Ships & Modules

Sure, CCP should introduce a skill intensive, but essentially useless ship which requires 12 months of pure training just for bitter vets who want to be special snowflakes. Maybe a CONCORD shuttle or something.

That's not the problem here. The problem with Tech3 is, that the performance of them is to different!
From OP Tengu over OK Loki+Proteus to UP Legion.

Mix with some absolut useless moduls for each one.

TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU SIR

Like I dont understand why people call them OVERPOWERED.

If someone pays 1.5bil+ to fit a t3(F**KING EXPENSIVE SHIPS) and train for 2 years to fly( more if you wanna fly it well) why shouldnt the ship have all that power. Thats just like people saying a Pirate BS like the Vindi is OP. Thats stupid. the ship itself is over 1 bil and people trainned and paid alot for that power.

Lets look at the VERSITILITY of T3s right now. A T3 should be able to be configured to be a better HAC than the T2 verson or a better Recon that its T2 count part. If they buff T2s They better Buff t3s... And how about those EWAR and LOgistics subsytems. Most of them are CRAP. sure(the loki for webs and prot for point but the rest is complete garbage)

Please tell me more about how they are more Versitle when they can only do a few things well At the moment.

With the buffs to t1 and navy ships in odyssey coupled with nerfs to many tech 2 variants, I feel eve is dangerously close to becoming `vannilla` its scarcley worth flying ships like the absolution when for example navy harbinger can do the job with virtualy the same ehp/dps and a tracking bonus to boot.. just 1 example.. it seems to be the case for pretty much all hac`s, logistics and field command ships.. in my opinion considering the huge difference in skills needed and cost the performance should reflect this! more so than slightly better resists.. and even those are being gradualy whittled away..
The point of eve when I started playing is that its a HARD game (thats what i liked about it).. by allowing relative noobys to have access to ships wich out perform their tech 2 variants not only irritates the long term players but makes for a less challenging experience for the new players.. will they still be here in 10 years time?

You bring up a very good point.

People get confused thinking T3s are OP when really its just because you can do more with them.. Like there are cruisers that can have as much dps or tank as tengu but the tengu can also fit a 100mn ab and what not... that is not OP that is called a T3, that is called having trainned skills to have that ability and Virsitility. I dont feel there is anything wrong with that.

T3s should be the kings of cruisers.. Be OP compared to a HAC when fitted for that role, or OP compaired to a Recon, Or eve OP compared to a Logi. Hell this ships cost over a Bil isk more fully fitted compared to a T2 and are alot more skill intensive.. What are people mad about. They should be powerful ships... Noobs or people with low sp need to stop complaining

Yeah? Which ones?

Okay. Which cruisers can beat a Tengu in either tank or DPS?

Well HAM legion has comparable tank but the DPS is vastly inferior as it lacks the range of a Tengu and has no damage bonus to counter Tengu's kinetic bonus.

they should be about 5-15% better than T2s at their role

This is one of the dumbest threads I've had the displeasure of reading.

All you spacepoor people crying that T3's should be "equal" to T2's need to HTFU and deal a few simple facts.....

1 - That T3 cruiser cost a poopload more than your crappy T2 HAC or whatever. The hull price is a bit higher, then
add in a full set of subsystems, and a T3 cruiser with JUST the subsystems and no fitting / rigs at all probably cost
more than your entire shitfit HAC. And people who can / are willing to fly them generally bling them out pretty good,
which adds to the total price tag.... generally significantly.

2 - The subsystem skills don't take long to train, this is true. You also lose a skill level every time you die in one.
You can cry that's "not enough" all you want, and for risk averse pubbies it's not really much of a concern. But for
people who actually fly and lose them in PVP, that adds up in the form of time that could be spent training
other things.... significantly.

Seriously, since when have T1 items ever been better than T2 items? Is your Rifter better than your Wolf? Is your
Merlin better than a Hawk or a Harpy? No..... not sure where the idea that T3's shouldn't be better than T2's came
from, but it's pretty dumb. We should go ahead and balance all the T2 ships so that they're equal to the T1 ships
while we're at it to, right?

Don't like it? Don't fly one.... it's pretty simple.

Can't fly one / don't want to risk that much ISK? HTFU princess.

Don't want to fight one? Run away..... or die, then come to the forums and cry for nerfs like a little WoW kiddie.

It's been said many times that after tiericide the power difference between tech1 and tech 2 will be smaller. You get a linear increase in power for a expotential increase in cost. That will apply for tech 3's as well.

It's also been said many times that T2 will be the strongest ship in their specialization. For example a curse will be a better neuting ship than a legion but the legion will be good at more things (not the best but good). For example the curse has low ehp sen the legion would have a better tank while still being a good neuter.