These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Scylla] Strategic Cruiser Defensive Subsystems

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mimiko Severovski
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#21 - 2015-02-26 17:45:14 UTC
All the more reasons to fly ishtars.
A step in the right direction indeed.
Arkon Olacar
black.listed
#22 - 2015-02-26 17:46:43 UTC
Altrue wrote:
Also, general nerfing of T3s when they still retain their sp losses is super super not cool. Evil


Don't kid yourself, even with these changes T3s are still head and shoulders above the equivalent HAC (eagle/tengu, zealot/legion etc).
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#23 - 2015-02-26 17:47:55 UTC
Mimiko Severovski wrote:
All the more reasons to fly ishtars.
A step in the right direction indeed.

You may want to begin to prepare yourself for a pleasant surprise.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Blue Ice
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#24 - 2015-02-26 17:49:28 UTC
cool
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#25 - 2015-02-26 17:49:57 UTC
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
now if only the prop mod bonus affected only 10mn classes.


a more sensible way to fix this would be to just completely prevent people from fitting oversized or undersized prop mods
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#26 - 2015-02-26 17:50:16 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Wander Prian wrote:
Rowells wrote:
First

Why do the armor subs get less nerf than the tengus shield sub? Imo the armor subs are extremely powerful considering you can out tank every single subcap using them.



Because they don't have nifty value like shield regen in armor that they could dump the remaining bonus into without screwing up other stuff besides tanking

I honestly don't see passive regen being anywhere near as powerful as an extra 100k+ ehp though.


Nice number you pulled out of your butt there, anything else hiding up there with it?



Psssst... slave implants...
Skyleth Bergen
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2015-02-26 17:51:33 UTC
I'm confused about the need for these changes. The training time loss is a pretty significant penalty for flying a tech iii as well as the price of a properly fit one. Not only that but they are a pain to build, requiring quite the pipeline and skill set versus tech ii. I have never flown in null sec tech iii fleets though; is that where the problem with these ships exists? Also, despite their often large pools of hp, disabling one with some recon ships is pretty darn easy.
Klyith
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2015-02-26 17:51:56 UTC
Haiyooo wrote:
Id still like someone from CCP to explain the logic to nerfing ships that are 3 times the cost of the others, it is their point to be better than HAC because of cost... Just nerf everything to T1 values so the hordes can win already.

Because it should be like training a skill to V, you invest 5 times the skillpoints for another 5-10% boost.


(Also the hordes are flying tengus just like everyone else.)
Haiyooo
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2015-02-26 17:55:44 UTC
Corey Lean wrote:
Haiyooo wrote:
Id still like someone from CCP to explain the logic to nerfing ships that are 3 times the cost of the others, it is their point to be better than HAC because of cost... Just nerf everything to T1 values so the hordes can win already.


The hordes are flying these ships right now



Bah brave is the new horde and they muster some t3's but still 150 other trash ships in with it...
Chesterfield Fancypantz
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#30 - 2015-02-26 17:56:02 UTC
I personally think that this is a fine first step to see how the adjustments are made.

The issue with the discussion regards to the 5 vs 7.5% bonus is the fact that tengus can be completely and utterly brick fit, and still have max dps as a result of the dps modules being in the lowslot, and tank being in the mids.

A dps t3 going armor needs to have resists mods and damage mods taking up his lowslots, meaning the extra 2.5% is there for balance.

I personally think that t3s as a whole have too much EHP, and it should be a 5% flat for all of the races, but I do understand why it is 7.5%. I support either.

an armor t3 may be able to push serious EHP, but not while pushing out dps at the same time. Tengu can do both.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#31 - 2015-02-26 17:56:53 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hello everyone. We are updating Singularity as we speak with the first testing versions of our Scylla release coming immediately after Fanfest.

If you've been watching CCP Rise's tweets, you already know that we have some important balance changes in the works and that more info will be coming this week.

