Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I literally did not say that in this thread.

That is A viewpoint. It is not MY viewpoint.

I agree with most of the things you said about strategic cruisers but I wish to point out what people seem to continually miss: that these ships tank phenomenally better than HACs while easily performing alongside HACs overall in ways other than tank, and they can dish out tank and DPS at command ship level while maintaining substantially better maneuverability.

It looks something like this:

Price
T1 Frigate: |
T1 Cruiser: #
Combat BC: ###
Hvy Assault: ##########
Command: ##################
T3 Cruiser: #######################################################
A carrier: ###################################################################################

Combat strength
T1 Frigate: ##
T1 Cruiser: #####
Combat BC: ########
Hvy Assault: ##################
Command: ##########################
T3 Cruiser: ################################################################################
A carrier: ###################################################################

Like I said before, the defensive subsystems and fitting stats need to be nerfed to bring T3C EHP in a more linear gain path with T1 and T2 cruisers, not the current exponential gain they have right now.

Just train for a Muninn if you're worried about ships getting nerfed right after you've finish training for them. That pitiful ship won't be getting any nerfs for a very long time.

Legion Electronic - Emergent Locus: NERF
Most of the stats are fine. It combines a probe bonus with a tractor beam bonus, well those tractor beams cost high slots and the probe launcher is already using up the probably only one utility high it gets. What I think needs a nerf is the 99% reduction to probe launcher CPU cost. Other ships must make significant sacrifices to fit combat probe launchers, but the strategic cruiser can fit it for a measly 2.2 Tf CPU. I say give it -50% probe launcher CPU costs, then it costs just 110 TF. That's a sacrifice, but you still have most of the ship's CPU left over for a nice strong fit despite the launcher. I'd say that's very strong. Maybe the CPU cost reduction should be removed entirely.


Legion Electronic - Energy Parasitic Complex: BUFF
10% per level is too low. Curse gets 20% per level on one skill bonus, and fitting these modules to the Legion uses up high slots and powergrid that could be dedicated to offensive modules which would use its offensive subsystem skill bonus. Suggestions for buffing it:
1.) increase to 20% per level and let the Legion pilot use extra utility highs for these
2.) increase the subsystem's bonus high slots by one (and one less mid slot)
3.) switch this out for a tracking disruptor bonus instead


Legion Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir: NERF
Legion Engineering - Power Core Multiplier: NERF
I'm going to break my trend of not mentioning specific attributes to point out a glaring discrepancy here. This subsystem and the Power Core Multiplier are adding one weapon which can be fully bonused by the offensive subsystem, but they are not increasing the ship's "size" accordingly. With six total weapons, it is more powerful than a cruiser and closer to a battlecruiser. These subsystems should increase the ship's mass or signature radius accordingly. It wouldn't hurt for them both to also increase the ship's base powergrid a bit--the Power Core Multiplier does.


Legion Offensive - Assault Optimization: NERF
This subsystem clearly grants two full skill bonuses which compound with each other, giving the ship very strong missiles. It should have only one of these.
Alternatively, it could have +10% EM missile damage per level, allowing it to get fairly high missile DPS at the cost of having it limited to one damage type.


Legion Offensive - Drone Synthesis Projector: OK
The drone damage bonus is the same as the Arbitrator but the hit point bonus is smaller -- these are counted as one skill bonus. The drone bandwidth is the same, the drone bay is a bit larger on the Legion but I think the Arbitrator could use a bigger drone bay anyway. So then the three turret hardpoints with capacitor cost reduction is really just gravy to balance out the reduced drone hit points and I'll allow it.


Legion Offensive - Liquid Crystal Magnifiers: NERF
Big heavy nerf here. Reduce the damage bonus to 5% and remove the capacitor cost and optimal range bonuses entirely. Alternatively, give it the optimal range bonus and remove the others--this gives the Legion as a whole more options, enabling it to be a turret sniper.
As a third option, we could take a lesson from the Punisher school of ship balance strategy and take away a turret hardpoint, then let it have the optimal range bonus along with 5% damage per level. This frees up powergrid and capacitor as well, while not actually increasing its damage any higher than 5 unbonused lasers. This is similar to the offensive bonuses on Navy ships.


Legion Propulsion - Wake Limiter: BUFF
At only 5% reduction to MWD signature radius penalty, this subsystem isn't doing much for the Legion other than providing its base attributes. Assault frigates get 50% reduction as a role bonus. I say make the subsystem grant at least -10% MWD sig radius penalty per level.




That's it for the Legion's subsystems, maybe later I'll add more on other strategic cruiser subsystems but I think this gets the general idea across.

You're talking nonsense. They already are in line - it goes T1, T2 then T3

If you fit a T3 to do the specific role of a T2, the T2 ship almost always outperforms the T3. In the few cases where the T3 is better at the specialised role, the T2 vision has different advantages and is cheaper.

The real issue here is the logistics mechanic. T3 cruisers only become a problem when you have 20+ of them supported by 6+ logi. This will always be the issue. Nerf T3 and BC become too the problem, then HACs, then BS and so on...

See wormhole space if you want to see how well balanced most ships are in eve right now.

Yeah most of the T2/T3 comparisons also apply to T1/T2 but no-one seems to care there.

Its ok for a cerb to dunk a caracal in every way, shape and form but damned it's just not fair that the tengu is better than the cerb.

/scratches_head

1. Note that I said specialised role. The falcon and rook have a better jam strength than the tengu anything else is irrelevant.