Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Your comment so wrong in many ways. Only reason i compared it to pirate bs's was because i answered to post that claimed T3's will "outclass anything with similar price tag" so i did make example with ships that has similar price tag. And again about vindi was answer to an post that claimed "T3 will kite and win vindi" and i did ask him if he meant solo/small gang/null blob cause all of these situations are very different. And i did also make few examples what could happen there. Tbh solo BS vs solo T3 i wouldnt pick vindi for he job anyway. Tempest would do much better with its 2 heavy neuts. T3's cap dont work with 2 heavy neuts on it.

End of story

Once again, the part where T3s start to be broken is from medium scale (15 pilots up) to largescale coalition fleets. Yes, you can counter T3s in small engagements, or you can avoid them at all. These are options you dont have when you fight for objectives, you can either fight or gtfo. And here the combination of medium railguns with battleship tanks on cruiser hulls are getting op.

Dont tell me a low signature wouldnt make a thing at long distances. Signature is relevant on whatever distance you shoot. Speed not as much (as the important speed ist the transversal, at least for turrets), but the Signature Resolution of a weapon like the 1400m Howitzer Artillery II is 400m, whilst the 250mm Railgun II that Tengus and Protei use only have 125m, making them better at hitting both Tengus and Ishtars. The pure paper DPS of both (comparing Spike to Tremor) is nearly the same (268 vs. 273), but, as anyone would suspect, the Machariel with Artys has a 5,6k alpha whilst Tengus only have around 800. The optimal range is largely the same, tho the artillery has 100km more falloff, but a FC that cant shoot back will simply rewarp so that isnt that much of a problem.
Now how damage projection works: if the Tengus are flying in a 90° to the Machariels, they receive powerful 0 DPS for the distance between 0 and 100km and climbing up to 20 DPS at 225km. Even only a little bit of "not burning straight into that alpha from hell" will reduce the massive damage of a Machariel to a quarter at optimal range. The standard Tengu has 172k EHP without links and overloading vs Tremor L would require 123 Machariels shooting before logis are able to land reps (as we both know fleet reality most fleets would need considerably more damage to achieve that, as not many people are max skilled, some are not shooting due to brainlag or still cycling and other stuff).
If you have a standard 4 link booster Tengu as support, you boost the Tengu EHP vs. Tremor to 189k. But suddenly, the DPS of the Machariel goes down to a 10th of what it should be. So, now you need 335 Machariels to "alpha easily" a Tengu from the field. All V Machariels have 21 second cycle time without implants. Even the worst logi would have had enough time to lock and cycle reps in this time.

So please dont tell me, that Machariels easily volley Tengus off the field unless you are able to run the numbers to prove that.

Because of the killmail I extracted the fit from had Tremor loaded ;)

And because comparing different type of ammunitions is... difficult, when you try to also compare the whole system behind that.
Yes, DU outclasses Spike on nearly every range. But then you can also switch to Lead and suddenly the Tengus are better again.

If we talk about a standard combat range of ~ 120km and your proposed 130 DPS, around 44% of your damage is applied. So from your 6,5k volley only 2,9k hit the Tengus. Against RF DU Tengus have a resistance of 208k. So only 73 Machas needed, that fire their volleys within a timeframe of ~ 3 seconds. Tengus have a high enough cycle time to bring 2 full volley within that, Machas do not. Hell, Tengus can do 7 volleys while Machas are still cycling!

Get on the fighter assist thread and your bucket will be well used.

And I have seen carriers blapped. Currently nobody uses a subcap doctrine that can alpha our railgu fleet as they have a bigger tank than near any battleship with one of the smallest sigs in the cruiser lineup and enough speed to throw off the tracking on med artillery let alone large.

Point of my earlier comparison was that your far more likely to see links used in conjunction with a T3 than a lot of other ships, even without the links though the overall mobility and sig is out of whack with the EHP by a considerable margin - that isn't to say the answer is to nerf EHP. Changes to T3s should be about making the player make a little more choice/trade off not about taking a chainsaw to any one attribute.

Thats utterly ****** up -.- it will just decrease their buffer tank while sustaining their hp/s AND decrease the overall signature. All hail the tengu?

T3 cruisers need to be balanced with the other cruisers not battleships. These thing need a chainsaw applied to to them to drag them down to the point where they don't invalidate T2 cruisers.

No reason why you can't have the options for both, having the supplemental type sub-systems allow for huge tank but not great mobility/sig doesn't tread on the other T2 cruiser's toes and you have the option of using the adaptive type sub-system if you want the mobility and sig to compare to T2 cruisers at a loss to potential EHP.

The fact is a lot of T2 cruisers are somewhere between bland and uninteresting and downright ineffective cutting T3s back to compare to and using that as your base to work off would do nothing good for the game. Possibly enhancing the specialisation of T2 cruisers into some interesting capabilities would be of more benefit than nerfing T3s into mediocrity - I don't even know why I would fly a vagabond or muninn these days T3 or no - though rise hasn't done too bad a job with recons - I can see myself using 1-2 of them now that I wouldn't have touched before.

Problem is doing that so that the top end configurations fall in line without the lower end configurations (i.e. where your actually having to use module slots for other functionality) being pushed so low they aren't feasibly useful any more - for various reasons whether thats actually because they are too low or because they are too low for the costs of using a T3.

I actually don't disagree with the specific scenario involving the tengu above - though I'm against knee jerk slashing of EHP as an answer - partly because in abstract a lot of changes in Eve seem to revolve around X is OP no one is happy until X is bashed into the ground, then Y which was in a good place before becomes OP so no one is happy until Y is bashed into the ground, then Z which was previously obscured in mediocrity becomes the new focus and the circle continues.