These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Strategic cruiser balance pass
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#201 - 2017-04-21 21:27:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
EDIT: Actually lost all interest in this now and regardless of what we think it won't have any impact on what CCP do with them anyhow.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#202 - 2017-04-21 21:29:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
I spend weeks at a time in a purifier.

You flow megathron in frigates fleets, you are not good statistics example.


It is pointless having any discussion with baltec1, because he spent time in a Purifier he understands the nomad existence., I think that says it all in terms of any input from him... Roll


LOL just noted him in a fleet of T3's flying a Megathron, that is classy...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Salvos Rhoska
#203 - 2017-04-21 21:38:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Frostys Virpio wrote:
HAC are suffering from the T3 plague just like AF do. Their role is better done by another ship so they see really low usage. The way to correct the HACs problem is not to buff them. You have to move away what flat out stomped them out of their designed role.


HACs are suffering cos they are crap, as are AFs.

Its not a T3C issue.
T3Cs are a specific class anyone can get to, albeit at cost and SP loss risk.
The payoff is versatility.

Faction cruisers Gila/Cynabal/Orthtrus already outstrip HACs.

Muninn and Vagabond are both jokes, no matter how you fit them.
That has nothing to do with T3Cs, it has to due with HACs being crap.

My suggestion is give HACs a faction specific role bonus rather than the limiting universal role MWD bonus.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#204 - 2017-04-21 21:39:00 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:

LOL just noted him in a fleet of T3's flying a Megathron, that is classy...


Megathron is awesome - I would have taken the Kronos in its old form over a Prot every time if it wasn't for the vulnerability to capitals and bombs, etc.
Salvos Rhoska
#205 - 2017-04-21 21:53:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
baltec1 wrote:
No the best way forwards is to make them the generalists they were always supposed to be.


Explain, specifically, how to achieve that without causing extinction of hostile deepspace nomads.

I proposed diversification of the 4 T3C hulls.
You said no.

So what exactly do you propose?

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#206 - 2017-04-21 21:58:19 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
It is pointless having any discussion with baltec1, because he spent time in a Purifier he understands the nomad existence., I think that says it all in terms of any input from him... Roll

I don't think it's pointless because he just don't understand what "nomad life" means. He is just missunderstainding it I presume. I can be for a week in the Venal then take a break in hisec, short time in Aridia, take some wormholes into diffierent regions. Never know where next gate will take me. What do I need for that? Mobility. Cloak. Probes. In the same time I'm a target for any entities that are living in given space.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Salvos Rhoska
#207 - 2017-04-21 22:05:36 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
It is pointless having any discussion with baltec1, because he spent time in a Purifier he understands the nomad existence., I think that says it all in terms of any input from him... Roll

I don't think it's pointless because he just don't understand what "nomad life" means. He is just missunderstainding it I presume. I can be for a week in the Venal then take a break in hisec, short time in Aridia, take some wormholes into diffierent regions. Never know where next gate will take me. What do I need for that? Mobility. Cloak. Probes. In the same time I'm a target for any entities that are living in given space.


+1

These guys dont understand there are a lot of players playing as you do.

You , and many others, create content and opportunity.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Alaric Faelen
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#208 - 2017-04-21 23:27:03 UTC
Quote:
HACs are suffering cos they are crap, as are AFs


Some of that is the result of power creep. Faction ships like pirate hulls were meant to be fairly rare and outrageously expensive as a result. However they have become common as shuttles with entire Sov fleet doctrines being based on them (ie, expected to be lost and replaced en masse).

I remember when seeing a Cynabal in low sec meant a dangerous and probably successful pirate that had earned his -10 and felt confident enough to risk what was at the time considered a shiny ship. Now they are the Toyota Camry of cruisers. Everywhere.

