hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 1 of 33 123411 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 657

Thread: Tech 3 OP, Next on Nerf List [Devpost]

  1. #1

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    2,513

    Tech 3 OP, Next on Nerf List [Devpost]

    https://forums.eveonline.com/default...14#post3174514

    Quote Originally Posted by CCP Ytterbium
    Tech3s are due for a change, and are not meant to go above Tech2 in terms of raw performance (example: Warfare Subsystems, have a look why at the end of this blog). The other problem with Tech3s is that only a few of the sub-system configurations are actually decent, with the rest being quite terrible. Ideally all the sub-systems should have a proper role on the field, and Tech3 should be used because of their flexibility and adaptability, not because they surpass hulls of the same category at their specialized purpose.

    The chart linked in the first post is slightly out-of-date - the new one we've showed during Fanfest 2013 is here.

    In summary:
    • Tech1 are the basic entry level, simple gameplay hulls that are used as reference points for all the other. That's why we started with them during the "tiericide" initiative.
    • Navy / Faction are improvement over Tech1, with roles more or less varied depending on the ships themselves. Ex: Drake vs Drake Navy Issue, Megathron vs Vindicator and so on.
    • Tech2 hulls provide specialized gameplay with advanced mechanics. Perfect example are Stealth Bombers, Interdictors, Heavy Interdictors, or Black Ops.
    • Tech3 vessels were initially meant to be extremely flexible with adaptable roles due to sub-system configurations. In practice, they currently overlap in stats with other, more specialized ship classes, which create problems.


    Tech3 ships are due to be rebalanced after Tech2 hulls so that our team may use the experience they've gained along the way to overhaul them properly.


    Exactly how and when this is going to be accomplished, we cannot say for now, even if we do have some ideas.
    Discuss~

  2. #2

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Paying too much for collectables.
    Posts
    1,553
    I think their main issue is with things like this rather than general capabilities:

    Tengu > Cerberus for long range HML sniping
    Loki > Huginn/Rapier for long range webbing

    There are other examples but those the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

  3. #3
    Resi's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,645
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Ravi and kil2 (or whoever is resposible for balancing) have no clue in general of balancing at all, the only things they put out that were halfway decent was imo by sheer luck.

    Hope they dont mess t3s up to badly.
    You are so retarded

  4. #4

  5. #5
    מלך יהודים
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,194
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Ravi and kil2 (or whoever is resposible for balancing) have no clue in general of balancing at all, the only things they put out that were halfway decent was imo by sheer luck.

    Hope they dont mess t3s up to badly.
    You're a bit dumb.

    As for versatility vs spec. Specialization will always*win because of the simple reason that fleet warfare has moved from shit fleets to more uniform fleets with a specific purpouse. If you move t3s from doing a specific role well to all roles medicore you will never see them used.


    

  6. #6
    Donor AmaNutin's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 21, 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeekar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Ravi and kil2 (or whoever is resposible for balancing) have no clue in general of balancing at all, the only things they put out that were halfway decent was imo by sheer luck.

    Hope they dont mess t3s up to badly.
    You're a bit dumb.

    As for versatility vs spec. Specialization will always*win because of the simple reason that fleet warfare has moved from shit fleets to more uniform fleets with a specific purpouse. If you move t3s from doing a specific role well to all roles medicore you will never see them used.
    Not fully mediocre is the intent, but obviously not as good at doing those jobs as tech 2s; so I definitely expect their links boosting to be nerfed for sure. I'd think the tech2 rebalance should be done first so the tech 3 rebalance would put them in between tech 1 and tech 2 effectiveness.
    Last edited by AmaNutin; June 10 2013 at 06:47:31 PM.
    Audacter calumniare,
    semper aliquid haeret

    If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed.
    -Albert Einstein

  7. #7
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    Lowsec
    Posts
    2,675
    Im not, their balancing programm is god awefull. They completly dont get what they are doing. (not saying i could make it better, but at least i can see that they suck at what they are doing).
    Your hate is my pride!


