These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Angsty Strategic Cruiser Thread.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#41 - 2013-09-09 05:48:21 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:

Resorting to extremes to come up with absurd numbers isn't how ships are balanced, after all, I could spend 1b on a Navy Brutix and get the same stats.



No, you couldn't get the same stats, and you don't spend a bil on a T1 BC, like everyone spends on their T3s. T2 fit with CNAM does 916 before heat, compare this with other ships and you'll realize that you are grasping fro straws for defending your precious toy, what figures are quoted doesn't change the relative balance.

Anyway, overheated figures are still perfectly acceptable when discussing T3s, ability to overheat longer than anything else is one of their core features.

.
Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#42 - 2013-09-09 07:17:38 UTC
Incindir Mauser wrote:
chris elliot wrote:
Currently we all know the problem with t3's is that they are too hard to kill without t3's of your own. Thus creating a vicious cycle of one upping either numbers, or dread/carrier support.


Not going to repost that whole wall of text, save the gem quoted above.

Definitely some good feedback here, from everyone that has contributed. T3's don't exist in a little bubble W-Space has created, they've massively proliferated. Although they have seemed to fallen out of favor as a major null/lo fleet doctrine.

And I'll second chris elliot's observation that unless you're rolling fourty dudes with half a dozen guardians, you've not got much of a chance against thirty dudes with half a dozen logi. I personally feel that it's a combination of how powerful T3 armor HP and resistances are in combination with logi. And rarely, if ever, are there totally even matched up gudfights occurring spontaneously. Every time someone shows up in Adhoc's system and rings the doorbell, we've just come to expect that the opfor has a login trap, is hiding another 20-30 guys on the other side of the hole, or a jump or two down the chain. And it's lead to a lot of discussion internally on how to come up with a counter that doesn't involve dread blapping or carriers. Frankly, we haven't found one that works reliably. Even if we, or someone else did, that would instantly become the new meta.

I'm not saying that any of this is "good" or "bad" it's just the way the meta has worked itself out in W-space.

Thanks again to all that have contributed.



T3 aren't to blame because the other team blobs you. If T3 were no longer the best ship to use in wormhole space, your enemy would simply switch to the new "best ship" and we would be back to square one.

Dread blaping is a perfectly fine counter to T3 blobbing and no one should feel bad about using their home field advantage. You are not going to win any fights or improve you pvp experience if you are constantly scared of people using log off traps against you, so just grow a pair and you might learn something.
chris elliot
Treasury Department
Plug N Play
#43 - 2013-09-09 18:07:49 UTC
Quinn Corvez wrote:


T3 aren't to blame because the other team blobs you. If T3 were no longer the best ship to use in wormhole space, your enemy would simply switch to the new "best ship" and we would be back to square one.

Dread blaping is a perfectly fine counter to T3 blobbing and no one should feel bad about using their home field advantage. You are not going to win any or improve you pvp experience if you are constantly scared of people using log off traps against you, so just grow a pair and you might learn something.




Your post perfectly illustrates my earlier one about being terrible with the added bonus of showing the attitude to boot.

Eve is not about "Best Ships" it is about playing the rock, paper, scissors game and letting your piloting skill fill in the blanks. Every part of the game has to do this, there is no reason why we should be exempt. Having to go back to square one depending on what the other guy shows up with is kinda the point. That is where you learn things, with t3s you don't learn. You have a nearly perfect 50 km sphere of death around every gate and wormhole you jump through. All you have to do is approach and press f1. Hell, even things like pulsars do little to nothing to change the meta of armor brawling t3 fleets. How can you intentionally take a hit that large on purpose unless you were so overpowered to begin with?

You being unwilling to admit that someone else should have a viable alternative to killing you with the jagged boring edge of a mirror should illustrate to everyone else how much of a problem this is.
M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#44 - 2013-09-09 21:44:49 UTC
chris elliot wrote:
Currently we all know the problem with t3's is that they are too hard to kill without t3's of your own. Thus creating a vicious cycle of one upping either numbers, or dread/carrier support.