T2 ships are in a good place as far as being very good at their specialist roles. The problem seems to be that there are too many ships that can do just as well or better at more than one role, making the specialists obsolete. The limiting factors of rarity and cost have been overcome.
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#209 - 2017-04-22 00:36:09 UTC
I'm not sure HACs are as total crap as they are being portrayed. I tried to run level 4 burner missions in pirate hulls and was told by the folks who wrote the book on it that it really wasn't going to work, that the resists on pirate hulls wasn't good enough, etc. and I needed to skill into HACs.

Or... (if I'm remembering correctly), go get a strategic cruiser?
Cade Windstalker
#210 - 2017-04-22 00:48:42 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
I spend weeks at a time in a purifier.

You flow megathron in frigates fleets, you are not good statistics example.


He wasn't claiming to be, the guy said he didn't know what "nomad life" meant or was like, and he got called on it Lol

Rroff wrote:
EDIT: Actually lost all interest in this now and regardless of what we think it won't have any impact on what CCP do with them anyhow.


Oh I wouldn't say that, so far CCP's plans seem to be at a high level and testing phase, and if someone makes a good argument there's a pretty good chance they'll see it and factor it in, assuming they haven't already, but that requires someone to make a good argument rather than just appeals to emotion or imagined demographics...

Alaric Faelen wrote:
Quote:
HACs are suffering cos they are crap, as are AFs


Some of that is the result of power creep. Faction ships like pirate hulls were meant to be fairly rare and outrageously expensive as a result. However they have become common as shuttles with entire Sov fleet doctrines being based on them (ie, expected to be lost and replaced en masse).

I remember when seeing a Cynabal in low sec meant a dangerous and probably successful pirate that had earned his -10 and felt confident enough to risk what was at the time considered a shiny ship. Now they are the Toyota Camry of cruisers. Everywhere.

T2 ships are in a good place as far as being very good at their specialist roles. The problem seems to be that there are too many ships that can do just as well or better at more than one role, making the specialists obsolete. The limiting factors of rarity and cost have been overcome.


Pirate Cruisers have always been fairly cheap compared to the Battleships, and if you look at the Tiericide plans and the rebalance threads for the various pirate factions the ships are sorta supposed to be a bit better at general combat. Stuff like the Cynabal actually got nerfed in their tiericide pass as well, so they're actually less ridiculous than they used to be.

I do wish HACs would get a small buff though Ugh
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#211 - 2017-04-22 04:13:48 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Jeremiah Saken wrote:

You flow megathron in frigates fleets, you are not good statistics example.


Unlike you I actually experiment with ships, the mega is for fun and provides challenge. You asked me for nomad ships and I provided them and told you I live out of a purifier for weeks at a time but apparently thats not a nomad life.

Tell me, what exactly do you consider a nomad life to entail? I'm alone in hostile space, I have enough ammo, paste and tools in the hold to last me that time and I don't dock again until I return home. Is that not a nomad life?



Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Explain, specifically, how to achieve that without causing extinction of hostile deepspace nomads.


Use one of the other cloaky ships. You don't need an overpowered mini battleship to live that life.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

I proposed diversification of the 4 T3C hulls.
You said no.

So what exactly do you propose?



Reduce powergrid and CPU down to match cruiser/navy cruisers, reduce the bonuses from 8 down to at most 4, slight nerf to cap amount and recharge rate, remove ability to fit nullification and cov ops at the same time, remove SP loss on death, lower build cost, ability to remove rigs without destroying them, bump cargo to around 400-450m3, reduce subsystems from 40m3 to 10m3.
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort
#212 - 2017-04-22 04:37:28 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

Reduce powergrid and CPU down to match cruiser/navy cruisers, reduce the bonuses from 8 down to at most 4, slight nerf to cap amount and recharge rate, remove ability to fit nullification and cov ops at the same time, remove SP loss on death, lower build cost, ability to remove rigs without destroying them, bump cargo to around 400-450m3, reduce subsystems from 40m3 to 10m3.