  8. #8
    Donor AmaNutin's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 21, 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,150
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Im not, their balancing programm is god awefull. They completly dont get what they are doing. (not saying i could make it better, but at least i can see that they suck at what they are doing).
    What has been horrible so far? I think a lot of people had issues with the BS rebalance, but frigates and cruisers definitely "hit the spot."
    Audacter calumniare,
    semper aliquid haeret

    If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed.
    -Albert Einstein

  9. #9
    Space Panda's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 24, 2011
    Posts
    1,471
    lol

  10. #10
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    Lowsec
    Posts
    2,675
    Quote Originally Posted by AmaNutin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Im not, their balancing programm is god awefull. They completly dont get what they are doing. (not saying i could make it better, but at least i can see that they suck at what they are doing).
    What has been horrible so far? I think a lot of people had issues with the BS rebalance, but frigates and cruisers definitely "hit the spot."
    T1 logis, ewar, ewar frigs, tds/light missile buff, attack frigates, bcs all around, bs' , planned cynabal/mach nerf, their general idea of balancing, the condor. Making previously unused ship viable really isnt that hard (every idiot could do that), but they completly mucked up the rest. If you buff everything at once you dont really achieve anything.
    Your hate is my pride!


  11. #11

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    2,513
    Even the cruiser/frigate buff have resulted in clearly more generally useful and some very niche ships. Sure simple case of some hulls clearly outclassing another in all properties is reduced compared to when that result was intended, but that isn't really impressive.

  12. #12
    Larkonis Trassler's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    5,029
    If it's not on the cards until after t2 is looked at then there's no real worry.
    Apart from links their is very little that a t3 can purely do better than it's direct t2 counterpart. The problem is that at the same time the t3 can do evrything else (tank and dps in the case of the loki/huginn) so much better than it's specilised counterpart that the extra effectiveness in role isn't worth it.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    April 14, 2011
    Posts
    5,410
    just a little musing, but if tech 3 ships are being nerfed because they are more effective in role the a "specialized" Tech 2 ship, doesn't it stand to reason that most tech two ships should be nerfed becuase they are better in every way then the T1 hulls they are based upon.

    IMO Specialized means that it gains something in one area, but loses out in the others. Few of the T2 ships actually fit this bill, coincidently the ones listed in the dev post do
    Tech2 hulls provide specialized gameplay with advanced mechanics. Perfect example are Stealth Bombers, Interdictors, Heavy Interdictors, or Black Ops.
    One could also add marauders to that list; but regardless, these ships lose tend to lose out on something in order to gain their speciality. I wonder if we will see the rest of the T2 line up go down this road in the rebalancing pass

  14. #14

    Join Date
    April 30, 2011
    Location
    AVRSE [TISHU]
    Posts
    1,487
    I don't think T3's are in a ~bad place~. They've already mentioned how they want to change the boosting bonuses (a good change, imho), and most of the the T3's imbalances revolve around T2 not yet being buffed.

    Tengu - Buff Cerberuses. Fix medium rails to make RailGu's a thing.
    Legion - Make Curse less shit (even though it has range-bonused neuts over the Legion). Make Zealot as speedy as the Omen. Swap Zealot/Liquid Crystal Mag damage bonuses.
    Proetus - Add drone subsytem that allows 5x sentries or heavies, buff Deimos speed. Remember that Arazus/lacheses are too thin to armor tank, so Protei are essential to keep armor BS alive as a meta. Fix medium rails, because I want a perma-MWD Proteus kiting comp so bad.
    Loki - Rapiers/Huginns are still too thin to be armor, but the Loki takes a serious hit to sensor strength and lock range when it opts to fit webs, which is easily exploitable. Buff shield Lokis somehow, along with the Vagabond. Muninn seems to be in a good place; would own if HAC's got the 50% MWD sig bloom bonus that has been discussed previously.

