These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Scylla] Strategic Cruiser Defensive Subsystems

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dean Dewitt
Universal Force Army
Neutral Lands Association
#181 - 2015-02-28 14:29:54 UTC
Why is always the tengu which is the most nerf? ok the tengu is more used than before especially in PVP by big alliances but is it the reason they should be nerf? Big alliances use tengu with railgun and that's exactly what is going to be rebalanced? When was the last time the tengu was changed? Stop changing things that doesn't need to be changed. The tengu is most used in fleet the others T3 are usable in solo, the only thing the tengu can do in solo is PVE.

Don't nerf the tengu because 0.0 alliance use them.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#182 - 2015-02-28 14:56:22 UTC
The Tengu *can* solo pvp, it just costs a lot lot more than other solo pvp vessels and isn't especially good at it.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#183 - 2015-02-28 15:24:47 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
The Tengu *can* solo pvp, it just costs a lot lot more than other solo pvp vessels and isn't especially good at it.


The 100mn/active tanked fit does pretty well - though you need deep pockets and more skill and nerve than I have to produce results with it.
O2 jayjay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#184 - 2015-02-28 23:06:22 UTC
+1

For the armor tanked ships they need a bigger sig increase. Great start towards the t3 nerf.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#185 - 2015-02-28 23:38:21 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Why are T3s in need of an emergency defensive subsystem nerf after all these years of being unchanged? Surely just waiting to do an actual balance pass would be the sensible thing to do.

Because the last set of re-balances left them being Substantially OP AND in use. No one cares about OP ships that no one uses

As for why not balence them.. Well we all know it's on CCP's Agenda.. but remember, rebalacing T3's is a LOT more complex than it sounds.. 5subs per ship, 5 variations of each sub. So that's what? 25 Potential combo's per ship.. so a T3 Rebalance is like rebalancing 100 ships in one go.

That's not something you do quickly or easily. We all know they need it, CCP says so too, but I think they want to finish the rest of the balances and then deal with T3's once everything else it done.. Honestly it will likely be a complete overhaul of the T3 Cruisers..


I for one can't wait till they get to them.. but for now, this is a start.. and with the new 6week cycle, they can address issues more quickly should they come up.
Bogdo Lama
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#186 - 2015-03-01 06:26:03 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Spencer Owl wrote:
Saw this from a mile away. While I love my T3s, this is necessary to make battleships viable. The gap between T2 cruiser and T3 cruiser is way to big. I shouldn't be able to fly a cruiser around with the tank of a BS, sig of a cruiser, and the DPS of a T2 AC. It undermines the BS class. While BSs are still too easily blapped by dreads this is a start in the right direction.

That said, I'd like to see some minor changes to grid/cpu and the removal of skill loss.

Just about everything else works out.

Keep up the good work CCP.

PS - who do I have to pleasure around here to get some help with the Rev?


None of this makes the battleship class more viable. This change only achieves dragging T3's down a bit which while a bit sad to see is necessary.

I tested out my tengu on SISI and I tanked a thanatos and Orthrus quite easily pre-change. SISI has already been updated to the new format and I wouldn't be as game to try it out now I think.


I have also tanked thanny on sisi with triple rep hyper. Just saying..
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
#187 - 2015-03-01 10:26:04 UTC
The rail Tengu is used at far ranges and disengages when things get close enough to start shooting it with good DPS. I don't think a nerf to tank is going to change much at all.

There are all our dominion

Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin
Bogdo Lama
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#188 - 2015-03-01 10:35:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Bogdo Lama
James Zimmer wrote:
First, I'm glad Strategic Cruisers are getting nerfed. When the standard response to a Proteus being in the fight is "just dock up", because there is no good counter other than a blob or more T3s, the ship class is OP.

That being said, I don't think this quite addresses the issue with T3 cruisers, and I'll be excited to see what else CCP has in store. In my opinion, T3 cruisers are supposed to be highly appealing because they are more flexible than anything, not because they are flat out better than everything. However, in the current state of affairs, T3s can out-tank, out-DPS, out-run and out-range T2 cruisers, ALL AT THE SAME TIME. They are flat out better combat ships than every sub-cap with the exception of marauders. Frigates, destroyers, a handful of cruisers and marauders still have function because of niche roles, but if it wasn't for a high amount of SP required to fly T3s well, T3s would obsolete everything else.

I would personally like to see the SP loss go away, ship cost to go down, and even stronger subsystems, but subsystems that came with substantial drawbacks as well. Sure you can tank your T3 to insane EHP, but kiss your DPS goodbye, or you can project at great distances, but you're a slow, clumsy glass cannon. In general, I think that a T3, fit for general PvP, should be a bit weaker than a HAC, because we already have HACs and we don't need duplicate ship classes. Right now, T3s are just super-bonused HACs.