T3s aren't the problem, its WH mechanics. Mass limits plus the fact that fight on wormholes begin in a 10km sphere make kiting setups and BSs difficult to pull off at best.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#45 - 2013-09-09 21:44:56 UTC
Roime wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:

Resorting to extremes to come up with absurd numbers isn't how ships are balanced, after all, I could spend 1b on a Navy Brutix and get the same stats.



No, you couldn't get the same stats, and you don't spend a bil on a T1 BC, like everyone spends on their T3s. T2 fit with CNAM does 916 before heat, compare this with other ships and you'll realize that you are grasping fro straws for defending your precious toy, what figures are quoted doesn't change the relative balance.

Anyway, overheated figures are still perfectly acceptable when discussing T3s, ability to overheat longer than anything else is one of their core features.


Nobody spends 1b on a T1/Faction battlecruiser, but if you spend 1b on a T3 it is comperable to a 1b battlecruiser.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#46 - 2013-09-09 22:09:30 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Roime wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:

Resorting to extremes to come up with absurd numbers isn't how ships are balanced, after all, I could spend 1b on a Navy Brutix and get the same stats.



No, you couldn't get the same stats, and you don't spend a bil on a T1 BC, like everyone spends on their T3s. T2 fit with CNAM does 916 before heat, compare this with other ships and you'll realize that you are grasping fro straws for defending your precious toy, what figures are quoted doesn't change the relative balance.

Anyway, overheated figures are still perfectly acceptable when discussing T3s, ability to overheat longer than anything else is one of their core features.


Nobody spends 1b on a T1/Faction battlecruiser, but if you spend 1b on a T3 it is comperable to a 1b battlecruiser.


Think the 1v1 situation is rather wayne, in small gang scenarios (in wormholes, less than 20 is normal, as is more than five) t2 resists just bring that T3 on a different level. And until now, there simply wasn't an alternative besides the short-armed-T-rex that the old astarte has been (more gunrange, no utility highs and less buffer, worse sig, less scramrange in comparison to the proteus) just made the only alternative rather not desirable for wh fights. It had one of the proteus' strength without offering anything beyond.

The new Astarte though has two highs in excess, more raw damage, better application in it's favor - with only the tank being at a disadvantage. There is the Deimos and to an extent the Ishtar competing for heaviest holebrawler, with both being as small as a proteus, lacking key attributes the proteus has, but also offering mobility and ewar-resilence (at those fleetsizes quite important) and in the case of the ishtar: *moving dps*, like you can hug the hole and your *blasters* just travel their 700dps over to the foe, while running capstable neuts or w/e. Take two sets, one for each side. Just jump and reconnect :3

All three new alternatives are also significantly cheaper in their baseconfig (not that significantly compared to the astarte) and won't lose you SP. They all do not have the proteus' awesome scramrange I have to admit. Also, all those four hulls outperform any competing (battle-)cruisersized T1/navy-hull by far in any gangscenario, mostly regardless of the pimp you slap on a t1. If a wormhole-gang has you tackled, you don't move unless 100mn AB-cruiser and no serpentiswebs around, making it all a race of (your friendly logi x your resist profile) vs incoming dps. You can rotate as you want, but tech-II resistances means less logi to hold long enough to overwhelm the hostiles.

tl;dr: tech-II is near always the better choice in comparison to T1/faction/navy (excluding battleships for the neccessary unique traits of vindicator/bhaalgorn/armageddon) IF the ship is intended to fly in a logistics roam. Thus, the proteus will always be better than any navy brutix, regardless of #officer mods. It wins the 1v1 regardless of pimp on any of the two just cause gallente tech-II against blasters... with local tank specific subsystem.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2013-09-09 22:31:57 UTC
chris elliot wrote:

Eve is not about "Best Ships"


In general, eve may not be about the best ship but wormhole space is.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Jon Matick
State War Academy
Caldari State
#48 - 2013-09-09 22:49:42 UTC
Roime wrote:
No, you couldn't get the same stats, and you don't spend a bil on a T1 BC, like everyone spends on their T3s.

you REALLY don't get it do you...

we don't spend billions of isk on T3s. we spend billions of isk on whatever the best ship for our purpose is.
in WHs, yes this generally means t3s. so what?
I also know people who fly officer fit falcons and billion isk recon ships in whs. do those need a nerf because theyre better than T2 fit T1 ewar ships? hardly.

when they nerf T3s into uselessness, it will be command ships and we'll be flying around in 2bil isk astartes and absolutions.
for the last time, do NOT compare plex fit T3s to T2 fit T1/T2 ships. it isnt valid.

