These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

is the T3 nerf an attempt to...

First post
Author
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#21 - 2013-07-24 02:52:32 UTC
the issue with T3s is that T2s, especially HACs, are junk almost across the board.
T2 hulls have been around for so long that the current state of T1 ships just trumps them in almost all situations and T3s look OP as a comparison result.

unfortunately no one at CCP seems to get this and they have decided to not fix HACs so good bye T3s i guess...

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#22 - 2013-07-24 13:23:00 UTC
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:
I don't think it is likely that a t3 nerf would be catastrophically dramatic.

Probably won't change my life one bit.


Then you don't PVP in C5/C6 WHs.
And if you do, you're doing it wrong.

Ryuce wrote:
While the OP appears to have no clue about the goals for tech 3 when the concept was introduced,* he might also be refering to the general marked and income implications by a tech 3 nerf, which might decrease demand to an amount where WH income is below 0.0.

*they were infact designed to be exactly what the dev's now seem to plan to "nerf" them to: Jack of all trades, master of non, as opposed to tech 2.


So what exactly do T3s do better than T2s?
Recons? Nope.
Logistics? Nope.
Boosting? Yes, but that can be fixed by a single nerf to the boosting subsystem, and a buff to Command Ships.

HACs don't have a role, and they suck so bad at whatever it is they are supposed to do that they are worse than T1 cruisers. If they nerf T3s to the point of HACs T3s will be the single worst ship class in the game. Worse than Electronic Attack Frigates, and that is a whole new level of bad.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2013-07-24 14:21:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Ryuce wrote:
While the OP appears to have no clue about the goals for tech 3 when the concept was introduced,* he might also be refering to the general marked and income implications by a tech 3 nerf, which might decrease demand to an amount where WH income is below 0.0.

*they were infact designed to be exactly what the dev's now seem to plan to "nerf" them to: Jack of all trades, master of non, as opposed to tech 2.


Could you please provide some links that explain exactly how T3's were "supposed to be"?

Unless someone hacked the games and changed T3 without CCPs knowledge, the current performance of the T3s are exactly how they were supposed to be.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#24 - 2013-07-24 15:34:09 UTC
Maurice deSaxe wrote:
Run people out of wh space and buff 0.0? If ccp nerfs the T3 what reason would there be to inhabit wh's and do any production there? Not raging here but if ccp nerfs T3's I will most likely quit eve all of my characters sp are focused around wh's and I am not looking to retrain for other roles because I am forced into it.

I want to cross train when I feel like it. I don't care how much in the future it is I do not feel these changes are needed.

One because it just gives more power to the 0.0 power blocks
Two it effectively ruins a whole group of people's play style.
The sp and isk investment and the specialized role these ships fit justify the current state of the ships.

If you want to buff t2 then fine do so but don't nerf T3 based on trying to fix t2s. It is after all a T3 by this logic I want to see t2 nerfed to be more in line with t1 this goes for everything from the hull to ammo and guns and tank.




Yes. The nullsec blocs want the wormholers gone. Our t3's do not use nullsec moongoop. We cut into their profits, and you can't setup wormhole rental system like they have in low and null. You get rid of the wormholers and move them into null, they'll have to pay to rent a system (8 to 20 billion isk a month, more if you have more people) to hold for themselves.....


That's pretty much the sole reason.

In the end, its all about money.

Yaay!!!!

Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#25 - 2013-07-24 16:51:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Onomerous
Nix Anteris wrote:
Onomerous wrote:
they are concerned about the TOTAL effect of a T3 nerf, not just the PvP aspect.

Rapiers are totally viable in escalations.


Point being? I can't take my caracal in their either. Should it get a huge buff? What about ________? Escalations are not ALL of WH living.
Deshrial Sculpin
Psychological Clinic
#26 - 2013-07-24 19:17:35 UTC
Could someone point me to the "nerf t3" thread ? I found the hac upgrade, the medium weapon upgrade but I have not found the nerf post ?

