The graphic still holds as a general outline, the shift is mostly on the improvement axis. In any case, it’s perfectly normal for such models to be iterated on as the game develops, so long as the meta is kept in good shape (how much they can achieve this is another question). Wormholes are an example of this, they were never meant to be inhabited, but that was the direction players quickly took after they were introduced. CCP didn’t insist on their vision for it faced with emergent gameplay.
At the expense of all other things it can do, at a time.
I have just told you how Stratios kept seeing good use even with all other T3Cs being better. There are always more nuances to game balance than one particular subject. In the example you give, you miss that Legion can’t be feasibly shield tanked whereas Sansha ships are shield tanked laser platforms. This also means that buffer tanking would play against Legion’s strength there, while you can fit a Phantasm with nanofibers. These are just some of the points that come up when balancing ships. What you are going on is just a general rule to keep in mind, not the whole picture.
That’s only because it’s currently outperforming t3c’s at it’s specific niche, cloaky hunting with drones. If you buff the drone system of the proteus, you take away the stratios’ niche.
Consider this, the proteus doesn’t outperform the ishtar as a fleetdrone boat even though it costs more than the ishtar, so obviously it’s unbalanced right? Of course not, even though the ishtar is more isk and time efficient it still outperformsthe proteus at it’s specific niche. With t3c’s, you’re paying more for the ability to generalize
All you are saying is same old, ignoring my main points etc, like did I say the prot outperform the ishtar? xD Val en Thielles said it good, and I’m not going to waste more energy on you for now.
I mean, I guess if you ran out of ideas and ignore what I said about his point then I suppose throwing a “I’m not going to waste more energy” is probably a good idea. Why bother defending an incorrect idea when you can simply give up?
Nope, but I was using it as a point of reference, since it’s easier to see why T3C’s shouldn’t take over faction niches. If suddenly the loki had better webs than serpentis ships, that’s perfectly fine because T3C’s shouldn’t be outperformed by faction cruisers? Or if the legion got a 30%/subsystem AB bonus, that’s perfectly fine because it should outperform the phantasm right? And since mordu’s ships get 10%/level to warp disruptors, proteuses should get a 15% per level?
And back to the topic at hand, you’re saying that it’s fine for the proteus to be better at being a cloaky drone boat than the stratios, AND have the ability to be nullified.
Well in that case, this thread is still wrong, because why would only the proteus deserve a buff? ALL T3C’s need to be buffed. A 10% web strength and 10% web range per level is needed for the loki, legion needs a 50% AB bonus per level and the tengu needs a 100m^3 drone bay with 500% damage bonus to drones. And while we’re here, let’s throw the proteus a 50% bonus per level to warp disruptor and scram range
I took another hard look at the drone proteus… Grudgingly I have to admit op is correct, drone proteus is total & complete ■■■■. In it’s current state there is never a reason to choose it over another (cheaper mind you) ship.
I see a lot of toxicity but OP is fundamentally right. He is just talking about drone Proteus, not an overall Proteus buff.
I never understood why an Ishtar or even Vexor NI could fit a full heavy drones set, whilst the T3 counterpart can’t. Proteus drone boat is simply a no-go at the moment. It’s a niche that could be fixed for better and more varied playstyles.
The vni does not need a nerf, it did not need the last one. The one it got was really a pvp nerf. Adjusting the anoms would’ve made a hell of a lot more sense. The drone proteous being ■■■■ is completely unrelated.
Ahh, that’s not my image, it’s CCPs… and I’d quoted the person I was responding to, whose gripe was regarding the available bandwidth… so I’m missing the point you’re trying to make?
Heh, maybe you missed this bit, so I’ll quote it again:
It’s got nothing to do with ‘my interpretation’, it’s enabling him to understand, which I’m sure would have happened if he’d read the thread.
Or are you suggesting (sorry “that people are suggesting”) that the ability to fit a full flight of heavy drones is not an improvement? Because if ‘the people’ didn’t agree with ‘my interpretation’ he’d of said “While I understand”… you see?
I’m going to suggest you stop attempting to respond for people, it’s not working.
yes it is your interpretation.
CCP did not say that drone proteus should be ■■■■ in that graph.
I suggest you stop imposing your opinion onto other people, as you may have noticed already it’s just not working.
People just don’t agree with you and thus think the current state is imbalanced. Period. You are just trolling with your “useless as intended” stupidity.
I don’t even read your paragraph with “or are you suggesting” which I guess is just more useless crap.