I am looking at it i see it and still cant believe it a butcher with a dull side of knife would manage to do a better job complete disaster shame web sub got back to its old self new one look(ed) much more potent.
1 Like
The VLY is cheaper and all ready used for this. And yes, it is theoretically uncatchable and has a small cargo space perfect for very valuable items. I have tried to be caught in one and it was a riot!
I tested the new Proteus and new Tengu in SISI, and I think the changes are going to be alright.
Really looking forward to it.
Focus groups should be diverse to represent as many different people and diverse or even opposite opinions as possible. This technically means that a hunter who would use these ships should have the same right to be in the group as a miner who would most likely be the victim. Even I would have a place as someone who is interested in solo PVE and exploration, but doesnât have experience with these ships yet, because I didnât find some of the options appealing.
I really should have tried to get into this groupâŚ
1 Like
You missing the point, mine was an answer about SP loss upon death.
I agree when you say HACs should be the best HAC.
But then the problem becomes that no one would use t3c.
The Tengu, based on the current state on SISI, appears to have been strategically pushed into obscurity. After spending a fair deal of time playing with fitting I noted:
-The best thing is does is specialize in transport through bubbles, while warping cloaked. This is already done in cheaper and better ships for that purpose.
-The tank now makes it useless for anything but a stealth transport
-There is no covert missile fit that comes even close to the dps needed to use it for WH or Nul solo.
-The amount of available mids with the fits for exploration (no one in their right mind would use a T3C for exploration now, it just doesnât make sense in any way) is ridiculous. 8 mids? But not where NEAR the power grid, CPU, or Cap to use them all. So why have them?
-The ship doesnât do enough DPS for running hisec comabt sites anymore, let alone sleeper sites in wh space! you are better off in an astero.
-No drone option at all??? Is this for real? What about using drones for e-war or logi?
The attraction to this ship for me, was a scanning shield tanked, covert missile boat, and web with drones that could work well in nul and WH space to catch either explorers, (or in my intended use) to catch hunters (such as stealth bombers), and run combat sites in these places. It was the one ship that could do all that I wanted, and it carried a hefty price tag in skill and ISK to achieve that. It was something for players like me to have as a sort of endgame state or goal in an exploration career.
I just trained for this ship and had skill injected heavily and the nerf was announced. I thought it was a purposed improvement until I tried the ship on SISI -thatâs when I got the strong impression of one of either 2 things.:
-The new T3C will be 1/10 the cost of the current price, making it the disposable ship of choice to through into a situation enmass in large battles as logi or hospital ships.
-The designers fully intended to make use of this so expensive and absurd that players would naturally, on their own, abandon the T3C all together, and this would make the bulk of players that have no interest in them, much happier.
There is simply no useful purpose for this ship for me that justifies the current cost in training time and ISK. I am very sad that I wasted so much time aiming for what I felt was the best ship for what I wanted to do. I know, tears⌠We make investments, and I happened to invest in the worst possible ship at the worst time. But the ability to covert cloak and be interdict immune will never sit right with players that fly, nor other players in the game. I am also opposed to it.
What is the purpose of this ship now? What is its intended role? My personal opinion, donât be afraid to outright retire the T3 cruiser. It just doesnât sit well in the game, and although I loved the original concept, the general player base hates it. Just end the T3C and compensate us all so that we can go back to playing the game in something that works. I am not angry, but I just see this ship stuck in the doldrums while someone decides to pull the plug⌠In the meantime the slow death ends in players not getting compensated.
One more note, how in the world was the Nestor more broken than this -if it covert cloaked? Perhaps it is time to bring that back to the table as the penultimate vessel for explorers, now that the T3âs days are done! Or let the Nestor cynojump and retain itâs wormhole-ability and be done with it!
1 Like
something something 700+dps rlml active tanked tengu?
[quote=âNou_Mene, post:287, topic:8414â]
But then the problem becomes that no one would use t3c.
[/quote]People should be using T3Cs because theyâre versatile, not because they do a better job than T2 ships in their respective roles.
The question should be: Do you want to spend 200m on a ship and be locked into a single role OR do you want to spend 3x as much on a ship that can assume various different roles?
Once you buy a Heavy Assault Cruiser, youâre stuck with a Heavy Assault Cruiser. It canât do anything other than being a Heavy Assault Cruiser. So even if it does a better job than T3Cs in terms of DPS and survivability, thatâs all it can do. It canât fit a covert cloak. It isnât nullified. It doesnât have bonuses for EWAR, remote reps, command bursts, etc⌠That is where T3Cs should shine.
Theyâre worse in combat than HACs, worse at logi than Logistics Cruisers, worse at EWAR/recon than Recon Ships, worse at tackle than HICs, but they can at least do all of the above (by swapping subsystems) at a decent level, along with other roles that arenât filled by T2 hulls.
However, I think one of the biggest issues is that HACs donât really have a defined role. Theyâre essentially just T1 Cruisers on steroids with an odd role bonus.
In my opinion, the role of HACs should be refined: CCP has mentioned that HACs are meant to be tough and resilient, but mobile ships. And not just tough in terms of EHP, but also EWAR and capacitor, and potentially even overheating.