I'm making threads right now for two of the sets of changes coming in Scylla, and for details of the rest you should watch the o7 show tonight at 20:00 EVE Time and keep your eyes peeled for a Dev Blog that will drop in the coming days. I'm making threads for this subset of the planned changes today because these are the ones that are already running in today's SISI update.

As many of you know, Strategic Cruisers are extremely powerful ships that see common use across EVE. We have said for a long time that we want to do a comprehensive balance pass on them, buffing some aspects of these ships and nerfing some other aspects. That larger set of changes is still in the works, but in the meantime we are making a targeted set of changes to the Defensive Subsystems on the four T3 Cruisers.

The biggest changes here are to the hitpoint bonuses subsystems, Supplemental Screening and Augmented Plating. These subsystems are by far the most powerful defensive subsystems for PVP use, and their strength is a significant part of why T3 cruisers often eclipse other competing ships (such as HACs and Command Ships) and why the Loki struggles in comparison to the other three.
We're reducing the strength of the bonuses on these specific subsystems, to +7.5% Armor HP per level for Augmented Plating and a combo of +5% Shield HP and +3% Shield Recharge Rate for the Supplemental Screening.
The other changes in this pass are all more minor tweaks to HP and signature values to help balance out the viability of the different subsystems relative to each other.


    Legion Defensive - Adaptive Augmenter
  • Signature Radius: 140 (-14)
    • Legion Defensive - Augmented Plating
  • +7.5% Armor HP per level (previously +10%)
  • Signature Radius: 154 (+7)
    • Legion Defensive - Nanobot Injector
  • Armor HP: 3750 (+150)
    • Legion Defensive - Warfare Processor
  • Signature Radius: 147 (+7)
    • Loki Defensive - Adaptive Augmenter
  • Signature Radius: 125 (-5)
    • Loki Defensive - Adaptive Shielding
  • Signature Radius: 130 (-13)
    • Loki Defensive - Warfare Processor
  • Signature Radius: 143 (+13)
    • Proteus Defensive - Adaptive Augmenter
  • Signature Radius: 160 (-16)
    • Proteus Defensive - Augmented Plating
  • +7.5% Armor HP per level (previously +10%)
  • Signature Radius: 176 (+8)
    • Proteus Defensive - Nanobot Injector
  • Armor HP: 3650 (+150)
    • Proteus Defensive - Warfare Processor
  • Signature Radius: 168 (+8)
    • Tengu Defensive - Adaptive Shielding
  • Signature Radius: 150 (-15)
    • Tengu Defensive - Supplemental Screening
  • +5% Shield HP and +3% Shield Recharge Speed per level (previously +10% Shield HP)
  • Shield Capacity: 3550 (-200)
  • Signature Radius: 165 (+7)
    • Tengu Defensive - Warfare Processor
  • Signature Radius: 157 (+7)


Like I said, these are not the final changes we want to make to T3 Cruisers, they are one specific set of changes we are making to help improve the balance surrounding this class until we can finish the comprehensive pass down the road.
These are also not the only balance changes coming in Scylla. All the details on those changes will be released in an upcoming dev blog.



Fozzie your hate for caldari is showing again.....
devolutionary
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#32 - 2015-02-26 17:59:51 UTC
Haiyooo wrote:
Corey Lean wrote:
Haiyooo wrote:
Id still like someone from CCP to explain the logic to nerfing ships that are 3 times the cost of the others, it is their point to be better than HAC because of cost... Just nerf everything to T1 values so the hordes can win already.


The hordes are flying these ships right now



Bah brave is the new horde and they muster some t3's but still 150 other trash ships in with it...


Crucifiers. Crucifiers as far as the eye can see.

All in all I approve of the direction of these balances, though the insistence on shield regen is a little out of touch given we are talking about a ship that needs nerfing because of its fleet applications. Shield regen when you will have logi is a touch daft, but I also get that you can't serve only null fleets all the time.