You keep talking about T3's as if they were just "some stupid super T2 cruisers that arent needed in this game". I cant understand this kinda mentality. I read your post but i cant still understand why you dont like them.

T3's arent flat out better in everything than all other sub caps. Example why are ishtars used so much if T3 is better?
Imho T3 is supposed to be better than hacs in all classes they do cost more than twice as much. And after all they are T3 not T1,5 as in T3 even sounds like it should be better than T2. Besides whats the whole point of this ship class. Hull that you can customize to suit for your needs. Would it be BS tank, 100mn ab, cloaky nulified or exploring or whatever. And there is nothing wrong with this. I like T3's as they are and like to them stay as they are. I like to fly them and i like to kill them theyre aweosome fun on both sides. Besides they are rather easy to kill..

Yes ive also used alot T3's. I did check my kb stats for most used ships (different char). And my top 5 looks like this.

1. Tengu
2. Loki
3. Cynanbal
4. Drake
5. Tornado

What actually makes me bit sad is that theres no BS's on this list. Not even on top 10 list. And why is this even i love to fly BS's aswell? I think mostly because BS's are so big and slow. As in if theres a fight 35jumps away. And i have to choose between BS, T3 or HAC. One thing is sure i wont be flying that 70jumps in BS.
Tineoidea Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#189 - 2015-03-01 14:25:14 UTC
Bogdo Lama wrote:
You keep talking about T3's as if they were just "some stupid super T2 cruisers that arent needed in this game". I cant understand this kinda mentality. I read your post but i cant still understand why you dont like them.


As it is right now, T3s are super HACs. Recon fitted T3s arent op (or at least dont feel that op) like HAC fitted T3s. They feel much better than normal recons but dont get that silly borderline opness, that they get when you switch them to do both damage and tank well. One part of the problem is the power of medium rails, as Lokis arent that much used, blaster ships are easy to kite, laser legions easily neuted out and HAM/HM legions either dont have the required range or DPS. A ship that shoots up to 120km with ok-ish DPS, good alpha, forgetable cap consumption, very good speed and super fast align time on the other hand is not so cool.
The only way to flat out counter T3s is to bring even more of them and maybe sensor damp/tracking disrupt them. But EWAR only has a limited range and Tengus can easily shoot from afar.

Quote:
T3's arent flat out better in everything than all other sub caps. Example why are ishtars used so much if T3 is better?


Because of Sentrys are the one weapon system that is even more broken than railguns :)

Quote:
Imho T3 is supposed to be better than hacs in all classes they do cost more than twice as much. And after all they are T3 not T1,5 as in T3 even sounds like it should be better than T2. Besides whats the whole point of this ship class. Hull that you can customize to suit for your needs. Would it be BS tank, 100mn ab, cloaky nulified or exploring or whatever. And there is nothing wrong with this. I like T3's as they are and like to them stay as they are. I like to fly them and i like to kill them theyre aweosome fun on both sides. Besides they are rather easy to kill..


Easy to kill? They are the hardest ships to kill in all of EVE! Maybe the T3 destroyers are a bit harder if they are able to maintain a long distance to the enemy, but T3s are very very strong ships and outclass other ships in their price tag with ease. The main part about T3 cruisers isnt their flexbility, as this is not getting much use. There are only a few different really strong fits for each of them, which is pretty sad. They are not versatile. They are just stronger HACs.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#190 - 2015-03-01 14:27:17 UTC
Bogdo Lama wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
[---


None of this makes the battleship class more viable. This change only achieves dragging T3's down a bit which while a bit sad to see is necessary.

I tested out my tengu on SISI and I tanked a thanatos and Orthrus quite easily pre-change. SISI has already been updated to the new format and I wouldn't be as game to try it out now I think.


I have also tanked thanny on sisi with triple rep hyper. Just saying..


I bet you weren't cap stable. I was.
Bogdo Lama
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#191 - 2015-03-01 15:58:23 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Bogdo Lama wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
[---


None of this makes the battleship class more viable. This change only achieves dragging T3's down a bit which while a bit sad to see is necessary.

I tested out my tengu on SISI and I tanked a thanatos and Orthrus quite easily pre-change. SISI has already been updated to the new format and I wouldn't be as game to try it out now I think.


I have also tanked thanny on sisi with triple rep hyper. Just saying..


I bet you weren't cap stable. I was.


