EVE General Discussion

I just came here to help and confirm that indeed, the fits you posted earlier are tragic abominations and are bound to experience a midlife crisis and lots of shrink expenses when they realize they're useless and have no purpose.

One good thing about this balance pass is that we are going to see cruiser-sized command ships again, for the first time after the recent link revamp. On the othe hand, I wonder how they will find their place among CDs, BCs and CSs.

The double logi-CS role seems kind of wonky .

If you and I were the Universe I would be all the bright special stuff and all the lovely dark matter and you'd be vacuum. One good thing about the balance pass is laughing at PL's... I mean, the developers, special mistakes. This will certainly be one of them if it goes though. I look forward to it. Its like the Trump administration in a development team.

Baltec1:

Nothing is stopping you from using T3Cs.
Or from using HACs, or T1, or Navy cruisers.

Yet you want to nerf T3Cs so hard, that even your own alliance will no longer use them in fleet PvP.
Why make a ship class so useless in PvP, that even you wont use it in PvP?

That doesnt make sense.

Im perfectly happy flying around in Pirate/HACs/BCs for most of my gametime.
Occasionally, I run some more risk in T3Cs for greater profits in hostile space.

I have to get in, refit, run the content, and get out.

The cost differential and the SP loss, already balance the T3C.

Having said that, since T3Cs seem to be such a problem for you in fleet PvP;
Im ok with doubling the SP loss, and increasing the build cost.

Thats a 100+% increase in cost of loss of a T3C, as a factor of price and SP.

This doubles the cost of replacing a T3C.

If players in PvP fleet actions have enough isk/SP to deal with that, so be it.
They will pay double of now.

Its hard to argue against doubling the cost as not being a significant nerf to PvP T3Cs.
Twice the cost + build price as compared to now for replacing the same ship.

I can only assume there are some Hammerheads missing off this because the fit as linked deals 200 DPS.

Ah, I stand corrected, you've used the wrong drones here, overheated the RLMLs, and forgot to turn on "factor in reload time" on the DPS calculation.

It also costs twice what either of those T3 fits does and since it gets most of its damage from Drones it's more vulnerable to being declawed over a protracted fight due to Smartbombs or smaller ships focusing the drones. While you can pull drones in a small fight larger ones tend to rely on simply having enough drones in reserve to replace losses.

Also while it's faster than a Legion it's only 50m/s faster and has a 60m larger sig which more than negates the tanking benefits of the speed. On top of that it has an EM hole that the Legion doesn't have, meaning it's going to take it in the teeth from a Legion or an EMP slinging Mach fleet.

Overall if anyone were to bring these to anything more than a small skirmish they'd likely lose the fight and the ISK war in spectacular fashion.




You forgot to turn on "Factor in Reload Time" on the DPS again, and you're comparing overheated DPS to base DPS. The actual DPS on this fit is a staggeringly bad 319, making it good for nothing more than swatting Cruisers with no Logi around and Frigates. Anything it has to do sustained DPS to is going to laugh. The rest of the DPS comes from those Hammerheads which are likely to die to smartbombs before the halfway mark in any decent sized fight.



Lets see here...

First off, it's 50% more expensive than a T3C. Before it lights the MWD it has a 367m sig which is huge, and afterwords it's going to speed tank like a cinderblock, so even though the paper EHP is higher the applied damage it takes is going to make it lower, by a lot. On top of that you've once again overheated the guns and failed to factor in reload to inflate your DPS numbers.

Oh and yes Pithum C-Type Invulns are much harder to get in any significant numbers than the relatively common armor mods on those Proteus and Legion fits.

Oh and all of these fits are vulnerable to neuting since no Cap Booster and poor cap regen, NOS only does so much to keep things running and assumes you're in range of someone you can safely steal cap off of.

Oh and on top of that those EHP numbers were without factoring in Slave implants or anything like that, so that would push the T3Cs even further above these fits you're spitting out.