A very small change to sigs on the Warfares is fascinating as well, if only to shake up the laziest of boosters.
Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#33 - 2015-02-26 18:04:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Aliventi
CCP Fozzie would you please present the numbers showing the current HP stats of a Tengu with supplemental screening fit, a Legion with adaptive plating fit, and Proteus with adaptive plating fit; then compare them to the soon to be nerfed versions? Essentially please give us numerical proof that the Tengu deserves a 5% nerf AND a 200 base HP nerf while the Legion and Proteus only deserve a 2.5% nerf. I have a feeling it does, but I am not 100% sure on how to calculate the numbers.
Chesterfield Fancypantz
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#34 - 2015-02-26 18:05:54 UTC
devolutionary wrote:
Haiyooo wrote:
Corey Lean wrote:
Haiyooo wrote:
Id still like someone from CCP to explain the logic to nerfing ships that are 3 times the cost of the others, it is their point to be better than HAC because of cost... Just nerf everything to T1 values so the hordes can win already.


The hordes are flying these ships right now



Bah brave is the new horde and they muster some t3's but still 150 other trash ships in with it...


Crucifiers. Crucifiers as far as the eye can see.

All in all I approve of the direction of these balances, though the insistence on shield regen is a little out of touch given we are talking about a ship that needs nerfing because of its fleet applications. Shield regen when you will have logi is a touch daft, but I also get that you can't serve only null fleets all the time.

A very small change to sigs on the Warfares is fascinating as well, if only to shake up the laziest of boosters.


the shield regen is, and isnt good in fleets.

If you get hit with a bomb(hypothetical) and it takes you to 80% shields, it really really helps logistics to not have to come and rep you up to get you back to full shields. 80% shield vs 100% shield could be the difference between catching reps and blowing up.
Hoshi
Incredible.
Brave Collective
#35 - 2015-02-26 18:06:09 UTC
Chesterfield Fancypantz wrote:

an armor t3 may be able to push serious EHP, but not while pushing out dps at the same time. Tengu can do both.

Except the dps of a tengu aren't really that great. The normal fleet Tengu fit does less raw dps than the Moa (because it doesn't a drone bay). It has great damage projection but raw damage where never really a problem.

"Memories are meant to fade. They're designed that way for a reason."
killerlman
Fast Flow in Slow Motion
White Sky.
#36 - 2015-02-26 18:06:32 UTC
Significant change for tech 3 will be NOT 8km reps range in logistics mode.
Also as i said before,allow for proteus to use five heavy drones, and increase drone bay in drone synthesis subsystem!
Chesterfield Fancypantz
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#37 - 2015-02-26 18:07:35 UTC
Aliventi wrote:
CCP Fozzie would you please present the numbers showing the current HP stats of a Tengu with supplemental screening fit, a Legion with adaptive plating fit, and Proteus with adaptive plating fit; then compare them to the soon to be nerfed versions? Essentially please give us numerical proof that the Tengu deserves a 5% nerf AND a 200 base HP nerf while the Legion and Proteus only deserve a 2.5% nerf. I have a feeling it does, but I am not 100% sure on how to calculate the numbers.


Id be happy to see the adjusted statistics, but we would have to insist upon seeing dps and range included as well.

As I said in my posting part of the problem is the frank differences between shield and armor damage because of the isolation of tank modules onto low/mid slots.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2015-02-26 18:08:55 UTC
Haiyooo wrote:
Id still like someone from CCP to explain the logic to nerfing ships that are 3 times the cost of the others, it is their point to be better than HAC because of cost... Just nerf everything to T1 values so the hordes can win already.


Because there are a handful of people still not using ishtars. Lol
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#39 - 2015-02-26 18:09:06 UTC
i was hoping for a more hull integrated approach.. i.ee. build the sig radius, HP fittings etc into the base hull like all other ships have, and make subs just bonus based, it would certainly help with multiple issues

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
BadAssMcKill
Aliastra
#40 - 2015-02-26 18:12:03 UTC
Wrik Hoover wrote:
ok