Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

This very much yes!

It's a shame and so bad I have actually decided to with immediate effect stop using the Tengu and ignore any sites that may require it. I am extracting the skills and selling the ships now that hey are still worth something. I also am biomassing two toons alltogether as they have no more use for me since they were specifically trained and used to run Sleeper caches sold to me. If this means I need to further reduce my game accounts I will as I am at the point I will not spend any RL money to plex accounts.

The ship is just nerfed to the point it's not good for anything but pewpew and even then it's lackluster and has virtually no reason for existing anymore. A mentioned, it's now worse than the Stratios.

The problem is that you seem to be correct.
The citadel transition had a plan to replace the POS functions during a longer period.
The tactical destroyers - ships that by function and mechanics are much more simple - took a year of conversation before testing it on SISI to fix.

But trying to fix the strategic cruisers in about 2 months? Even if they started earlier without the focus group, this time is really short. CCP seems to be... desperate here. "Quickly do something! Anything!"

Personally I would like to know how many drafts were about the subsystems before they announced it on the last event. They clearly take suggestion from the forums, like the separate cargo hold for subsystems for example. So why is this whole rework so rushed?

It has taken so many years to get to a T3 rebalance and it feels like the devs suddenly thought one day "OMG we forgot about rebalancing T3s, quick lets do it in a few weeks before Seagull finds out."

I spent a short time looking at Proteus and Loki configurations and it is a mess. I feel the defensive subs should have PWG & CPU added, remove the subs giving the PWG & CPU and turn them into something useful.

With the Proteus I had issues with PWG even when using an 800m plate alongside the friction extension sub and with the Loki using a shield setup I had 500 PWG spare and 8 CPU after filling all slots except 1 utility high slot.

Slot layouts need looking at again and normalizing, so many high slots ...? ( just condense the turrets down 4 and bring sub bonuses up). As for mid & low slots have a base of 5 & 5, with adjustments altering from that like +1 mid -1 low depending on what the ship has as an intended tank, etc.

Having this affected by tank and core, not propulsion (because it should be a given that a ship will be fitted with a prop mod), would mean a more balanced slot layout with a maximum of 7/3 or 3/7.

As for the cloaking sub getting an extra high slot, just use the utility slot for the cloak. 6 fixed high slots(-1 for drone subs because you like to do that for whatever reason), 4 for turrets/launchers/RR with 2 utility.

Finally, the whole ship appearance fudgery, I think the focus group must really hate themselves to think that the sub appearances which have been proposed was a good idea.

Gotcha...thanks.

So a Cloaky T3C will still be able to pass a 30-ship insta-lock gate camp untouched, drop a covert cyno, cloak back up, and laugh at how over-powered the mechanic still is.

Pathetic.

Recon ships are weird.
They also seem to be a combination of two roles: electronic attack combined with half of an exploration equipment.
Currently Stratios is the only cruiser sized explorer. T1 explorer cruisers should have similar bonuses as the frigates, while being lighter and having a larger cargo hold than the average cruiser. These should be upgraded to recon ships with probe bonuses, one should get the cov-ops cloak and analyzers, the other the d-scan immunity with enough d-scan range bonus to see the whole system.
While the e-war cruisers should become heavy e-war cruisers where the primary abilities (target painting, sensor dampening, weapon disruption and ECM) are expanded by the secondary abilities (web, warp disruption, capacitor warfare and middle finger because Caldari has only one method).

By the way did anyone see what Chance Ravine was doing on SISI? 1000 DPS cloaky active shield cap-stable Tengu doesn't seem OP to anyone else?

The tank on the covert options are garbage unless you fit a passive tank and to me, this alone indicates that the design choice behind this is flawed. So if CCP are going to stick with that, the DPS absolutely needs to be high! Don't forget that you are in a mush squishier ship that when you die in, you lose skill points.

Every ship needs to excel at on thing, otherwise people will always choose the the better alternative... And no. Flexibility isn't a compelling enough feature because you can't apply that flexibility on the battlefield.

Tengu is extremely deficient in power grid. 540 powergrid after fitting skills is far, far too low.

I don't know if this idea has been suggested but T3C should work as follows...

The cruisers should be able to be refit without the use of a mobile depot (or similar) not under a combat timer. Saved fittings should be able to be instantly applied while in space providing there is not combat/weapons timer.

"Tengu Defensive - Supplemental Screening
Caldari Defensive Systems bonuses per skill level:
5% bonus to shield hitpoints
5% bonus to the benefits of overhearing shield hardeners
Additional Stats:
+2M, +2L
+1000 Shields
+10m Signature Radius

Tengu Defensive - Amplification Node
Caldari Defensive Systems bonuses per skill level:
10% bonus to shield booster effectiveness
10% bonus to the benefits of overhearing shield boosters
Additional Stats:
+3M, +1L
+500 Shields, +100 Armor
+300 Capacitor Capacity"

For some reason, Supplemental Screening have 1 more L and 1 less M compare to Amplification Node, isn't that backward?
I don't see the point of having more M slot for active tank