Pretty much agree with all this, but I still say base buffer need to be hit hard to be brought down to below BC levels in conjunction to what you propose.
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#213 - 2017-04-22 04:45:23 UTC
Nasar Vyron wrote:

Pretty much agree with all this, but I still say base buffer need to be hit hard to be brought down to below BC levels in conjunction to what you propose.


Yes, please add this to the list of nerfs.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#214 - 2017-04-22 05:24:55 UTC
Nasar Vyron wrote:

Pretty much agree with all this, but I still say base buffer need to be hit hard to be brought down to below BC levels in conjunction to what you propose.


A good point.

For example, a cloaky loki gets 19k base EHP while the rapier only gets 7.7k. So it makes sense for the cloaky loki to at the very least be brought down to a similar level. It also should have 85% EM resists like the rapier.
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#215 - 2017-04-22 06:09:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Coralas
Cade Windstalker wrote:


I'm not suggesting you're using the wrong tool for the job, I'm saying that the Proteus is not a dedicated exploration ship.

You've said yourself that whatever you're doing drones are not the optimal tool for it. Without more details I can't really comment on the specifics of the sites you're doing beyond your own vague assessment of them. Comparing the Proteus and the Stratios it seems likely that post-update the Proteus will still be an upgrade in overall performance over the Stratios, but it won't be the same night and day difference, especially in tank, that it is now.



nah, I said "multipurpose exploration". just flat out no.

Even the stratios is not a dedicated exploration ship, as anything with a reasonable tank, and the ability to fit 3 neuts, a cloak and an expanded probe launcher and deal nearly 500 dps with covert cloak fitted plainly has hunter applications.

Quote:


The Isthar is probably the only HAC currently not directly overshadowed by the relevant T3C competing fit. However considering that the Ishtar can't warp cloaked and doesn't get any kind of bonuses to probing or data and relic analyzers I think calling it a flat out lesser ship is a bit of a stretch.



If it cannot do the same content that the ishtar can do, then it is flat out lesser ship, there is no point me bringing a swiss army knife if I can't unscrew something on the encounter to avoid me needing a machete. Put another way, the ships were designed to exploit the existing content, not the other way around.

Quote:


The problem here isn't that the Deimos is a bad HAC, the problem is that the Proteus is superior to it in virtually every way.

Even the Drone-fit Proteus can pull more raw DPS than an Ishtar, it just gets a large part of it out of guns which makes it less attractive since drone fits tend to be pure drone boats.



So we have a minor difference on opinion about how effective the deimos is and an agreement that the rail buffer fit proteus overshadows it.

there are turret slots on the ishtar.

Quote:


Except as has been repeatedly stated here there is not one fit that is out of line. There is, at best, one fit that doesn't directly overshadow its HAC counterpart here, and that's more because the Ishtar is an OP little monster and gets 100% of its bonuses to drones where as the Proteus' drone fits are more of a hybrid setup.

That doesn't mean we should sacrifice overall balance to preserve your snowflake, which is probably *still* kinda OP given how well a Proteus tanks compared to an Ishtar if its puts it mind to it.



No, only you've stated that, and I've repeatedly pointed out why I don't believe that is so.

also that was not what was being discussed. ie baltec and I were having a discussion about the proteus being barely better than the thorax that you've jumped into. I think the whole idea that the progression goes t1->t3->navy->t2->pirate makes no sense whatsoever, no how flexible the t3 is when totally under powered. There is no doubt that t3 moniker implies progression.

Quote:


Welcome to the wonderful world of Eve tradeoffs.

I don't think your exploration ship is going to be nerfed into uselessness, at least not objectively. Whether or not you find it as the best option is going to be another thing entirely.