I'm really wondering what magical BS fit you're basing this off of, because trawling through zKill for fleet Nightmare and Mach fits yields a couple of different fits, none of which gets close to 266k EHP before boosts. The Machs deal about 400 DPS and tank 196k EHP, the Nightmare deals about 900 DPS with Navy Multi but only tanks 147k EHP.

Also that Faction BS takes damage worse than a T3C making the actual tank favor the T3C in practice.

Also if you haven't noticed there have been people complaining about the current cost to power ratio of Pirate Battleships as well.

So no, the problem here is not that Battleships are under powered. They're good at being a ball of hitpoints and at projecting damage at ranges even the T3Cs can't match. The problem here is 100% that T3Cs are OP.



Except that your fits don't actually work. Those T3C fits are taken out of an actual fleet engagement, not EFT BS pulled out of someone's rectal cavity as a thought experiment. If you want to actually start bling-tanking T3Cs as a thought experiment then you can get stuff that smokes your fits completely, and they're not doing that well in the first place.

Oh and on top of that you seem to have missed that those T3C fits can actually do important PvP things like point and scram enemies. Also they're armor tanked, while all of your fits were active shield tanked, which is always going to give better EHP but is very vulnerable to cap warfare.

These fits are just laughably bad.

Try and fit up something actually practical that competes with the T3Cs and you might have an argument. Right now you're just throwing around chaff and hoping someone has a brain aneurysm and believes what you're selling.

Baltec1:

Your isk/SP wealth is not an excuse or a premise for balance.

You want T3Cs nerfed so hard, and specifically, that you will no longer field them in your PvP fleets.

That is a contradiction.

Why shouldnt T3Cs have cause to be fielded in PvP fleets?

A 100%+ increase in cost of replacing a T3C is a HUGE nerf.
Increase cost of T3Cs, and double the SP loss to two subsystems per destruction.

Equal in magnitude to your own proposal, but without the drawbacks of destroying the T3C/subsystem market, nor of makibg non-pvp fleet players and their content obsolete.

Do you not see that?

Again I point to titans to demonstrate that SP and ISK do not stop us from getting them in large numbers.


No thats what must happen. We will start using HACs in our HAC fleet again.


They can be after the nerf, people use T1 hulls in fleets all the time, just not us.


It nerfs nothing, T3C will still be a better HAC than a HAC.

1) You point to TITANS?
Are you joking?
Have you completely lost the plot?
Your isk/SP wealth is not material to balance.

2) Nothing is preventing you from using HACs right now.
You dont need T3Cs wiped out to the point YOU will no longer field them, inorder to use HACs.

3) So other people do use T1 cruisers in fleets, but just not you.
Hmmm.

4) Doubling the cost of of replacing a ship nerfs nothing?
Im pretty sure a +100% nerf to cost and SP loss combined will make many think twice about choosing another hull instead.

5) There is a hypocrisy and self-interested bias, in that you want to nerf T3Cs so hard, that your alliance even wont use them in PvP fleets. Stinks of "we dont want to use them, so neither should you!".

But it is for baltec1.

His proposal nerfs T3Cs to the state that he himself said his alliance would no longer field any of them.

He wants them wiped out of fleet PvP, entirely.

That is his primary impetus.
Secondary to that, he doesnt want cloak/null T3Cs interloping their space.
Third, he wants to wreck the T3C production/resource market.
Fourth, he wants T3C nomads to instead join NS alliances.
Fifth, he wants WHs nerfed, as no longer being able to field T3Cs to complete content there, and to reduce WH proceeds linked to T3C and subsystem manufacture.

This is a bad idea, with too many hedged interests involved, with no benefit to anyone except baltac1s interest.

Just so they wont field, or have to deal with, T3Cs in fleet combat with all their trillions in isk, titans, and dozens of millions of SP.

baltec1:

Lol at trying to skew this into a Malcanis Law issue by citing how many Titans you can field, how rich you are, and how little SP loss matters.

I see what you are trying.

Doubling the SP loss, and increasing build cost is sustainable by PvE pilots.
Can you say the same for your PvP fleets?

Aside from that, the tank on some specific T3C builds is the only extraneous issue that needs addressing.
I, and everyone else, agrees its too high.