Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

High slot is needed for cloak+probes. Cloaky hunters. Frankly it will be glass cannons (and not very big cannons) with current bonuses.



1. "Increase cost slightly" cost of what? Hull? Subsystems? It's kinda opposite to versatility of the whole idea.
2. How much cargo space on those?
3. Subsystems bay maybe?
4. How harsh nullification debuffs will be? (I'm happy with not removing option to covop+nullification)

I'm playing with Tengu combinations and it took to me to a strange places I never been before, started to check my fleet support skills for fleet bursts...

It would be direct nerf to tank and dps on cloaky hunters T3C.

I got another one: should covert+nullfied setups carry cyno? Maybe nullifing should remove ability to carry one?

There is a lot of bonuses in those offensive subs..A lot...

Considering Loki i don't like extra launcher in gun sub and extra guns on missile ones with 37+3 Mbit/sec bandwidth... in all honesty i am sick of it but there is that extra launcher in there over current setup with all possible bonuses added to them so who knows ....two neuts...shiet ton of drone bay space < -_- > i hope.

T3Cs should be incredibly expensive because of how versatile they are.

If you buy a HIC, you're stuck with a HIC. You can't change it into a HAC or logi. But you can change the role of your T3C, so it should have a hefty premium in terms of cost.

Think about it: it's cheaper to buy a specialized tool than it is to buy an all-in-one tool.


Just a tad unrelated, but people were calling for the removal of interdiction nullification from the combat interceptors because of how overwhelming they can be in groups.

T3Cs with covert cloaks, interdiction nullification, and offensive subsystems are going to be far worse in comparison, and completely uncatchable even with the slower align time if they keep some warp core stabs in their cargo and swap out when traveling.

SP loss only matters if you lose the ship. Do everything right and the hull is relatively cheap for what it's capable of doing. The upfront cost should be higher.

SP loss also unfairly hurts newer players. Older players who typically have most of the skills they want trained up don't have to sacrifice anything to train their subsystem skills back up, but newer players have to choose between the subsystems or other important skills they haven't trained yet.

The decreased lock range isn't that big of a deal if you're being bridged in by a Blops to gank a target, which is what the cloaked + nullified + offensive T3Cs are going to be doing. The decreased agility and increased signature radius don't matter if you fit warp core stabs in your lows when traveling -- again, something that isn't an issue if you're being bridged by Blops anyway.

I was going to suggest an increased delay in lock time after decloaking, but even that doesn't matter if the target is already pointed by a cloaked T3C that's fit for heavy tackle.

Hi All

I think so far there going to be to many high slot , so far with the cloak and DPS subsystem you can get 8 high slots, with only 6 guns that you can use.

The Defensive Subsystem should give you the same number as high slot as guns that you can use on it.
So if you want to use Clock , Prob and Dps hunter you either have 6 guns and a cloak or 5 guns cloak and probs, not all three.

Plus the Mids slot need a look at I reckon.
Take the extra high slot and put it towards a mid.

Look at the legion as an example, it gets max 3 mids for a DPS boat or low as 2 , less than a proteus.

That's what I see in the graph so far of cause.

Just wanted to mention that I'm reading over the thread as well as being a member of the focus group. I wanted to echo Chance Ravine's comment - there should be a reason to use a cloaky t3 over a stratios when the re-balance is complete.

And while I personally didn't enjoy the nullification, after reading more of the exploration and HK justifications I agree with keeping it. Not that I get the final say, but what I'd be voicing.

I feel you, if it doesnt improve performance of the game then it doesnt matter, but I thought I read somewhere that the subsystems add to the lag problems. Could be wrong.

Good points. Personally I dont see why there is SP loss, just make it a higher up front cost. The SP thing is a legacy thing they should get rid of.

It shouldn't be CCP's job to make sure the players have ships that do everything they want. It's the players who need to adapt.

I would love if my Marauder had better resists or the ability to use a MJD when in Bastion, but CCP has rejected both those things. Why? Well, for balance.

I don't believe a ship that can fit a covert cloak, interdiction nullification, and 6 bonused turrets/launchers is balanced. There's a reason Recon Ships don't have spectacular DPS and tank. There's a reason they don't have interdiction nullification. There's a reason Black Ops Battleships can't fit covert cloaks.

All of that reasoning goes out the window with T3Cs though. It's as though every other ship in the game is balanced by one standard while T3Cs are balanced by another, and it certainly doesn't help that so many players support that.

1. T3Cs are Cruisers. They are not Battlecruisers. They are not Battleships.
2. Being T3 does not justify them being fundamentally broken in terms of balance. T3Ds were just rebalanced by CCP, and they seem to be in a good place. They are very much Destroyer hulls. They don't compete all that much with Cruisers, and they certainly don't compete with Battlecruisers. T3Cs should be very much the same, relative to their hull size.
3. Cost is not a proper balancing tool when used as an excuse to try and justify an unbalanced ship. We know this. Marauders are 10x as much as T1 Battleships, but CCP refuses to give them T2 resists -- they cost as much as Dreadnaughts, but don't perform anywhere near the same level. The same should be true of T3Cs. You shouldn't be paying all that extra isk for a brokenly powerful ship. You should be paying that isk for a ship that's versatile and can adapt to many different roles -- unlike T2 ships, which are limited to specific roles.

This really all seems like common sense, but T3Cs have been so strong for so long that people simply aren't willing to admit that they need a much more extensive nerf than we're currently seeing. I think that this should be the goal.