These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

[Post-Rubicon] T3 Rebalance Discussion
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2013-10-03 13:48:13 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
doesn't really justify anything it's an odd mechanic that should be removed but odds are they would increase the training time to compensate which makes more sense really


So you are saying you'd have no problem pausing your training queue for 3-5 days every time you lose a ship?
Veyer Erastus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2013-10-03 13:50:08 UTC
As a Legion owner i just don't get it how someone can call it's tank overpowered. Legion hull has the most useless faction resists in the game. You don't fight angels with lasers. While Loki/Proteus can stack resists for apropriate pirate faction's and achieve usefull tank, Legion is completely useless outside of low-level WHs.
Icarus Able
Refuse.Resist
#43 - 2013-10-03 13:56:29 UTC
Veyer Erastus wrote:
As a Legion owner i just don't get it how someone can call it's tank overpowered. Legion hull has the most useless faction resists in the game. You don't fight angels with lasers. While Loki/Proteus can stack resists for apropriate pirate faction's and achieve usefull tank, Legion is completely useless outside of low-level WHs.



Useless? You have balanced resists that is awesome.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2013-10-03 13:57:03 UTC
Syrias Bizniz wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Syrias Bizniz wrote:

My understanding of the different tech levels is
T1 Generic hulls that can do just about anything
T2 Specialised hull that can do 1 thing really well
T3 Specializable hulls that you CAN specialize into a role or do 2-3 things at a time, if you choose to specialise a T3 it should outperfom a T2 but if its just say a probing combat ship its not much better then HAC's


I feel it's okay to have a T3 outperform a HAC in terms of EHP and so on, but my main problem is, for the HAC to be as effective as it can get, you need HAC V which is a Rank 6 skill. The Subsystems of the T3 are all Rank 1 skills and open a wide spectrum for the pilot. He can do Recon stuff, HAC stuff, Command Ship stuff, Cov Ops stuff without the need to put a single skillpoint into these ships. He ends with 'A Rank V' skill (5x1, you know) that will obsolete 2(or 3 if you count logi) rank 6 skills, a rank 4 skill, and a Rank 8 skill.



Except that they don't if you fly around with all rank 1 or 2 subs your have little more than a battlecruiser with generous fitting options. All of these stats that everyone keeps quoting around with level 5 subs.

I'm still waiting to see this 800DPS 200keHP rail proteus fit. He's best I can manage 176,000 with a T2 fit that includes three trimarks. 747 DPS w/drones. Unsurprisingly, it moves at a whopping 451m/s

So far as it goes
You NEVER take a T3 over a logi, because the range on the logi subs is so pathtetic as to be near useless outside of a couple edge cases (WH reps, and blops drops) otherwise a T3 logi can barely rep across the distance of a warp bubble
Recons point/web/ECM better than the T3s do across the board, no T3 gets a fuel bonus, no T3 gets a cyno cycle bonus, the loki gets no painter bonus. You only use T3's in a recon roll is a fleet environment, they can tank, recons....not so much.
HACs, well, that sucks, I said when they were doing the hac reballance that they didn't go far enough, I'm still holding to that
There is no T3 that can simulate a HICTOR it simply doesn't exist.




Yeah, funny how people are talking about All V for Strat cruisers so the skill-benefits are maxed out, huh? Come on, it's RANK 1 skills, if you don't put in those 3 days per skill, then you wouldn't put in those 21 days per skill for a HAC or Recon, would you?

Also, towards that Proteus:

I might not achieve the 200k EHP, ...


[Proteus, Rails]
Federation Navy Magnetic Field Stabilizer
Federation Navy Magnetic Field Stabilizer
Federation Navy Magnetic Field Stabilizer
Damage Control II
1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner
Republic Fleet Warp Scrambler
Federation Navy Stasis Webifier

250mm Railgun II, Javelin M
250mm Railgun II, Javelin M
250mm Railgun II, Javelin M
250mm Railgun II, Javelin M
250mm Railgun II, Javelin M
250mm Railgun II, Javelin M

Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Anti-Explosive Pump I

Proteus Defensive - Augmented Plating
Proteus Electronics - Friction Extension Processor
Proteus Engineering - Power Core Multiplier
Proteus Offensive - Hybrid Propulsion Armature
Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors

Hammerhead II x5




But heated this thing does 1036 dps.
176k EHP
499m/s

Implants used:

