban me, bro!
Meytal
Doomheim
#36 - 2013-06-24 18:54:30 UTC
Onomerous wrote:
stup idity wrote:
Onomerous wrote:
A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.
[fit posted]

nice fit... weak on DPS but I guess if this is your scouting guy. Wouldn't fly that as a normal line member though. Very interesting.

So, you have to sacrifice DPS/etc to achieve a crazy tank. That sounds like it is working as intended to me.
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#37 - 2013-06-24 19:05:14 UTC
Meytal wrote:
Onomerous wrote:
stup idity wrote:
Onomerous wrote:
A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.
[fit posted]

nice fit... weak on DPS but I guess if this is your scouting guy. Wouldn't fly that as a normal line member though. Very interesting.

So, you have to sacrifice DPS/etc to achieve a crazy tank. That sounds like it is working as intended to me.


Well, yes. I agree 100%. That's the thing with just about any ship (T3 especially)... you can do lots of things with them but there is a trade-off.

The fit is not something I would fly but I guess it is possible to get >200k tank on a cloaky loki. No offensive intended to anyone but that seems like an EFT warrior fit to me. Just my opinion.
stup idity
#38 - 2013-06-24 19:30:48 UTC
Onomerous wrote:
Meytal wrote:
Onomerous wrote:
stup idity wrote:
Onomerous wrote:
A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.
[fit posted]

nice fit... weak on DPS but I guess if this is your scouting guy. Wouldn't fly that as a normal line member though. Very interesting.

So, you have to sacrifice DPS/etc to achieve a crazy tank. That sounds like it is working as intended to me.


Well, yes. I agree 100%. That's the thing with just about any ship (T3 especially)... you can do lots of things with them but there is a trade-off.

The fit is not something I would fly but I guess it is possible to get >200k tank on a cloaky loki. No offensive intended to anyone but that seems like an EFT warrior fit to me. Just my opinion.


just thrown together in a couple of minutes to see if it's possible. I doubt anybody would actually fly something like this.
Either: cloaky + damage for the whole fleet (should still have 100k+ ehp)
or: heavy tank + probes + tackle, no real need for dps and rest of fleet on standby.

I am the Herald of all beings that are me.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Stay Feral
#39 - 2013-07-10 02:15:58 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
stup idity wrote:
Onomerous wrote:
Elepherious wrote:
The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.

Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.

You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.

... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens.


A cloaky loki with 200k+ buffer tank? I need to see this fit please.


this one has >200k ehp with passive boost, no implants, all 5:

[Loki, covops]
Loki Defensive - Adaptive Augmenter
Loki Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration
Loki Electronics - Immobility Drivers
Loki Engineering - Power Core Multiplier
Loki Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst

Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
5x Dual 180mm AutoCannon II (Hail M)

2x Stasis Webifier II
Faint Warp Disruptor I
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I

2x 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
2x Centum C-Type Energized Explosive Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Kinetic Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

2x Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I



Any good Cloaky Loki is shield tanked. There are some good armor fits, but for solo PVP in a Cloki a good pilot shield tanks.

Also, to achieve that 200k EHP, you had to sacrifice almost all of your DPS. Working as intended.


Elepherious wrote:
The TIII Ships should be like a utility tool, While it can accomplish many goals in a single tool it does none of them particularly well. Wherein, you can use a multitool to unscrew something, but the better designed screw driver gets the job done quicker and more efficiently. or you can use a multitool to open a can, but the can opener does it better.

Same premiss, it should fit multiple roles, but not do them as well as the actual TII variants designed for the role.

You should be able to fit a HAC like fitting, but it shouldn't be as powerful as an actual HAC. Or can fit a booster fitting, but not as effectively as a booster.

... Also I have a cloaky Prot with 276 EHP tank... It happens.


Proteus has a ridiculous tank, Loki has (compared to other T3s) a terrible tank.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Joan Greywind
The Lazy Crabs
#40 - 2013-07-10 07:08:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Joan Greywind
From a developer's perspective, when a ship, or class of ships become the go to choice for any real fight, they are considered overpowered. (I am here talking about t3's in general and not just clockies). T3's aren't horribly unbalanced but they are by far the most used ships in any serious capacity in WH space, hence the call for "nerfing". This is actually a valid point and a good reason to "rebalance t3". For me personally this change will hurt a lot (as I use t3 almost exclusively, other than logi of course), but t3 needs to stop being the all dominating force in WH's so we can get diversification in serious fleet comps and maybe some more useful doctrines, other than bring 2 bhaalgorns, 2 ecm tengues and the rest proteus and legions (not exactly but fleet doctrines are all centered around t3's in WH). I understand that their mass is the crucial factor here, nevertheless in EVE there shouldn't be a ship class or type that is that dominant in any kind of space.

Hopefully they won't make the ships ****** enough that we won't be able to use them anymore (Fozzie is actually good at "rebalancing").

Just one last thing, please note the word "serious fights", please don't link the kill mails where you killed retrievers with your vexor.