My Blog:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2013-09-10 05:27:21 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
chris elliot wrote:
Currently we all know the problem with t3's is that they are too hard to kill without t3's of your own. Thus creating a vicious cycle of one upping either numbers, or dread/carrier support.


T3s aren't the problem, its WH mechanics. Mass limits plus the fact that fight on wormholes begin in a 10km sphere make kiting setups and BSs difficult to pull off at best.


The huge jump in mass from T3s and BC/CS to Battleships is, IMO, a design flaw. It makes BS difficult to use for offensive work in w-space and greatly increases the value of T3s and Command Ships in w-space. It also means there's a huge gap between pilots who can fly a BC and those who've made the leap to a T3 or CS, because the intermediate step (in SP), the battleship, has limited application.

The other effect - that if you're jumping a BS through, it should be a good one - doesn't bother me as much. I have no objection to flying and shooting navy and pirate battleships. OTOH, it's yet another reason lower SP pilots have problems - they tend to be poorer.
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2013-09-10 05:30:25 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:

chris elliot wrote:

Eve is not about "Best Ships"

In general, eve may not be about the best ship but wormhole space is.

Pilot and mass limits sees to that. Maximum effect from each pilot, and from each ton is essential in w-space.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#51 - 2013-09-10 08:40:30 UTC
Jon Matick wrote:
Roime wrote:
No, you couldn't get the same stats, and you don't spend a bil on a T1 BC, like everyone spends on their T3s.

you REALLY don't get it do you...

we don't spend billions of isk on T3s. we spend billions of isk on whatever the best ship for our purpose is.
in WHs, yes this generally means t3s. so what?
I also know people who fly officer fit falcons and billion isk recon ships in whs. do those need a nerf because theyre better than T2 fit T1 ewar ships? hardly.

when they nerf T3s into uselessness, it will be command ships and we'll be flying around in 2bil isk astartes and absolutions.
for the last time, do NOT compare plex fit T3s to T2 fit T1/T2 ships. it isnt valid.


No, you don't really get it, do you? Even if you spent 2bil on the Astarte, it wouldn't be as resilient or versatile as a T3.

And no, recons don't need nerfing because they are just specialized versions of the T1 ships- they don't have 4-5 times the EHP (T1 versions have as much raw buffer), nor BS-class offensive capabilities, and only two rig slots. Celestis is even stronger in actual damping than Arazu. This is a case of T2 being an improvement over T1 in a balanced way. Very much like logistics ships, T2 is better but T1 is very usable.

Then consider T3. They are incredibly better than T1 combat/attack cruisers, and better than HACs*. Nice, not a problem for an expensive cruiser with SP loss drawback. But it just doesn't stop there. They are better than T1 battlecruisers. They used to better than T2 battlecruisers*. They are better than battleships. They are better than recons unless you need the extreme range. They can engage every ship class in game and expect to come out on top. This superiority spanning multiple ship classes is the issue, and also the very reason why they are the best ship for wh purposes.

* HOWEVER- the situation is quite possibly not as seriously off balance as it's been so far- CCP did things in the right order and fixed HACs and CSs before even planning T3. It will take several months to see what kind of meta shifts these cause, and work on the T3 rebalancing based on that knowledge. And again, many T3 features need buffing- reconfiguring them should be easier and financially viable (see my suggestion on reducing a rig slot), and there are way too many bad subsystems. SP loss is also something that could be discussed, while it is a balancing mechanic, it doesn't necessarily envourage PVP or increase enjoyment from the game.