I would remove the overheat bonuses from T3Cs and instead put them on HACs. Give HACs some EWAR resistances and capacitor warfare resistances (tuned down on active tank hulls, of course). That would better differentiate them from other Cruiser hulls, and the same bonuses could also be passed on to AFs â killing two birds with one stone. AFs and HACs could become the go-to ships for survivability outside of just EHP.
Then T3Cs could be justified in having the DPS and EHP they have because theyâre no longer pushing HACs out of their role â theyâre essentially occupying their own role. I would still pull them back a bit in other areas in order to give Logistics Cruisers and Recon Ships a break, but not enough that they would become garbage. Theyâd still be effective, just not enough to replace T2 ships.
3 Likes
You are correct Iâve only destroyed 203 T3âs not sure how many where cloaky nullifide. But if they cloak and run away who cares, just wait until they drop cloak to run a relic, data or some site and you got them! Cookies and tears!
[quote=âPflepsen, post:291, topic:8414â]
But if they cloak and run away who cares
[/quote]You should care. Thatâs too safe of a playstyle.
Fozzie apparently thought it was fine for them to be able to facetank a Thanatos with 5x DDAs, so there isnât a single subcap out there that can kill the thing before itâs able to light a covert cyno and have some friends bridged/jump in.
On the off chance that you have enough pilots with you to kill the thing, you wonât be able to catch it.
So itâs able to choose where and when to engage. The only other ships in the game that are capable of doing the same are Interceptors, but they have paper tank and canât light covert cynos.
If I bring my Thorax/Ishtar/Ishkur/Drake/Raven/Enyo/Astero/Abaddon/Thanatos/Kronos into a hostile system and see a gang that can kill me, I donât have the option to run. I am going to get blown up, at least 9 times out of 10, so the least I can do is take a few out with me.
If I bring my Tengu/Proteus/Loki/Legion into a hostile system and see a gang that can kill me, I do have the option to run. And they canât stop me.
I feel thatâs way too powerful considering my Tengu/Proteus/Loki/Legion is fit with a module that allows me to project power on a level that no individual ship, save for maybe supers, is capable of matching. It should require more than just ISK or SP to be capable of that. It should require risk. Lots and lots of risk. An exceptional amount of risk. And not just after decloaking, but after undocking.
1 Like
I digress, I want the best ship for the role.
In very few cases I would choose the versatile one, even more now with combat refitting out of the picture.
I would like to see T3C pushed into a more [piloting] skill intensive direction. For example taking some bonuses from passive into overheating. I would also like nullification gone [or at least increase the trade off]. But thatâs just me.
[quote=âKyral_Kujan, post:290, topic:8414, full:trueâ]
I would remove the overheat bonuses from T3Cs and instead put them on HACs. Give HACs some EWAR resistances and capacitor warfare resistances (tuned down on active tank hulls, of course). That would better differentiate them from other Cruiser hulls, and the same bonuses could also be passed on to AFs â killing two birds with one stone. AFs and HACs could become the go-to ships for survivability outside of just EHP.[/quote]
While I completely agree with this idea, the âkilling two birds with one stoneâ isnât the best metaphor if you are talking about technically dead metal space birds.
I definitely agree about nullification.
However, there is a problem with pushing T3Cs into such a role now. Theyâll be able to overshadow some T2 hulls, but not all of them. I donât think thatâs good game design. If a T3C canât replace a HIC (since it canât fit an interdiction field generator), then thereâs no reason for it to be able to replace a HAC, Logistics Cruiser, or Recon Ship.
All T2 hulls should be equal in that there isnât any other hull in their class thatâs able to better fill the role they fill.
Hit that active tank T3 with some neuts and it will fold up like a piece of paper! you got 1 min for the covert cyno, he is soooo dead right there!
Itâs a good counter on paper, but it wouldnât work against HKs using XLASBs.
Great point! iâll have to make one of those! In that case, your screwed.
@CCP_Fozzie What is the purpose of this balance change⌠Help me understand
The only feature Iâm seeing is less Hit Points. Do the Devs want us to not use a T3 cruiser? Other ships do wormholes so much better. Rather large effective HP loss just make more sense to use a haul that wonât give you a skill point loss.
I mean Seriously if the entire problem with T3 cruisers is 0.0 space you just do what you did with the damn citadels and apply the T3 bonus depending on sec stats. If your in Highsec space give small percent of the bonus while in wormhole give a higher percent. in null sec give half bonus.
1 Like
But in turn, anything that makes life miserable for null sec F1 monkeys iâm all for it! Usually i jump into a null sec system i send 50 monkeys running for their stations and POSâs. Would love to see local channel removed and make them use recons to secure there system.
1 Like
isn t it like ⌠monday for a minmatar ship? i don t see anything wrong , it even look badass.
the core of the ship looks big and sturdy, then they add stuff to it: front and back
i think itâs a good change. i mean: now you have a reason to use Marauders.
Being flexible is one thing, being able to do absolutly anything and be really good at it, is another.
Arenât Minmatar ships supposed to look like an explosion in a girder factory? LOL i think it looks bad ass!