Well i did tanked it for half hour until we got bored at it and docked up. And no not cap stable but instead using cap booster and had enough cargo space to run reps half hour and still had boosters left in cargo when docked up..
Jake Chely
Star Nation
Goonswarm Federation
#192 - 2015-03-01 16:05:46 UTC
I started playing Eve a few months ago.
Although I'm still a noob when it comes to ships and main differences between them, I found T3 cruisers to be really (too?) powerful.
They Certainly need rebalance.

That being said, they are still Tech 3. We all expect Tech 2 ships to be better than their Tech 1 versions.
I see Tech 3 ships like cruisers capable of playing differents roles but not as efficiently as a specific Tech 2 cruiser would.
I know for example that the drone DPS of an Ishtar will always be better than the Proteus one because of the extra 25Mbits bandwidth. 5 heavy/sentry for the Ishtar, 4 maximum for the Proteus.
I didn't check every other possible configuration but I assumed it was always the case. I assumed that any tech 2 is better in it's own specific field.

If it's not that way then rebalancing Tech 3 is definitely needed. Careful though, let's not make them too weak either.
Like I said, they are still Tech 3, they are supposed to be high end ships.
Moreover, if you happen to die in one of those, you have to train one of your subsystems skills again. With +4 implants and no remap that means more than 4 days training. I bet you won't risk flying another brand new Tech 3 during these days.
And that's 4 days while you can't train another skill.
Bogdo Lama
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#193 - 2015-03-01 16:52:00 UTC
Tineoidea Asanari wrote:
Bogdo Lama wrote:
You keep talking about T3's as if they were just "some stupid super T2 cruisers that arent needed in this game". I cant understand this kinda mentality. I read your post but i cant still understand why you dont like them.


As it is right now, T3s are super HACs. Recon fitted T3s arent op (or at least dont feel that op) like HAC fitted T3s. They feel much better than normal recons but dont get that silly borderline opness, that they get when you switch them to do both damage and tank well. One part of the problem is the power of medium rails, as Lokis arent that much used, blaster ships are easy to kite, laser legions easily neuted out and HAM/HM legions either dont have the required range or DPS. A ship that shoots up to 120km with ok-ish DPS, good alpha, forgetable cap consumption, very good speed and super fast align time on the other hand is not so cool.
The only way to flat out counter T3s is to bring even more of them and maybe sensor damp/tracking disrupt them. But EWAR only has a limited range and Tengus can easily shoot from afar.

Quote:
T3's arent flat out better in everything than all other sub caps. Example why are ishtars used so much if T3 is better?


Because of Sentrys are the one weapon system that is even more broken than railguns :)

Quote:
Imho T3 is supposed to be better than hacs in all classes they do cost more than twice as much. And after all they are T3 not T1,5 as in T3 even sounds like it should be better than T2. Besides whats the whole point of this ship class. Hull that you can customize to suit for your needs. Would it be BS tank, 100mn ab, cloaky nulified or exploring or whatever. And there is nothing wrong with this. I like T3's as they are and like to them stay as they are. I like to fly them and i like to kill them theyre aweosome fun on both sides. Besides they are rather easy to kill..


Easy to kill? They are the hardest ships to kill in all of EVE! Maybe the T3 destroyers are a bit harder if they are able to maintain a long distance to the enemy, but T3s are very very strong ships and outclass other ships in their price tag with ease. The main part about T3 cruisers isnt their flexbility, as this is not getting much use. There are only a few different really strong fits for each of them, which is pretty sad. They are not versatile. They are just stronger HACs.


You say they outclass every other ships with their price tag. These ships are pirate BS's like mach or rattle. Arty mach will outrange and out dps loki for example. Even arty TFI can outrange and out dps loki. Rattle will outrange and out dps tengu. Vindi will out dps any T3. You see where this is going?

Killing T3's in different surroundigs like solo/small gang/null blob isnt hard. Which means that if null blob has 50 scimis and you cant kill tengu it just might be cause of scimis. T3's are very easy to alpha off field with lets say for example 150 arty machs at +100k. In this scenario they become bigger problem when you let them land too close so you cant track em anymore. T3's in small gangs are very easy to kill by shooting it its matter of reps again. If theres too much reps then you need damps and neuts on logis. Solo T3's are also easy to kill lets say 100mn tengu. Multiple webs and neuts work well here instead feeding said tengu frigate by frigate..
August Johann Bader
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#194 - 2015-03-01 17:54:44 UTC
I tell You what I think: the most stupidiest and the most easiest way for You as game developers is to make some stupid rebalance things thst kill the spirit of EVE-online and do it like: "Hi guys! Look we make a super change in game! We haven't done anything at all GOOD and SMART but we what You to think about us like we've done this!".