Anyway, this part reveals your immaturity and limited capacity, which is really quite typical on these forums and makes continuing this discussion with you ultimately pointless:

Quote:
when they nerf T3s into uselessness


MAH PRECIOSSSSS GIEF SP BACK!!11

Ideally you would see rebalancing T3s as huge boon to w-space- toning down a ship class just gives more room for other doctrines, resulting in a more varied and interesting battlefield.

And lastly- They will still be the only general combat ship with a covert ops cloak, which guarantees their usefulness in w-space.

.
Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#52 - 2013-09-10 08:51:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Quinn Corvez
If T3s get a complete redesign great but if they just get nerfed, I think CCP should give us the sp back.

Every wormhole corp has encouraged their members to fly almost nothin but T3 ships due to the design of wormhole space. To turn around and say "that sp investement was a waste, deal with it" is unreasonable.
M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#53 - 2013-09-10 19:11:47 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
Roime wrote:

Ideally you would see rebalancing T3s as huge boon to w-space- toning down a ship class just gives more room for other doctrines, resulting in a more varied and interesting battlefield.



You don't get it. If T3s become useless WH alliances will fly only [insert new best stats:mass ship class here].

It won't be a boon to WH industry (especially if they are flat out nerfed without useless subs being buffed) and WHers will simply switch to the new best stats:mass ship

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#54 - 2013-09-10 19:44:20 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
Roime wrote:

No, you don't really get it, do you? Even if you spent 2bil on the Astarte, it wouldn't be as resilient or versatile as a T3.


Since CCP just LOLNOPE'd and lost my post, I EFTd up a standard Proteus and Astarte. Here are the stats, I'm not retyping the fit because its too damn hot here today for that. Both are using void and 5 hammerhead IIs.

Proteus

148k EHP
1050 DPS
1200m/s
Weak on cap, 1v1'ing an Astarte it would be capped out while the Astarte will have no such issue.

Astarte

110k EHP
1150 DPS
1030m/s
1 medium and 1 small neut
Small cap booster [with Navy 400s]


Losing some EHP (leaving its tank on part of that of a Loki) and speed is more than a fair trade for neut power (a fleet of Astartes would need fewer of the traditional Neut-Bhaals or Neut-Legions) DPS, and cap stability.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
chris elliot
Treasury Department
Plug N Play
#55 - 2013-09-11 05:02:03 UTC
Incindir Mauser wrote:
And it's lead to a lot of discussion internally on how to come up with a counter that doesn't involve dread blapping or carriers. Frankly, we haven't found one that works reliably. Even if we, or someone else did, that would instantly become the new meta.



Since you live in a pulsar... might I suggest Arty Machs?

Nice sig bloom all around, great tracking, good speed, long range, good damage, selectable damage types.. Whats not to like?
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#56 - 2013-09-11 05:49:50 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Roime wrote:

Ideally you would see rebalancing T3s as huge boon to w-space- toning down a ship class just gives more room for other doctrines, resulting in a more varied and interesting battlefield.



You don't get it. If T3s become useless WH alliances will fly only [insert new best stats:mass ship class here].

It won't be a boon to WH industry (especially if they are flat out nerfed without useless subs being buffed) and WHers will simply switch to the new best stats:mass ship


No you don't get.

Quote:
If T3s become useless


They don't become useless.

Meditate on this until you understand what rebalancing means.

.
Jon Matick
State War Academy
Caldari State
#57 - 2013-09-11 06:47:44 UTC
Roime wrote:
delusional ramblings

sigh... ok mate. whatever helps you sleep at night.
your entire premise is false so i cant really argue with you on anything reasonably so i'll summarize:

T3s are NOT better than recons at ewar
T3s are NOT better than command ships at DPS
T3s are NOT better at probing/scouting that a covops (i dont want to hear it, theyre not)

What T3s ARE better at than any of those ships is doing multiple things well. Not multiple things the best, multiple things well.
This makes them generalized ship which is EXACTLY what theyre meant to be.
Once again, you and people like you are pulling 'facts' out of thin air and screaming 'UNBALANCED" without any clue regarding what T3s actually are and how they compare to other ships.