    I think the T3's will seem more balanced when T2 gets a buff. As for link changes, I really support them, as long as something like this is possible:

    [Loki, THE DREAM]
    Damage Control II
    Gyrostabilizer II
    Gyrostabilizer II
    Tracking Enhancer II
    Warded Ladar Backup Cluster I

    Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
    Federation Navy Stasis Webifier
    Large Shield Extender II
    Large Shield Extender II

    Skirmish Warfare Link - Evasive Maneuvers II
    Skirmish Warfare Link - Rapid Deployment I
    Skirmish Warfare Link - Rapid Deployment II
    220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, EMP M
    220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, EMP M
    220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, EMP M
    220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, EMP M

    Medium Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer II
    Medium Anti-Explosive Screen Reinforcer II
    Medium Polycarbon Engine Housing I

    Loki Defensive - Warfare Processor
    Loki Electronics - Immobility Drivers
    Loki Engineering - Power Core Multiplier
    Loki Offensive - Projectile Scoping Array
    Loki Propulsion - Chassis Optimization


    Imagine this running links for your nano-gang. Who could say no to that? Make those 4 guns into an effective 6 turrets, and you're golden. Limit T3 links to 3 links total (allow them to mix and match as discussed in that dev blog linked in the OP) and buff their damage while using the warfare subsystem. If links could function as a useful combat ship in the fleet, then they'll see plenty of use. Requiring Command Processors makes them combat inviable. With their tank subsystems dedicated to link-running, we'll see Command Ships used in slower, tankier fleets, and T3's in AB-sig-tanking or nano fleets.

  15. #15
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    Lowsec
    Posts
    2,675
    Problem i see with their idea of "flexibility and adaptability" for t3s is that that this would make them pretty useless, you dont take a ship into a fleet that gets a slight web range bonus and that can probe with a weak bonus but that has less ehp/dps then a ahac, you need specialized ships. If you make them jack of all trades but so that they arent better then t2 in any way then they just become quite useless super expensive, guarented skill loss deathtraps.
    Your hate is my pride!


  16. #16
    Moderator Movember 2011DonorModerator Cue1*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Native Freshfood
    Posts
    6,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Larkonis Trassler View Post
    Apart from links their is very little that a t3 can purely do better than it's direct t2 counterpart.
    The armor Legion, Loki, and Proteus all beat their T2 counterparts in nearly every way. They all do cloakie probes better than any Covops does, and the Tengu is pretty much the only solo Caldari cruiser available.

    :Tabletz:

  17. #17
    Smuggo's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Behind you
    Posts
    10,324
    I wouldn't go expecting a full buff of tech 2, more greater specialisation. If they straight buff we end up back where we were 18 months ago when no one flew T1 cruisers because they were comparatively bad.

  18. #18
    Resi's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,645
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    I wouldn't go expecting a full buff of tech 2, more greater specialisation. If they straight buff we end up back where we were 18 months ago when no one flew T1 cruisers because they were comparatively bad.
    For HAC's if they do too little they'll still be made obsolete by Tier 3 BC's, if they do too much they'll trample over tech 1, they're going to be a tough one to balance for CCP. Although the mooted 50% MWD sig reduction bonus (and recent nerfs to tier 3 BC's) will hopefully go some way to giving them a viable role on the battlefield while not trampling on other ships' roles.

  19. #19
    Daneel Trevize's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    9,945
    Just slap tier3s with a tracking bonus, if they must retain their full 8gun dps potential against reasonable targets to shoot BS weapons at.
    How many BSs even have 8 guns these days??

    I really don't get why medium rails haven't been buffed yet, it's insane. Even a partial fix to see where they might struggle to work, atm they shit if they were fitted but you can't reasonably fit them anyway.

  20. #20
    Donor AmaNutin's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 21, 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Daneel Trevize View Post
    I really don't get why medium rails haven't been buffed yet, it's insane. Even a partial fix to see where they might struggle to work, atm they shit if they were fitted but you can't reasonably fit them anyway.
    This.
    Audacter calumniare,
    semper aliquid haeret

    If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed.
    -Albert Einstein

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •