These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Tech 3 Destroyers coming in RHEA

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alstevar Eastern
Caldari State
#81 - 2014-10-19 10:21:14 UTC
Hi all, choose models before CCP take the one you dislike.

Amar models picture

  • Adapt the A concept for Gallente
  • The D is perfect for Amarr
  • Adapt the F for Caldari

Caldari models picture

  • Adapt the C for Minmatar

I think a new topic for what's wrong with all the 12 can be interesting.

Your effective personal standings need to be higher to see the player's signature.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#82 - 2014-10-19 10:21:57 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Some of the people in this thread should read before posting.
Thanks for the link.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#83 - 2014-10-19 10:24:51 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
The best way to think about the ships, is as if they had a built in seige/bastion module (or similar)

Hit a button, get one set of bonuses, hit another, get a different set. (I don't actually know how the UI will handle it. But conceptually, it's about what happens)

As long as we have tool tips covering all the important parts, we'll be fine. Cool

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Kaivar Lancer
Doomheim
#84 - 2014-10-19 10:59:36 UTC
As a pilot that specialises in destroyers / frigates, this sounds sweet. :D
Elisk Skyforge
State War Academy
#85 - 2014-10-19 11:14:54 UTC
They should've been called T2.5 rather than T3 I think.
Jandice Ymladris
Aurora Arcology
#86 - 2014-10-19 11:21:48 UTC
The Tech 3 destroyers look like they'll shake up things in smaller engagements. It also seems CCP is going for a new route for tech 3 ships? Transformation central instead of subsystem usage?

Still from all the info released on the Vegas stream about the tech 3 destroyers, there's still plenty of questions left, like slot layout, specific faction bonuses etc.

Providing a new home for refugees in the Aurora Arcology
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2014-10-19 11:27:33 UTC
I only have one word for T3 destroyers.

Sploosh.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#88 - 2014-10-19 12:20:07 UTC
Mister Tuggles wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
Carribean Queen wrote:


What is wrong with you.

T1 < T2 < T3

working as intended.


Incorrect. That is not the way the game is balanced at all.

Have you ever read a single devblog about balance?



Have you ever read a single devblog about balance? They are all bullshit, and balance is non-existent.


Live with it.



Also t3's are balanced in the sense that they are A) More expensive to purchase than their t2 counterpart, B) Have a skill loss on destruction, and C) don't really outperform their t2 counterparts in their specific role.

Yes, you can get a t3 to do multiple roles at once, but it will not be as effective in a single role as their t2 counterpart. T3's are the Swiss Army knife where as t2's are specifically designed to fulfill one role.


I'm not going to repeat myself by pointing out over and over that cost is not a balancing factor, so I'm just going to start hiding the posts from people who say that.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#89 - 2014-10-19 12:22:43 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
The best way to think about the ships, is as if they had a built in seige/bastion module (or similar)

Hit a button, get one set of bonuses, hit another, get a different set. (I don't actually know how the UI will handle it. But conceptually, it's about what happens)



How about an actual module, which produces the button, and this module only creates 1 of the three proposed changes, and you can only fit one, and it only operates for X amount of time with Y amount of cooldown.

You know, in line with everything else in EVE.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
Jandice Ymladris
Aurora Arcology
#90 - 2014-10-19 12:55:39 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
The best way to think about the ships, is as if they had a built in seige/bastion module (or similar)

Hit a button, get one set of bonuses, hit another, get a different set. (I don't actually know how the UI will handle it. But conceptually, it's about what happens)



How about an actual module, which produces the button, and this module only creates 1 of the three proposed changes, and you can only fit one, and it only operates for X amount of time with Y amount of cooldown.

You know, in line with everything else in EVE.


Your module proposal sounds alot like a subsystem implementation, just with 1 slot instead of 3. I do think CCP doesn't really know how to balance the tech 3 cruisers properly without them losing their versatility too much.
Might be that these tech 3 destroyers not only serve as new content/shipline, but also as a way to collect more data on flexible ship usage in order to get a better idea on how to do the tech 3 cruiser balancing properly.

Providing a new home for refugees in the Aurora Arcology
Arsine Mayhem
Doomheim
#91 - 2014-10-19 13:01:38 UTC
alenotna wrote:
New ships are good. Anything that keeps the game fresh is very welcome!!


It will be entertaining for a few hours.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2014-10-19 13:39:30 UTC
This is probably a test so that they can have an easier time balancing the T3s we have now.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#93 - 2014-10-19 14:17:24 UTC
Jandice Ymladris wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
The best way to think about the ships, is as if they had a built in seige/bastion module (or similar)

Hit a button, get one set of bonuses, hit another, get a different set. (I don't actually know how the UI will handle it. But conceptually, it's about what happens)



How about an actual module, which produces the button, and this module only creates 1 of the three proposed changes, and you can only fit one, and it only operates for X amount of time with Y amount of cooldown.

You know, in line with everything else in EVE.


Your module proposal sounds alot like a subsystem implementation, just with 1 slot instead of 3. I do think CCP doesn't really know how to balance the tech 3 cruisers properly without them losing their versatility too much.
Might be that these tech 3 destroyers not only serve as new content/shipline, but also as a way to collect more data on flexible ship usage in order to get a better idea on how to do the tech 3 cruiser balancing properly.


No it's more inline with "bastion/seige/triage" or w/e.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#94 - 2014-10-19 15:03:40 UTC
I'm really looking forward to this.

Switchable bonuses are a real new gameplay element to experiment and have fun with.

Fozzie also mentioned a 'short cooldown'. Depending on the duration, I'd assume you'll be able to switch just once during a short skirmish. For example, start a fight in kiting mode (speed, agility), then switch to either sniping mode to engage from afar or defensive mode for brawling.

Also, there apparently is no 'offensive mode' with extra damage, which sounds good.

Just queued Amarr Destroyer V... Lol

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#95 - 2014-10-19 15:14:48 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
Garbage, absolute garbage.

They should balance the existing tech3's before introducing more wonky crap.


You, and all your previous arguements are worthless. You think that everything needs rebalanced probably because you are a horrible player. You're the same kinda person that thinks the cure to null stagnation is all this SOV/cap ship rebalancing.

Players are adaptive and will always go with what works the best, this doesn't mean every module every ship needs to be changed every two months because a new favorite tactic is adopted. THAT IS HOW ITS SUPPOSED TO WORK. The fact that certain ship aren't as favorable is fine, its called natural selection. Suck it up and train for something else or get inventive and make those under utilized hulls work.

Point 2: new content is always good, because that is, in fact, what prevents this game and others from stagnation. It also is the cure to perferred ships type/fits. If something better is introduced then people will gravitate towards it. Problem solved.

Quit being a whiner and take your rebalancing talk to your psych.
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#96 - 2014-10-19 15:54:30 UTC
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
Garbage, absolute garbage.

They should balance the existing tech3's before introducing more wonky crap.


You, and all your previous arguements are worthless. You think that everything needs rebalanced probably because you are a horrible player. You're the same kinda person that thinks the cure to null stagnation is all this SOV/cap ship rebalancing.

Players are adaptive and will always go with what works the best, this doesn't mean every module every ship needs to be changed every two months because a new favorite tactic is adopted. THAT IS HOW ITS SUPPOSED TO WORK. The fact that certain ship aren't as favorable is fine, its called natural selection. Suck it up and train for something else or get inventive and make those under utilized hulls work.

Point 2: new content is always good, because that is, in fact, what prevents this game and others from stagnation. It also is the cure to perferred ships type/fits. If something better is introduced then people will gravitate towards it. Problem solved.

Quit being a whiner and take your rebalancing talk to your psych.



The devs are constantly looking at balance. This game has more effort into balancing the existing mechanics than any other game. One of the selling points about the new dev cycle is they can now balance and make the changes needed more quickly.

The fact that you see new shinies as more important than balance makes everything you have to say irrelevant.

New content.....you are still flying around in a ship doing what you were doing before. The content stays the same. Now instead of having to buy multiple ships for specific roles, now you will just buy one.
Jarod Garamonde
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#97 - 2014-10-19 16:07:27 UTC
Stop complaining. This is gonna be awesome.

That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right...

    [#savethelance]
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
#98 - 2014-10-19 16:09:55 UTC
Oxide Ammar wrote:
T3 destroyers will melt burner missions...just a thought.


Because of their hidden fourth mode: Transforming into a frigate.

Wait no there is no such mode, your thought is stupid.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#99 - 2014-10-19 16:10:50 UTC
I honestly can't wait for these things, I've always loved destroyers and ever since they Added more Battlecruisers (the other forgotten ship class lol) I've been waiting for somehting like this.
Celise Katelo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#100 - 2014-10-19 16:45:54 UTC
Sounds interesting, Destroyer with some sexy abilities P

Does a "wiggle" & "Teke Teke" What more could you ask for?

EVEBoard ...Just over 60million skill points, each skill was chosen for a reason. I closed my eyes & clicked another skill to train... "BINGO...!!!" ... "This time i got something usefull"