Slave Set,

Hybrid 5% (20m ISK)


~~~


I know, i know, faction fit!!1 So daring... and slaves! So ... ridicoulous!


Throw in some Links, and you can 'scramkite' at ~17km preheat, , where you will shoot Antimatter with 899 dps before heat. You're welcome!




Edit:


Towards the last block of text, i think you're right, especially about the logi stuff. The bonus is right now pretty wasted. I suggested giving it at least *some* range.



Ship itself costs 1.12bil in jita right now
Clone costs another 2.1
Stats 132k eHP (omni) no slaves
499m/s (643over heated)
Align 10.5s under prop, 7.76 (my double plated megathon aligns almost exactly that speed)
DPS 620 /729 over heated (w/o drones) 778/887 overheated w/drone 9000m + 22500m javelin tracking 0.032rad/s

Good boat if you are willing to put 3bil into danger daily.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#45 - 2013-10-03 15:50:02 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Derath Ellecon wrote:
So you say you have little to no experience with the Proteus, yet you call it OP.

Yes the Proteus can be fit with a huge buffer tank. Guess what you won't be doing with that fit. Yea damage. For one, your DPS will suffer. Then add to that, you can't shoot far past your nose. Then for the icing, you are a slow brick that will be lucky to catch anything and stay in range.

There is a reason many gallente blasterboats get fit for shield tanking. Armor tanking makes them too slow to apply their short range damage.

Sure you can configure it for high DPS. It is still a bit of a brick, so you can easily find your self getting kited to death. Also keep in mind a proteus gets to apply that damage primarily to the highest natural resist of many ships (kinetic/thermal).

So yea it's easy to run the numbers in EFT and conclude the proteus is OP. Go fly one first and then we will talk.

Also keep in mind, with the SP loss, and lack of ejecting, a proteus pilot has to pretty much go all in when fighting, since you are in brawling range.

So you're saying it's not OP? Lol


It is not.

People must start to stop the nonsense of assuming every Proteus pilot or every Proteus they cross have slave sets+hardwirings and strong boosters, armor links running and titan bonus. Then we might actually be able to have a beginning of serious discussion, this is also true for any other T3

After all ships rebalance lately if something T3's are not any more the only viable choice like T3's vs HACs, you can find many ships now doing better and for sure at lower cost. (drop 150 blatrixes over 150 lokis lets see the isk loss war what happens)
Paper stuff like eft/pyfa it's nice, flying them it's another thing, then the environment you play with these ships also affect quite strongly the opinion on how op these might be or not.
Bring officer/faction fits with super links pirate implants sets and strong boosters fits to the discussion brings nothing positive constructive or determinative factor, those are possibilities, not the only possible one to make them worth or it would only mean how bad those ships are.

The regular pilot T2 fitting his ship with T1 rigs no implants yadaya will always have to make trade offs to get either DPS or tank, it's possible to make a good combination of both and this is the reason why T3's are so awesome.
Of course and once again once you start throwing isk at fittings and rigs etc benefits might become exponentially good but again instead of flying T2 fitted command ships or hacs if you throw lots of isk in they also profit exponentially from those fits.

The fact those are not cheapo throw away ships is good, this single factor avoids large fleets of them because not only those can be countered but puts huge holes in alliances wallets when it comes to reimbursement programs, none of them despite propaganda stuff can afford to loose several fleets of those every week for months of war or being in permanent war.
It's more of an awesome tool for smaller entities to harass larger ones which is good.

So to finish this useless point of view and wall of text, why don't you guys start by setting the bases for T3 discussion?
T2 fitted, T1 rigs, no implants and stuff etc.
This is imho the only way to have a decent discussion about T3s and what might be wrong/good/too good and propose ideas.

Let the haters start hating.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#46 - 2013-10-03 16:02:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Sme Ematu wrote:
OP can you explain what your goal with this thread is? ... You give no reason why buffs are required except that you want them and make assumptions about ship strength that you have no experience with.

The purpose of this thread was merely to have an open discussion. With respect to my suggestions to buff the two Tengu systems, the new SoE Covert Ops cruiser will be putting out over 800 dps; the Proteus puts out over 500, the Legion is less and I believe the Loki is on the low end of the spectrum. The Tengu only puts out 300 and change, so the increased rate of fire on the Covert subsystem was just to buff this to put it more in-line with the other races. As for the Rifling Launcher subsystem, there's no dps increase - just the ability to apply damage more effectively.

Again, I'm not proposing suggestions for the 3 other classes as I don't really have a lot of experience for them.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#47 - 2013-10-03 16:04:58 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
...why don't you guys start by setting the bases for T3 discussion?
T2 fitted, T1 rigs, no implants and stuff etc.
This is imho the only way to have a decent discussion about T3s and what might be wrong/good/too good and propose ideas.

Sure, that's more than reasonable.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Radhe Amatin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2013-10-04 09:05:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Radhe Amatin
Minnie Ryder wrote:
My issue with the t3s as they currently stand is mainly that t3s are supposed to be generalists, passable in many roles but not excellent at any one. Right now they're better than almost any t2 ship cruiser sized and below, and rival everything except attack BCs for pure dps output. That's not generalization, as in t3, but specializtion.


You are confusing the role of a ship with its general stats.
Hacs are supposed to be better at a specific role, that role its not defined but its amount of ehp and the amount of dmg it can push because lets just say it it straight that is the center this topic is orbiting.

Besides in term of stats t3 should be better then t2 since they are build using sleeper technologies which is far more advanced then empires.
Nerfing t3 to be sub par to t2 hull will kill the ship and its use in wormhole space where its tank and damage really helps besides pvp stuff. So before CCP stats to tampering with t3 they should consider all the uses of this ships.
I agree that pvp should play a role in rebalancing the ships but if u rebalance the ships having only that aspect of the game in mind is bad because not all players in eve are pvpers.
Previous page123