These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

The great T3 rebalance

Author
Odithia
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2014-08-22 08:04:27 UTC
A lot of people have been complaining that Strategic Cruisers are extremely strong, boasting battleship like offensive and defensive power in a nimble hull for a now competitive price point. The SP loss is still a deterrent to newer players but bittervets won’t mind much.

After a quick search, I havn't found any recent DEV post about possible T3 rebalance.

Do you think T3 cruiser are overpowered? why?
How do you guys see T3 Cruiser in a balanced game?

One idea I had was to make them similar in power to T2 cruisers, their strength would be their versatility and the surprise effect.
Ditch the SP loss
Remove their rig slots
Completely rewamp the subsystems so that the offensive and defensive power don’t exceed that of a battlecruiser or HAC. So that it can never be more effective at EWAR than a Recon. But could get say 1 of the 2 "recon bonus" and get a bit more tank or gank compared to force recon.
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#2 - 2014-08-22 08:08:42 UTC
I have to say i sorta like them as they are, i just wish it wasnt so skewed, i mean if you go by the numbers a tengu is "objectively better" then a legion...

I'd much rather they equalize them by buffing the weaker ones to the and maybe nerfing the big boys a little then they do so by taking the nerf bat to the knees of the entire top 3...
Voxinian
#3 - 2014-08-22 08:53:34 UTC
They are not overpowered (as in dps), the Orthrus cruiser has a bigger punch then a Tengu at the moment... and that is not even a battle cruiser.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2014-08-22 10:18:01 UTC
Since the balancing pass to most of the sub caps, i don't see how T3 ships can be considered overpowered anymore.
Odithia
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2014-08-22 10:36:06 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Since the balancing pass to most of the sub caps, i don't see how T3 ships can be considered overpowered anymore.

Well if you compare a Tengu to an Eagle or a Cerberus, there is little point in using the laters.

I suppose the same applies with every other race, except maybe the Protheus/Ishtar.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2014-08-22 10:47:55 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Since the balancing pass to most of the sub caps, i don't see how T3 ships can be considered overpowered anymore.



They are still unbalanced between themselves, and there are some weirdnesses.. Liek the stupdly huge EHP pool that a proteus can reach that create NOT fun and not interesting situations in high sec and low sec.

Some subsystems are competley crap and need to be redone (liek the mixed missiles and guns from the loki.. make it a full missiles one dammit).

The eletronics subsystems are almsot always the Ewar ones, with no reason to use the others. Put and extra slot for the others if you want those to be used.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#7 - 2014-08-22 12:06:07 UTC
CCP have stated that they will land between T1 and T2 cruisers. Expect many nerfs but also a few buffs but mostly massive nerfs.
Elisiist Aldent
Vertex Armada
The Initiative.
#8 - 2014-08-22 12:14:12 UTC
T3 is kinda the jack of all trades. Just the problem with a jack of all trades is that whatever the T3 can do.. something can do better!

The question is.. how's that T3 rolling up on you fit out? (unless you've just memorized the looks of every single subsystem)
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#9 - 2014-08-22 12:24:00 UTC
Elisiist Aldent wrote:
T3 is kinda the jack of all trades. Just the problem with a jack of all trades is that whatever the T3 can do.. something can do better!

The question is.. how's that T3 rolling up on you fit out? (unless you've just memorized the looks of every single subsystem)


T2 should be better than T3 in a specific area that is their specialisation ... but T3 should be able too do multiple things at the same time ... which is perhaps the main issue atm .. its a case of being able too bring a T3 too do the job of 2 or 3 ships .. for a fraction of the cost and skillpoints .. the trade-off being some effectiveness and eggs in one basket ..

remove rigs and SP loss .. make subs cheap .. so they can be interchangeable .. build the fittings/HP etc .. into the ship .. so subs only effect the ships bonuses .. this would make the hassle of changing subs and mods much less of a problem. and makes it easier too compare too other ships ..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#10 - 2014-08-22 12:24:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
CCP have stated that they will land between T1 and T2 cruisers. Expect many nerfs but also a few buffs but mostly massive nerfs.



i dont see severe nerfs. t3 are the carrot to dangle to have people move to wh's. nerf t3 to far, why buy them? no one buys...,why be in the wh's.

why rebalance is hard, how to control them but
not have eve just screw it and pay tithes to tne 0.0 moon goo crews
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#11 - 2014-08-22 12:25:38 UTC
Elisiist Aldent wrote:
T3 is kinda the jack of all trades. Just the problem with a jack of all trades is that whatever the T3 can do.. something can do better!