What Do You want to do with Ishtars nerf it once again? Why? Because new players won't be able to fly on it for a several months and they would get out from EVE and You loose Your profits? And You afraid of losing Your money! That's true You lose Your profits and people who rules CCP lose their bonuses. That's why You do everything in the past 2 years to make the EVE fast-entering game, the game for stupid instead of the game for smart!

If You really want to nerf Ishtar make it slower not cut one of his main efforts. I use Ishtar as support ship for tengu to farm lvl5 agents. It is critical for me that it has 10% bonus to damage and drone BSs die of 3 shots. What should I do when You nerf both Ishtar and tengus?! I can farm now several missions without rewarp because of tank with dps from ishtars and tank by shiled from Tengu. After Your "super" rebalance I will need to change the whole tactics of the mission runing or pass them with rewarps and the time will rise to 6 - 15 minutes for 1 mission from 2-4 minutes.

I need Tengu's extreme shield amount and resists to fight throug matars missions and even now it is very hard to do that with 10% bonus to shileds! How should I earn ISK if I won't be able to farm missions on tengu any more?!

There are a lot of people who think the same way as I do.

If You really really have nothing to do and nothing to think about and the only business You've got is to cry: "Give me something to rebalance right now!!!! I need this!!! My children need a wine!! My wife doesn't gives me sex until I rebalance something!!!! So please...." then play with the speed and the signature of the ship. Don't play with the main features of the ship. Ishtars could be strong but slow and that would break some stupid tactics of stupid over blob. I know what I am talking about cause I fly Ishtars in both PVP and PVE. PVP is not the ony use of Ishtars.

To the nubes who plays eve: I was nube too and I also was kicked-assed by the more experienced players. LEARN!!!! DON'T YOU CRY!!!! THAT's EVE!!!
Tineoidea Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#195 - 2015-03-01 17:54:48 UTC
Bogdo Lama wrote:
You say they outclass every other ships with their price tag. These ships are pirate BS's like mach or rattle. Arty mach will outrange and out dps loki for example. Even arty TFI can outrange and out dps loki. Rattle will outrange and out dps tengu. Vindi will out dps any T3. You see where this is going?

Killing T3's in different surroundigs like solo/small gang/null blob isnt hard. Which means that if null blob has 50 scimis and you cant kill tengu it just might be cause of scimis. T3's are very easy to alpha off field with lets say for example 150 arty machs at +100k. In this scenario they become bigger problem when you let them land too close so you cant track em anymore. T3's in small gangs are very easy to kill by shooting it its matter of reps again. If theres too much reps then you need damps and neuts on logis. Solo T3's are also easy to kill lets say 100mn tengu. Multiple webs and neuts work well here instead feeding said tengu frigate by frigate..


Well done, sir. You picked the one T3 who is not capable of keeping up with the others to justify the power of the 2 that are really the problem: the Railgun Tengu and Proteus. And ofc. the Vindicator outdps any T3. But also the T3 kite the Vindicator to hell and will volley them from the field. Machas and Rattlesnakes dont tank nearly as much as a Tengu and therefor will die, even when they slightly outgun the Tengu (wouldnt be sure about that one, as paper dmg vs. projected damage)

Killing Tengus in nullsec blobs is hard. What do you think, why everybody uses them and why everybody uses them effectivily? Because it is not that easy to kill them. Neuting ships have only a very short range and are - besides the Curse - quite purely armortanked ships, so they get kited again because of shieldships dont care about your super buffertank and lowsignature as long as they are shooting with the awesome tracking of medium railguns and sentrys.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#196 - 2015-03-01 18:16:31 UTC
Bogdo Lama wrote:
T3's are very easy to alpha off field with lets say for example 150 arty machs at +100k.



Bogdo Lama wrote:
very easy to alpha off field


Bogdo Lama wrote:
150 arty machs



I feel you might want to get your idea of "easy" sorted out there, chief.
Bogdo Lama
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#197 - 2015-03-01 18:25:12 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Bogdo Lama wrote:
T3's are very easy to alpha off field with lets say for example 150 arty machs at +100k.



Bogdo Lama wrote:
very easy to alpha off field


Bogdo Lama wrote:
150 arty machs



I feel you might want to get your idea of "easy" sorted out there, chief.