Few notes on T3s:
as a note, I havnt flown a cloaky T3 in years because theyre strictly not useful if you have access to scanning alts (which lets face it, I do).
I'd also never take any T3 over a recon for ewar in a dedicated ewar role except a legion which is so bad at anything other than neuting that it's only fair it has one thing to be good at.
tengu in particular is LOL bad at ecm.
loki is only a good ship because it has good range webs (no where near recon range) and is literally the ONLY minmatar armour brawling ship so your options are rather limited. CCP's fault for not making the munin useful or giving us an armour bases minmatar CS.

My Blog:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#58 - 2013-09-11 08:59:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Terrorfrodo
Rek Seven wrote:
chris elliot wrote:

Eve is not about "Best Ships"


In general, eve may not be about the best ship but wormhole space is.


If that is true (I'm not sure it is), then wormhole space is in desperate need of getting fixed, because if there is a "best ship" anywhere in EVE, that area of EVE is terribly broken.

edit: My own feeling towards T3s have evolved somewhat since I started using them heavily myself about 9 months ago. I guess I'm biased now like most people in w-space, though I still try to look at it objectively. I fell in love with T3s mostly because of the countless options you have in devising fittings and fine-tuning them. A Proteus or Tengu is not really one ship, it's like an entire ship class all of its own. (And the people saying that there are only one or two good fits for every T3 are terrible at this game.)

The most important use of T3s in my opinion is that of the cloaky heavy tackler. For that role a ship must have a heavy tank and good tackling abilities, because it just takes a while to get non-cloaky reinforcements on grid. There is no other ship in EVE that can fill this well; Force Recons and Covert Ops are way too squishy. So I think T3s must keep their capabilities to have a covops cloak, strong tank and good tackle, and scanning bonuses.

However it is good that cloaky T3s do little damage, and this could probably even be nerfed further. Cloaky ships are generally not good at actually killing things in EVE, and the Proteus and Loki may be a little too strong in that regard. The ability to remain completely invisible behind a wormhole is very powerful and must be offset by some disadvantages.

The main other area where T3s are too strong is their ability to remain alive under remote reps. It just makes zero sense for a smaller force to engage a slightly larger force of T3s with logi support, because it is impossible for them to kill ANYTHING. Sometimes a smaller force would say "**** this, we engage them and kill some of them even if we will likely lose more", but if you know that you have no chance to kill even one ship, then what's the point? This discourages fights extremely.

I'm not sure how to solve this, but the combination of very high resists AND huge raw hp needs to be looked at. Maybe a way to go is to tie high resists to a subsystem that cannot be combined with having high dps. And if you do not use the resists subsystem, your resists will actually be on t1 level or slightly better. So you could make a T3 with good buffer and high damage but low resists, or strong resists but reduced damage.

.
Gypsio III
State War Academy
Caldari State
#59 - 2013-09-11 10:16:44 UTC
I'm a bit uncomfortable with the way that WH gangs are always dominated by T3s. In normal space, the recent balancing has made a huge array of ships viable, but WH space has remained stagnant and lacking diversity. Of course, much of this is to do with WH mechanics, which is an entirely separate issue. What?
Bleichrodt
Hyenas
#60 - 2013-09-11 12:08:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Bleichrodt
Mr Kidd wrote:
I've come to the conclusion that I don't care what CCP does to T3's as long as we have, in return, some viable cloaky dps/tank options. In w-space it's all about hiding your fleet. T3's fill that role perfectly. Without T3's what we have are wet paper bags. Left to utilize what is left if T3's are nerfed to inadequacy, we won't have viable w-space pew without having larger fleets.

I've said it several times, null/lo have force projection which hides their fleet compositions. W-space has no local and cloaks to hide our fleets. We've got to have a viable cloaky dps/tank class of ships. Having the title of T3 doesn't really matter to me.



This man is spot on +1
...also that Roime guy saying that T3s are better than multiple ship classes-way to over-simplify things and discount heaps of considerations in order to force the point you trying to makeWhat?