The question is.. how's that T3 rolling up on you fit out? (unless you've just memorized the looks of every single subsystem)

The problem with a "jack of all trades" is that eve is a game of specializations. If you can do everything with 1 ship at once, but not as well as something that focuses on just 1, then 9 out of 10 times youll lose to the specialized ship. if you can do anything, but have to refit for roles, then it would be vastly more effective to just go to a carrier/dockup and exchange for a more powerful (and cheaper) specialized ship.

All nerfing them will do, is take away more value from living in womrhole space, since the only thing worth looting at that point will be blue-loot for NPC buy orders.
Odithia
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2014-08-22 13:55:20 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:

All nerfing them will do, is take away more value from living in womrhole space, since the only thing worth looting at that point will be blue-loot for NPC buy orders.

It's not just about nerfing.
It's about balancing every subsistem so each one has its use.
It's about finding alternative to rigs that kill the purpose of those ships.
And it's about balancing the ships so that they don't completely dwarf T2 cruisers. Hence, the nerfing part would only affect the "super HAC of doom" subsystems.


Also I believe that a good rewamp of this class of ship has good chances to increase the demmand of such ships.

Balancing all this is a huge pile of work due to how the subsistems interact wich eachother, maybe that's why it's hasn't happened yet.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#13 - 2014-08-22 14:12:05 UTC
I don't like the idea of having no cpu and scanning/powergrid rigs on t3.
They would have to be completely changed.

It would decrease their uses.

I think main problem is the tank.
Dps and utility are certainly nice but not overpowered in any way.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2014-08-22 14:16:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Odithia wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Since the balancing pass to most of the sub caps, i don't see how T3 ships can be considered overpowered anymore.

Well if you compare a Tengu to an Eagle or a Cerberus, there is little point in using the laters.

I suppose the same applies with every other race, except maybe the Protheus/Ishtar.


So why is the Cerberus one of the most popular ships for a shield fleet?

Other than a slight hit point nerf to some of the subsystems, there isn't much need for a T3 nerf. HACs, recons, interdictors and logistics cruisers can all do things that T3 struggle or can't do. The cost and SP loss justify their abilities IMO.
Bohneik Itohn
10.K
#15 - 2014-08-22 14:21:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Bohneik Itohn
T3's are only going to be nerfed in a few minor respects, and even then it's going to be a few select subsystems getting the axe that unbalance the rest of the ship.

Remember, T3's were created to be effective and versatile in WH space primarily. That doesn't mean that they have carte blanche to be unbalanced anywhere else, and that's the issue being addressed, but it does mean that they will never drop below the point of being effective in WH's. Corps in C5's and C6's rely heavily on their T3 sub-cap support to control both PvP and PvE engagements, wringing out every last drop of efficacy these ships have. Ruin that and there will be a lot of problems.

As mentioned by CCP during the last fanfest, the goal isn't to nerf t3's into the ground, it's to bring the unbalanced subsystems into check and to buff the subsystems that aren't being used so that T3's can enjoy the full versatility they were designed for.

I expect T3's to get an actual true to heart rebalance in every sense of the word, with no real drop in desirability or function, just a squashing of the outlying abuses of particular combinations of effects. Talk has also been floating around about removable rigs so that people don't have to stockpile hulls, defeating one of t he primary purposes of versatility.

Call me an optimist, but I think in the end T3's are going to experience an overall buff.

Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!  - Freyya

Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help.

Ghaustyl Kathix
Rising Thunder
#16 - 2014-08-22 14:54:30 UTC
I think when he was being interviewed on Down the Pipe, Fozzie mentioned nerfing the augmented plating subsystem, but he didn't mention other nerfs. They did say "rigs won't hold you back anymore" and "we won't be nerfing them into the ground," so I'm pretty hopeful that they found a way to remove the limitation of rigs for T3s without cutting the rig slots, like rigging subsystems themselves or taking the rigs off of them.

But yeah, mostly I think it'll be a buff to the lesser-used systems and T3s.
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2014-08-22 15:48:52 UTC
Bohneik Itohn wrote:
T3's are only going to be nerfed in a few minor respects, and even then it's going to be a few select subsystems getting the axe that unbalance the rest of the ship.

Remember, T3's were created to be effective and versatile in WH space primarily. That doesn't mean that they have carte blanche to be unbalanced anywhere else, and that's the issue being addressed, but it does mean that they will never drop below the point of being effective in WH's. Corps in C5's and C6's rely heavily on their T3 sub-cap support to control both PvP and PvE engagements, wringing out every last drop of efficacy these ships have. Ruin that and there will be a lot of problems.

As mentioned by CCP during the last fanfest, the goal isn't to nerf t3's into the ground, it's to bring the unbalanced subsystems into check and to buff the subsystems that aren't being used so that T3's can enjoy the full versatility they were designed for.

I expect T3's to get an actual true to heart rebalance in every sense of the word, with no real drop in desirability or function, just a squashing of the outlying abuses of particular combinations of effects. Talk has also been floating around about removable rigs so that people don't have to stockpile hulls, defeating one of t he primary purposes of versatility.

Call me an optimist, but I think in the end T3's are going to experience an overall buff.

Except CCP also said they want them to be weaker in ANY regard to a T2. but able to fulfill multiple roles.

in other words, in EVE meta, they would never be used, because they would become too easy to overwhelm with specialized ships.

CCP pointed out in their graphs they wanted them to have less fight than a HAC, less logi than a logistics, etc, but be able to fit pieces of each. fact is, if they balance it around doing multiple roles, then to be relevant, fitting them for solely one would HAVE to be mroe powerful than a T2 because of the fitting space, which makes the rebalance irrelevant, and rebalancing them so that even focused they arent as good as a T2 would mean that when fulfiling their "multiple role" **** theyll be almost useless.

and no, throwing an extra T3-and-a-half of mods/subs in your inventory with a mobile depot is NOT justifiable as "being able to fulfill multiple roles", like so many propose, because relying on a mobile depot for your specialization means you lose your defining trait the second shooting starts (and lets not forget you need ammo and loot room aswell)
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#18 - 2014-08-22 15:52:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
No they aren't overpowered - however I don't think the balance of bonuses and penalties is quite right - i.e. that afore mentioned augmented plating sub-system where the sig penalty associated with the massive increase in buffer HP is too small (in some cases even lower than the resist or active tank bonused ones which should be the ones with the smaller sigs). While they shouldn't be quite as big as BCs or BSs that extra HP should come with a sig and possibility mobility penalties that is much closer to that class than that of the smaller cruisers.

Removing rig slots would be utterly daft for reasons which is a whole topic of its own and taking the knife to HP or similar isn't much better. There are however quite a few areas where they don't have appropriate penalties for the bonus certain sub-systems give IMO. There are also a few tweaks needed to make certain configurations more useful.


TBH I think people massively under-estimate how much the current t3s are a driving force for the game, a goal which newer players work towards, save up for, etc. a shiny target to hunt and kill and vice versa to own, watering that down would do quite a lot of damage to the game.
Bohneik Itohn
10.K
#19 - 2014-08-22 15:58:56 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
[
Except CCP also said they want them to be weaker in ANY regard to a T2. but able to fulfill multiple roles.


Who, when and where? The talk from fanfest and Down the pipe is easily found and recorded for all to see. I haven't seen anything about bringing them down below T2's, which is just a silly concept and defies all reasonable practices from a balance standpoint.

There is no gap to fill between T1's and T2's, and versatility will not make the ships more appealing than T2's for WHers if they fall behind T2's. The majority of WH corps are fully capable of manufacturing their own T2's and bugger the logistics of having a different ship for every role in the POS.

I'm not getting all teary-eyed here or wishing upon that twinkly star in my heart, it's just a simple fact. There is no place for a ship between T1's and T2's. That's where faction ships sit and they fill those roles better than T3's ever will.

Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!  - Freyya

Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help.

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#20 - 2014-08-22 16:09:12 UTC
I definitely think there is a problem with T3s being OP relative to T1 and Pirate Battleships. For example you don't see many Maelstroms in null or WH space, even though they are nominally more expensive than a T3. I don't know if the answer is to nerf the T3s or buff some of the battleships, but I would think that CCP would like to see more of a balance.
123Next pageLast page