Player Features and Ideas Discussion

The new repairer and booster amounts are live on SiSi. The capacitor requirement has not changed for them, but you get more hit points repaired per unit energy.

You don't fly T3s much do you?

1) fair, covert subs generally don't kill your tank.
2) if you fit for the eHP f two BSs you get the DPS of a T1 cruisers...or less.
3) They are perfectly killable, its called a web
4) Rapiers have a significanlt longer web range
5) Just lol ECM Tengu? Really?
6) like you said, fixed


T3s are fine HACs suck. Period.

:edit

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18181867 I tacked that with a friggin bomber, there is your unkillable pwnmobile.

Yes, we use them all the time. We have no choice because the wormhole arms race has settled on these ships as the optimal concentration of firepower, maneuverability and survivability.

On the whole, bringing another class of ship to a wormhole fight is a waste of a pilot.

So the presence of these ships in their current form reduces the number of rational tactical choices and thus removes depth, complexity and richness from the game.

I completely understand that existing owners of lolpwnships (including myself) would feel the loss of all this power in the short term, and many would want to resist it. But they would adapt, and learn to use a wider variety of T1 and T2 ships in their place.

I my view, the resulting diversity would be good for the game.

These are very valid points. I flew in wormholes a lot last year while learning about tech 3s, and I have to agree that there really isn't anything I can see that will replace them adequately. They will need a hard look. They probably shouldn't perform leagues better than a HAC, as in hundreds of thousands of EHP better, but they should remain competitive in their intended environment. I'll have to think hard on that before I can provided any meaningful suggestions.

Why not make T3 a worm semi-exclusive, subject to sanctions and what not to increase their value .. opens the door for be being more lenient (to a point) in their balancing as general access to them would be reduced due to pricing/volume concerns.

Restrict construction of the subsystems to worm-space and reduce their volume to facilitate/help logistics operations. That means a worm denies passage of any ship carrying materials exclusive to worms .. or/and one could make it contraband for extra nastiness.
- T3's are, backstory wise, as pure military hardware as can be (mortal enemy of mankind and all that) so adding empire (read: high-sec) sanctions to the parts/sub-systems make all kinds of sense. Serves to not only make potentially OP hulls marginally more scarce but also adds a smuggling item, increases value of etc.

The End: T3's should be pricey, they should be powerful in whatever narrow niche they are fitted to occupy and they should be a way for the people outside of society proper to make a mint.
Would add that an entity that occupies several systems in worm-space should have to live with an increasing amount of external holes (relative to internal), that grows proportional with the amount of systems owned .. cosmic joke, natural forces coalescing .. there numerous ways to explain it but it all comes down to game balance

Example: Full T3 ships exiting worm space are generally kosher and ships carrying Gallente/Minmatar subsystems are persecuted in Amarr/Caldari space and vice versa .. gimmick is that it is high-grade military hardware which no nation/empire would permit in its space without having it under its control. When T4 comes along the rules change, obviously

Welcome to the real world, hope you had a good time in fantasy land

I doubt that HACs suck, or will not be used/useful for wormholes.
Especially peeking at Deimos/Astarte/Cerberus/Absolution/Nighthawk, all of those offer some of T3s key-attributes without SP-loss and in some cases, even advantages. In little detail:

- Astarte is competing with the proteus, simply cause green blasterboat. Their Agility isn't far apart from each other, their damageoutput very similiar. Remaining advantages for the proteus are mobility (goes like 10% faster) and sigradius. And around two to three times the buffer... ... ... (rhetorical pause) WH-Proteus normally got mwd/Scram (with hell of a range) and EITHER web or long point, I didn't yet shoot one of those equipped with a cap booster.
Advantage of the Astarte: No one will laugh at you for fitting T2 tank and you lose no SP on death. Has neuts and a cap booster.
The Deimos though is just special. Guess it's a scout that survives when fitted with AAR, 800 plate, dualprop. You'd prolly achieve better results tackling with a (cloaky) proteus, but that Deimos doesn't make everyone and their moms shiver in fear. Deimos is an OP-Brawler, runs one MAR on it's own - sounds like slowly killing drakes in c2s , waiting for them to bite.

