Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Don't forget losing 4 days of skills every time you die (or eject).

They look cool.

This doesn't make any sense

You currently want ship progression to be Tech1 -> Tech3 -> Tech2

Why would tech 3 which is supposed to be highly advanced be worse than a simple tech 2?

Because frustrated loud mouths with little brains said so.
And it will work like it worked on Gallente nerf to oblivion for almost 5 years, their logs showed nothing despite hundreds of pages and literally thousands of posts from players claiming how bad and nerf those ships were.
The answer was "our logs and graphics clearly show they're good, just look at", indeed we all know how good they were but never mind, they're supposed to be the ones knowing something about what they do right? -Eve history shows it's not always the case.

Yep, player feedback and stuff etc.

And Gnosis is awesome at it? :)

I disagree that T3 cruisers fail at it. For instance, I can fly a nullified, covert Tengu explorer through null looking for sigs. When I find a combat site, I can park in an NPC station, swap modules and proceed to do the site without the need for a second combat ship. The only problem is, I can only do this swap in friendly or neutral territory. In my opinion, there should be a way to swap modules in a hostile territory as well, at least to some extent.

Beyond that, T3 hulls are perfectly fine. In fact, they may be the most balanced thing in game. The problem is solely with subsystems. Take for instance the Tengu. I think we all agree that the Ejection Bay is absolutely amazing. But when was the last time you saw a Tengu with Magnetic Infusion Basin? Those are the ones that need balancing and fixing before we start inventing the wheel.

All of the subs add or remove slots.

No **** sherlock one is a COMBAT sub.

durp

Reading this thread reminded me of something I learned in EVE a few months ago...







**implied facepalm**






I agree with the guy who said it is good that CCP doesn't let players balance the ships. I have to wonder if some of the posters in this thread even read what they put down.

So what you're saying is that price should be considered as a balancing factor? No, it shouldn't. Some pilots can barely afford T1 cruisers while others buy and sell super-capitals on a daily basis. Price should never be a balancing point because the distribution of wealth in Eve is itself unbalanced.

There's really only one change you need to make to Strategic Cruisers:

• Eliminate rigs and calibration

Yes, I'll miss the occasional engineering rig as well - but it wouldn't fundamentally change the class (other than making it less OP on the extreme end of things). The ability to carry and swap-out subsystems and components is already extremely advantageous, despite the associated costs. And you can still do goofy things like run 100MN afterburners - it just makes it less feasible and more of a sacrifice since you'll be using those lows for reactor controls, power diagnostics or capacitor power relays.

As has been previously mentioned, some of the offensive subsystems do need some buffing, such as the Magnetic Infusion Basin (+5% rate of fire per) and Rifling Launcher Pattern (+5% kinetic damage per) on the Tengu.