I am just curious exactly what they are nerfing...
James Arget
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
#27 - 2013-07-24 20:53:54 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1889852#post1889852

Quote:
Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line. It doesn't necessarily means nerfing them to oblivion and beyond, but making sure that each subsystem configuration has a use and they don't overlap on other ships by making them different in role and purpose.

CSM 8 Representative

http://csm8.org

Sorany
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2013-07-24 21:09:10 UTC
James Arget wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1889852#post1889852

Quote:
Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line. It doesn't necessarily means nerfing them to oblivion and beyond, but making sure that each subsystem configuration has a use and they don't overlap on other ships by making them different in role and purpose.


I always like starting with "KILL THEM, KILL THEM ALL, HUNT THEM DOWN AND JUST SHOOT THEM IN THE FACE!!!!!!!!", but then follow up with "well, maybe not in the face. perhaps just shoot them in the shoulder."
Maurice deSaxe
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#29 - 2013-07-25 06:26:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Maurice deSaxe
James Arget wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1889852#post1889852

Quote:
Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line. It doesn't necessarily means nerfing them to oblivion and beyond, but making sure that each subsystem configuration has a use and they don't overlap on other ships by making them different in role and purpose.

Thank you for that was having troubles finding it.

But yeah Like I said I feel T3's are perfectly in line atm.
They take more SP to manufacture then a titan, they are more pricey then other T2 hulls and the risk of losing almosts a weeks training everytime you leave your pos bubbles.

They will have to put all 3 of those areas in line before any nerf could be justified.
You can buff hacs and command ships without nerfing T3s it's pretty ******* simple CCP.
The problem is and always will be is that EVE devs are to closely tied to null sec alliances, and if they said there has never been a nerf based on their personal issue with the game because it effects their play style I would simply call them all liars.

Try to solo a C3-C4 In a tengu that's not worth like 2 bil and see how effective it is.
You do not see hacs running around with those pricey ass fits, and if you did maybe they wouldn't suck so bad.
Yeah Learn to fit hacs people.

Also feel free to send a mail to CCP Ytterbium as he is the one who wants to kill T3s like a rapid dog.
Tarunik Raqalth'Qui
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2013-07-26 01:04:06 UTC
The thing with T3s is everyone compares DPS T3s to HACs, where the DPS T3 gives you oh, 2x the tank and 1.25-1.5x the DPS for a 2x-4x price increase. Can we all agree that HACs are bad and need help? (Which the tiericide effort has started on, but we'll have to see on SiSi....)

HIC? No T3 equivalent whatsoever. HICtors are the one truly unique T2 ship class, even, but I digress.
Force Recon? Cloaky T3s are kind of orthogonal to this, save for cloaky neuting Legions overlapping with the Pilgrim. (in general, most cloaky T3s are either pure-tank brick tacklers or gank-and-tank hunter-killer scouts without EW, instead of the EW/tacklewar bearing scouts that characterize Force Recons)
Combat Recon? 3x the tank but *less* capability (less range/strength) otherwise for roughly 1.5-2x the price save for neut Legions, which make the armor Curse look like a joke in comparison some of the time due to the sheer GJ/s advantage of the neut Legion.
Logi? T3 RR subsystem is only good for spider tanking Tengus and the occasional shield Loki, or if you need the high slot for other reasons.

So: buff HACs to where they ought to be (I'd give them something of a 'baked in' speed/agility edge over T3s, and probably shave a bit of sig off too) and T3s will be fine, more or less. Also: can someone find a better reactor core for the Curse? Trying to get a plate of any flavor + 5 medium neuts on it is not happening, and that renders it unable to compete with other neuting cruisers on a GJ/s basis, which is what counts when you've got a capital to drain dry or a spider-tanking Tengu-ball to bust up. (Unless you're in a shield fleet. ;)
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#31 - 2013-07-26 01:42:07 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Maurice deSaxe wrote:
Run people out of wh space and buff 0.0? If ccp nerfs the T3 what reason would there be to inhabit wh's and do any production there? Not raging here but if ccp nerfs T3's I will most likely quit eve all of my characters sp are focused around wh's and I am not looking to retrain for other roles because I am forced into it.

I want to cross train when I feel like it. I don't care how much in the future it is I do not feel these changes are needed.

One because it just gives more power to the 0.0 power blocks
Two it effectively ruins a whole group of people's play style.
The sp and isk investment and the specialized role these ships fit justify the current state of the ships.

If you want to buff t2 then fine do so but don't nerf T3 based on trying to fix t2s. It is after all a T3 by this logic I want to see t2 nerfed to be more in line with t1 this goes for everything from the hull to ammo and guns and tank.




Yes. The nullsec blocs want the wormholers gone. Our t3's do not use nullsec moongoop. We cut into their profits, and you can't setup wormhole rental system like they have in low and null. You get rid of the wormholers and move them into null, they'll have to pay to rent a system (8 to 20 billion isk a month, more if you have more people) to hold for themselves.....


That's pretty much the sole reason.

In the end, its all about money.


Bullshit. If it comes to that, I'll just unsub and problem solved.

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7

Maurice deSaxe
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#32 - 2013-07-26 22:06:59 UTC
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Maurice deSaxe wrote:
Run people out of wh space and buff 0.0? If ccp nerfs the T3 what reason would there be to inhabit wh's and do any production there? Not raging here but if ccp nerfs T3's I will most likely quit eve all of my characters sp are focused around wh's and I am not looking to retrain for other roles because I am forced into it.

I want to cross train when I feel like it. I don't care how much in the future it is I do not feel these changes are needed.

One because it just gives more power to the 0.0 power blocks
Two it effectively ruins a whole group of people's play style.
The sp and isk investment and the specialized role these ships fit justify the current state of the ships.

If you want to buff t2 then fine do so but don't nerf T3 based on trying to fix t2s. It is after all a T3 by this logic I want to see t2 nerfed to be more in line with t1 this goes for everything from the hull to ammo and guns and tank.




Yes. The nullsec blocs want the wormholers gone. Our t3's do not use nullsec moongoop. We cut into their profits, and you can't setup wormhole rental system like they have in low and null. You get rid of the wormholers and move them into null, they'll have to pay to rent a system (8 to 20 billion isk a month, more if you have more people) to hold for themselves.....


That's pretty much the sole reason.

In the end, its all about money.


Bullshit. If it comes to that, I'll just unsub and problem solved.


Pretty much this.
Here's a sand box but if you are having to much fun
we will take the sand out of your box and move it to an other one go play there.
This is our sandbox and we will choose how you play it.

It has happened before it will happen again tons of people will un-sub if they nerf T3s into the ground, some will continue to play out of pure addiction and some will play because EVE gives them a sense of power but most logical people will just quit.
I know I will and I won't return till they fix it right again and if they don't fix it well I will find something else to do lol
Messoroz
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#33 - 2013-07-26 23:59:46 UTC
Warlord Shat wrote:
I find it odd that people complain that the Armour T3 Blob is unbeatable, but freak out when they talk about nerfing t3s


LOL, you do realize nobody above your post complained about the T3 armour blob? Go suck a horse.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#34 - 2013-07-29 14:04:47 UTC
Maurice deSaxe wrote:
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Maurice deSaxe wrote:
Run people out of wh space and buff 0.0? If ccp nerfs the T3 what reason would there be to inhabit wh's and do any production there? Not raging here but if ccp nerfs T3's I will most likely quit eve all of my characters sp are focused around wh's and I am not looking to retrain for other roles because I am forced into it.

I want to cross train when I feel like it. I don't care how much in the future it is I do not feel these changes are needed.

One because it just gives more power to the 0.0 power blocks
Two it effectively ruins a whole group of people's play style.
The sp and isk investment and the specialized role these ships fit justify the current state of the ships.

If you want to buff t2 then fine do so but don't nerf T3 based on trying to fix t2s. It is after all a T3 by this logic I want to see t2 nerfed to be more in line with t1 this goes for everything from the hull to ammo and guns and tank.




Yes. The nullsec blocs want the wormholers gone. Our t3's do not use nullsec moongoop. We cut into their profits, and you can't setup wormhole rental system like they have in low and null. You get rid of the wormholers and move them into null, they'll have to pay to rent a system (8 to 20 billion isk a month, more if you have more people) to hold for themselves.....


That's pretty much the sole reason.

In the end, its all about money.


Bullshit. If it comes to that, I'll just unsub and problem solved.


Pretty much this.
Here's a sand box but if you are having to much fun
we will take the sand out of your box and move it to an other one go play there.
This is our sandbox and we will choose how you play it.

It has happened before it will happen again tons of people will un-sub if they nerf T3s into the ground, some will continue to play out of pure addiction and some will play because EVE gives them a sense of power but most logical people will just quit.
I know I will and I won't return till they fix it right again and if they don't fix it well I will find something else to do lol


Hollow threats do nothing. There is a power grab going on right now involving space. People have been promised things to move stuff towards a direction. Those csm people we don't hear about will scream once CCP gets to t3's because they don't have any control over the wormhole community

CCP has no control over them either.

What will happen, don't know, but if CCP listen to the people who want to evict and collapse the wormhole community under the guise that wormholers are too rich, too powerful, ships to strong (idiotic as low and nullsec makes billions to trillions off of officer mods, implant drops, bpc's etc) when ther actual intention is to get wormholers out of wormholes so they can tax them with lowsec and nullsec renting, they will wind up losing probably there most distinctly unique community.


Yaay!!!!

ROSSLINDEN0
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#35 - 2013-07-29 15:44:40 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
the issue with T3s is that T2s, especially HACs, are junk almost across the board.
T2 hulls have been around for so long that the current state of T1 ships just trumps them in almost all situations and T3s look OP as a comparison result.

unfortunately no one at CCP seems to get this and they have decided to not fix HACs so good bye T3s i guess...


Have you been under a rock? they are fixing hacs
Maurice deSaxe
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#36 - 2013-07-30 08:12:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Maurice deSaxe
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Maurice deSaxe wrote:
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Maurice deSaxe wrote:
Run people out of wh space and buff 0.0? If ccp nerfs the T3 what reason would there be to inhabit wh's and do any production there? Not raging here but if ccp nerfs T3's I will most likely quit eve all of my characters sp are focused around wh's and I am not looking to retrain for other roles because I am forced into it.

I want to cross train when I feel like it. I don't care how much in the future it is I do not feel these changes are needed.

One because it just gives more power to the 0.0 power blocks
Two it effectively ruins a whole group of people's play style.
The sp and isk investment and the specialized role these ships fit justify the current state of the ships.

If you want to buff t2 then fine do so but don't nerf T3 based on trying to fix t2s. It is after all a T3 by this logic I want to see t2 nerfed to be more in line with t1 this goes for everything from the hull to ammo and guns and tank.




Yes. The nullsec blocs want the wormholers gone. Our t3's do not use nullsec moongoop. We cut into their profits, and you can't setup wormhole rental system like they have in low and null. You get rid of the wormholers and move them into null, they'll have to pay to rent a system (8 to 20 billion isk a month, more if you have more people) to hold for themselves.....


That's pretty much the sole reason.

In the end, its all about money.


Bullshit. If it comes to that, I'll just unsub and problem solved.


Pretty much this.
Here's a sand box but if you are having to much fun
we will take the sand out of your box and move it to an other one go play there.
This is our sandbox and we will choose how you play it.

It has happened before it will happen again tons of people will un-sub if they nerf T3s into the ground, some will continue to play out of pure addiction and some will play because EVE gives them a sense of power but most logical people will just quit.
I know I will and I won't return till they fix it right again and if they don't fix it well I will find something else to do lol


Hollow threats do nothing. There is a power grab going on right now involving space. People have been promised things to move stuff towards a direction. Those csm people we don't hear about will scream once CCP gets to t3's because they don't have any control over the wormhole community

CCP has no control over them either.

What will happen, don't know, but if CCP listen to the people who want to evict and collapse the wormhole community under the guise that wormholers are too rich, too powerful, ships to strong (idiotic as low and nullsec makes billions to trillions off of officer mods, implant drops, bpc's etc) when ther actual intention is to get wormholers out of wormholes so they can tax them with lowsec and nullsec renting, they will wind up losing probably there most distinctly unique community.





The thing is CCP devs play EVE also and they are out there in null sec with these null sec alliances.
They got caught when they gave out BPOs to an alliance so they will not be able to do that anymore.
SOO what's an other way to rig the game for big 00 alliance blobs?
Nerf everything in sight in an attempt to herd everyone into 00.

I am hoping the WH community would be able to put their love for EVE behind them and unsub if a major T3 nerf hits live servers.
Last time CCP made a change that everyone hated they lost thousands of subs and it did not take long to revert those changes. Same thing will need to happen here players need to make a stand to make sure CCP does the right things.

I also feel that it is never to early to plan how the community will handle this.
Complex Potential
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#37 - 2013-07-30 10:24:03 UTC
The only concern I have is that the Loki is going to be changed to the point of being unable to tank and web at range. If that happens it will no longer be able to fulfill its rather vital role in C5/C6 anoms (cap style obviously). I cant think of another ship that could do the same job right now and not get ripped apart.
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#38 - 2013-07-30 10:39:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Ellendras Silver
Maurice deSaxe wrote:
Run people out of wh space and buff 0.0? If ccp nerfs the T3 what reason would there be to inhabit wh's and do any production there? Not raging here but if ccp nerfs T3's I will most likely quit eve all of my characters sp are focused around wh's and I am not looking to retrain for other roles because I am forced into it.

can i have your stuff? and damn someone put a gun on your head and forced you to skill for T3s OMG was it CCP?
Quote:

I want to cross train when I feel like it. I don't care how much in the future it is I do not feel these changes are needed.

great that you feel that its not needed, doesn't make you less wrong
Quote:

One because it just gives more power to the 0.0 power blocks
Two it effectively ruins a whole group of people's play style.
The sp and isk investment and the specialized role these ships fit justify the current state of the ships.

can you see the nerf all ready if so can i borrow your time machine plz?
Quote:

If you want to buff t2 then fine do so but don't nerf T3 based on trying to fix t2s. It is after all a T3 by this logic I want to see t2 nerved to be more in line with t1 this goes for everything from the hull to ammo and guns and tank.

if you wanna boost T2 hulls so they function better in their highly specialized role then a T3 they would be OP like crazy

i dont know how they gonna change it but it is needed for sure and stop whining all you hvae to train is HAC and that like 6 days to get it to lvl 4 big whoop. it never made sense that a T3 could do every T2 hulls specialized task better and with MUCH less training. finaly they going to change it and i am sure WHs and T3s will still be good ships and WHs good isk and fun to be in

and for the record i live in WH myself and fly all T3s on 2 toons

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#39 - 2013-07-30 10:47:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Ellendras Silver
Maurice deSaxe wrote:

The thing is CCP devs play EVE also and they are out there in null sec with these null sec alliances.
They got caught when they gave out BPOs to an alliance so they will not be able to do that anymore.
SOO what's an other way to rig the game for big 00 alliance blobs?
Nerf everything in sight in an attempt to herd everyone into 00.

yeah that's the plan sigh NOT
Quote:

I am hoping the WH community would be able to put their love for EVE behind them and unsub if a major T3 nerf hits live servers.
Last time CCP made a change that everyone hated they lost thousands of subs and it did not take long to revert those changes. Same thing will need to happen here players need to make a stand to make sure CCP does the right things.

I also feel that it is never to early to plan how the community will handle this.

are you really saying that you find it good and logical that a T3 can do all the T2 tasks better then the ship SPECIALLY designed to full fill that task and NOTHING else

plz i am all ears explain how that make sense

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#40 - 2013-07-30 10:51:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Ellendras Silver
Kalel Nimrott wrote:

Bullshit. If it comes to that, I'll just unsub and problem solved.

ok can i have your stuff?

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]