- Nighthawk and Cerb... being the competition to the Tengu. While they are so much more fragile (Cerberus) or so incredibly much slower (Nighthawk) compared to a Tengu, a perma-mwd'ing Cerb with ONLY (*cough*) four times the sigsize and pretty much same damageoutput and still maybe sufficient tank could do, or if you are intending to chill around bubbles or directly on a POS brawling carriers: two med neuts onto the nighthawk, HAMs and a rig - and go 920+ kinetic rage dps. (mentioned the med-neuts that no tengu would ever have)

- Absolution versus Legion... Superslowbrick with accidentally neuts/smartbombs compared to a muchmuch faster and smaller brick that shoots much further. It kinda looks like the Legion is leading, but if you need to press utility into the hull and don't need that speed/range anyways, can stay with an abso for a near identical experience. On the upside I once slingshotted out of a lokis pointrange by overheating my active absolution's mwd. Never lose hope

None of those four T2 ships outperforms their respective T3-pendant, however they are able to perform similiar and sometimes almost identical given a certain task.
With the current Gap in punishment upon loss (like some 200-300mil for T2, or 700mil+ and SP for a proper T3), losses of T2 are so much more sustainable that usage of them is attractive from that POV.

Since that rebalance will greatly lower the gap in performance, partly due to utility on CS and the ebefing up of HACs (hopefully everyone agrees that HACs will be a lot more useful now [esp. Sacriledge, Ishtar] 8) ), T2 should allow rather new starting PvP'ers to directly advance out of their prophecies/myrms/Drakes/Brutixes(?) into a resp. T2 variant, instead of transferring directly into T3s if they wish to ever get 'guns instead of knifes for those wormholeshootings' - hope that makes sense and hits the spot.
So just looking at the tengu and caracal - now there at least IS a tech-II counterpart.

I actually can't see anything wrong with strat cruisers' resistances. Those resistances are jsut what you get for blinging up that thing. Only Issue I can perceive is *Buffersubs 10%*, *Local-Tank-subs 10%*, *those shiphulls are larger (!) compared to batlecruisers, someone please step by, mention that somewhere and adjust that sigradius to like two times or so*

What T3s offer beyond that is that of a cloaky dps/tackle (which atm only the blasterpilgrim can do, haha tank), the option of being a nullified cloaky 600mil cruisersized scout (potentially with tank or links) and that of dedicated BLOPS-logi (legion/tengu), and a couple even more narrow niche applications unique to the game. Guess it's not bad to have those roles enabled by some ship afterall, it just happens that you always build it starting off with a strat cruiser.

why cant the cerbus have the same bonus as the hookbill?
20% bonus to Kinetic missile damage, 10% bonus to EM, Explosive, and Thermal missile damage
10% bonus to Missile velocity


or atleast

10% bonus to Kinetic missile damage, 5% bonus to EM, Explosive, and Thermal missile damage

Except then they'd actually suck and no one would actually fly them :P

They'd suck if they were OP, or they'd suck if they were highly configurable ships with T2 resists and 5 bonuses rather than a T2 ship's 4?

At the moment, they have a total of 10 bonuses and T2 resists.

I've only rarely seen a T3 with EHP 10 times that of a similarly tanked HAC and they tend to give up DPS to do it. The trouble point is more the sweet spot where they're doing about HAC DPS or a little better but have the EHP of a well-tanked Battleship. This tends not to be several hundred thousand more but more in the range of 100-150k EHP, which is still pretty silly when you factor in their small sig radius, speed, and resists.



Pretty much, yeah. Though you might be able to add the Scorpion/Falcon/Rook there for powerful ECM projection, but even that may not be worth the trade-off with an ECM Tengu unless it's a home defense fleet and you can use bouncing warps to keep the enemy at long range.

The Vindi being there is more of a problem with the Vindi and less of a problem with T3s >.>

Really I think the comment about the pilot to EHP and DPS ratio is really the crux of the issue for WH pilots. The question is whether or not it should be changed.



This was the balancing logic that originally lead to Titans with AOE doomsday weapons. "Because there would only ever be about 5 in the game".



They're probably still getting metrics/feedback from the test server.