Whats the problem here? I see this in null all the time and even in low with smaller numbers. 150 machs/tfi's vs 150 tengus nothing new in null blobs. For example this is fleet doctrine for stain russians and they are not only ones using arty mach doctrine with these numbers.
Bogdo Lama
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#198 - 2015-03-01 18:50:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Bogdo Lama
Tineoidea Asanari wrote:
Bogdo Lama wrote:
You say they outclass every other ships with their price tag. These ships are pirate BS's like mach or rattle. Arty mach will outrange and out dps loki for example. Even arty TFI can outrange and out dps loki. Rattle will outrange and out dps tengu. Vindi will out dps any T3. You see where this is going?

Killing T3's in different surroundigs like solo/small gang/null blob isnt hard. Which means that if null blob has 50 scimis and you cant kill tengu it just might be cause of scimis. T3's are very easy to alpha off field with lets say for example 150 arty machs at +100k. In this scenario they become bigger problem when you let them land too close so you cant track em anymore. T3's in small gangs are very easy to kill by shooting it its matter of reps again. If theres too much reps then you need damps and neuts on logis. Solo T3's are also easy to kill lets say 100mn tengu. Multiple webs and neuts work well here instead feeding said tengu frigate by frigate..


Well done, sir. You picked the one T3 who is not capable of keeping up with the others to justify the power of the 2 that are really the problem: the Railgun Tengu and Proteus. And ofc. the Vindicator outdps any T3. But also the T3 kite the Vindicator to hell and will volley them from the field. Machas and Rattlesnakes dont tank nearly as much as a Tengu and therefor will die, even when they slightly outgun the Tengu (wouldnt be sure about that one, as paper dmg vs. projected damage)

Killing Tengus in nullsec blobs is hard. What do you think, why everybody uses them and why everybody uses them effectivily? Because it is not that easy to kill them. Neuting ships have only a very short range and are - besides the Curse - quite purely armortanked ships, so they get kited again because of shieldships dont care about your super buffertank and lowsignature as long as they are shooting with the awesome tracking of medium railguns and sentrys.


Are you talking about solo, small gang or blob fight?

If solo vindi will hit you on your point range. If you kite out of point range vindi can warp off. So T3 doesnt win this solo fight.

If small gang try to kite that vindi while hes loki/huginn friends have 5 webs on you so kiting might not work so good. This fight depends of many things like number of logi, ewar and stuff, but T3 wont still win this small gang fight straight.

If null blob this will be depending on many things again for example as i said earlier 150 mach vs 150 T3's. Machs will win at range while T3's will slaughter machs if let too close. Again T3 doesnt win this fight straight it depends stuff like FC'ing, warpins or range managment, numbers and stuff.. etc.. etc..
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#199 - 2015-03-01 20:59:41 UTC
The fact that you need to compare a T3 to Pirate BS's tells you just how broken they are.

Might want to remember, T3's are not supposed to be better than their T2 Counterparts, they are supposed to be more versatile. Currently, they are, except where drones are involved, crushing most of their T2 Counterparts. They out-rep a T2 Logi, but are very ranged limited. They boost 3 links, but not as much as a Commandship boosts 2, etc. So why should they be doing as much or more DPS, AND faster, AND better tank, AND often times smaller sig, than a HAC? Why should they be fitting tanks that most BS's struggle to fit and remain functional. It's silly.

And don't give me cost. CCP has said dozens of times, Cost isn't a balancing factor. If you make a fleet that rarely dies, then the cost is negated anyway. SP Loss, again, isn't there to make it better, it's the price you pay for having a hull that can be fit to do anything well. WELL being the key word. T3's shouldn't be the best at anything, but able to do everything well when fit right. They shouldn't be outfighting a HAC, out boosting a CS, out repping a Logi, etc.

Oh and as for the Vindi deal.. say at Disruptor range, which is out of it's webrange, and kill kill kill. Medium Rails will easily track it, and it'll never catch you, and can't warp off.


It's gonna be a painful day when CCP actually does their full rebalance of T3's.. I expect a lot of tears and rage.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#200 - 2015-03-02 07:47:37 UTC
Bogdo Lama wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Bogdo Lama wrote:
T3's are very easy to alpha off field with lets say for example 150 arty machs at +100k.



Bogdo Lama wrote:
very easy to alpha off field


Bogdo Lama wrote:
150 arty machs



I feel you might want to get your idea of "easy" sorted out there, chief.


Whats the problem here? I see this in null all the time and even in low with smaller numbers. 150 machs/tfi's vs 150 tengus nothing new in null blobs. For example this is fleet doctrine for stain russians and they are not only ones using arty mach doctrine with these numbers.


I have never seen a 150 man mach fleet. You do not alpha a tengu fleet in anything short of a full sentry carrier fleet due to the tiny sig, speed and massive tank on the tengu all while being cap stable.