You do make me laugh, I've just pointed out all the trade offs that make the droneboat proteus good at its task after you've asserted it was bad. welcome to eve yourself.

yet again, I'll refer you to the point that the swiss army knife is useless if the content doesn't allow alternatives to bringing a brick swinging a machete. That is not a trade off, that is useless.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#216 - 2017-04-22 09:23:47 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Unlike you I actually experiment with ships, the mega is for fun and provides challenge. You asked me for nomad ships and I provided them and told you I live out of a purifier for weeks at a time but apparently thats not a nomad life.

Tell me, what exactly do you consider a nomad life to entail? I'm alone in hostile space, I have enough ammo, paste and tools in the hold to last me that time and I don't dock again until I return home. Is that not a nomad life?

ofc I'm experimenting with ships, my tengu is changing all the time. I'm currently trying to fit nestor for c1-c2 wormholes. Problem is you trying to fit ships for pvp roams and I for pve activity. You will eventually lose your hull I want to make it as much above surface as possible, because the hull is my home, not some station in hisec.
I have no idea how many players play the game like I do. I figured it out from what T3C possibilities are. I'm rather possitive about Fozzman changes to T3C. I'm completely aware ships should be balanced via pvp not pve.
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Explain, specifically, how to achieve that without causing extinction of hostile deepspace nomads.
Use one of the other cloaky ships. You don't need an overpowered mini battleship to live that life.

Problem is there is no other cloaky ships to do high end pve content. Stratios is weak can hardly do lowsec sites. So if you don't live in null there is no ship you can get there above gatecamps other than T3C.

I have a dream that some day I will undock in covert T3BS.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#217 - 2017-04-22 09:32:56 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:

Problem is there is no other cloaky ships to do high end pve content. Stratios is weak can hardly do lowsec sites. So if you don't live in null there is no ship you can get there above gatecamps other than T3C.

Welcome to the world everyone else lives in who don't fly T3C.

I've had to bring battleships in to run whatever sites I want to run in lowsec, wormholes, etc. Most of the time, it's just a huge waste of time. Often, it is a waste of a ship too. But I've never felt entitled to some super-duper stealth cloaky own-mobile. I've just made due with what I had, and taken my lumps when I had to take them.
Salvos Rhoska
#218 - 2017-04-22 09:41:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Jeremiah Saken wrote:

baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Explain, specifically, how to achieve that without causing extinction of hostile deepspace nomads.
Use one of the other cloaky ships. You don't need an overpowered mini battleship to live that life.

Problem is there is no other cloaky ships to do high end pve content. Stratios is weak can hardly do lowsec sites. So if you don't live in null there is no ship you can get there above gatecamps other than T3C.


This.

The "you dont need this to do this" argument doesnt fly.
There is no alternative to the T3Cs.

baltec1, what "other cloaky ships" are you referring to exactly?

The same argument was made regarding cynos/caps/JFs in LS, albeit there they truly are not needed.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#219 - 2017-04-22 09:51:18 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Problem is there is no other cloaky ships to do high end pve content. Stratios is weak can hardly do lowsec sites. So if you don't live in null there is no ship you can get there above gatecamps other than T3C.
Welcome to the world everyone else lives in who don't fly T3C.

I've had to bring battleships in to run whatever sites I want to run in lowsec, wormholes, etc. Most of the time, it's just a huge waste of time. Often, it is a waste of a ship too. But I've never felt entitled to some super-duper stealth cloaky own-mobile. I've just made due with what I had, and taken my lumps when I had to take them.

oh you took BS to lowsec, wormholes. Sweet. Try that with M-OEE8 gates. We have T3Cs because taking something bigger into null is suicide most of the time. And I tried living in BS nomadic style. Mobility is the worst part of it. I want to play the game not watch how my potato is warping through 30 AU wide systems.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Salvos Rhoska
#220 - 2017-04-22 10:09:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
baltec1 wrote:
remove ability to fit nullification and cov ops at the same time, remove SP loss on death.


How convenient for PvP players, at the expense of PvE players.

Are the occassional T3C interlopers running content in your space really such an inconvenience for you that you want to kill off nomadic deepspace runners entirely?

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent