Yes we intentionally switched the Support sub bonuses so that only the fitting bonus was restricted to medium modules to open up the option for more unusual fits using small or large reps. However if we see these uses cause serious problems we would be open to making more changes to restrict them in the future (including limiting the range bonuses to only apply to certain reps again).
1 Like
Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.
I am a bit confused about the rapid light bonus for the T3C. Didnât you just limit some ships to have their damage bonuses no longer apply to light missiles?
We proposed a potential future change that would cause cruiser-sized range bonuses to no longer apply to light missiles. Damage bonus changes were not a part of that proposal.
1 Like
Whew, Wrecked relics are literally worthless now. Well. I had a good run between November and now; guess itâs time for me to find something else to manufacture.
I started playing Eve when strategic cruisers first came out and I havent been this excited about them in a long long time. These change are very interesting.
Wasnât the point of the rebalance to make it so T3Cs arenât overshadowing T2 Cruisers?
Looking at the new stats, every T3C can be fit to have better bonuses, more slots, and far better stats than their HAC counterparts.
The Loki and Legion even get the HAC role bonus (50% MWD radius reduction) in one of their propulsion subsystems.
So⌠isnât this a failure? At least from what I can tell, T3Cs are still better HACs than HACs. What happened to reworking them so that they no longer overshadow T2 Cruisers?
1 Like
With all of the effort over the past years to make Galent ships more like an armor version of Minnie style (fast moving armor) why did you feel the need to make the proteus so unforgivably slow?
1 Like
PS: on the standard layout the industry table is borked, with the wide layout I can see it all.
Might as well post it here:
1 Like
The skill pint loss feels stupid. A random skill? And if you want to skill inject that back it could cost well over a billion ISK if you decided to train all the sub-systems to 5 to get the full potential of this cruiser. So effectively you are flying almost, if not, a 2 billion ISK ship before fitting it.
Itâs not even remotely worth it in my opinion.
4 Likes
flying T3C is well worth that risk.
1 Like
No, the aim wasnât to make T3Cs on par or worse than T2 cruisers I donât think, it was to bring them closer to them in power. The HACs most definitely need a look at (most of them are worse than T1 BCs), but thatâs a different story for a different time.
If the T3Cs were nerfed too far, then when (hopefully) they do a HAC pass, HACs would then potentially overshadow T3Cs.
Yes, unfortunately the prot is still terribly slow, possibly worse now than before, Iâm not sure (if AHAC fleets are even going to be a thing), it will be able to keep up.
HACs are meant to overshadow T3Cs in their role. Thatâs the entire point of T2 ships â theyâre supposed to be the absolute best at what they do, period.
It doesnât quite make sense for HACs to be better than T1 BCs considering theyâre a class larger than HACs. Itâs a pattern thatâs followed by nearly every ship in the game â how many T2 ships in one class are stronger than T1 ships in the class above it? Not many.
This was a T3C rework. T3Cs should have been reworked relative to how other Cruisers are now, not how theyâll be in the future â thereâs no guarantee CCP will even touch HACs. Again, theyâre Cruiser hulls â they shouldnât be competing with Battlecruisers in terms of DPS and EHP.
1 Like
Hereâs the focus group contribution by number of lines.
Disclaimer: This is obviously a terrible metric. We all know that the loudest designers donât always make the best designers. Nevertheless, I thought it would be interesting.
sturm_gewehr: 1081
caprisunkraftfoods: 689
[DEV] ccp_fozzie: 637
white0rchid: 570
eustise: 562
titus.tallang: 459
rowells: 452
exooki: 331
noxisia: 330
progodlegend: 256
[CSM] sullen: 256
asher_elias: 251
icarus_narcissus: 251
starfleetcommander: 201
[CSM] jintaan: 184
frsd: 175
mawderator: 124
[CSM] noobman: 42
lanyaie: 37
[DEV] ccp_snowedin: 19
[CSM] suitonia: 12
lemkorgengod: 8
[CSM] rhiload: 6
[CSM] aryth: 4
[CSM] steveronuken: 3
3 Likes
Yet on the flipside, CCP catch a huge deal of flak from making heavy handed decisions.
1 Like
Yeah, youâre not wrong there. Really, any decision they make is the wrong one to a lot of people.
Thatâs why we need transparency and better communication from them though.
This is the last word we got from them as far as where T3 hulls should fit alongside T1, T2, navy, and pirate hulls. They either forgot about that image entirely or have changed their minds, but they havenât actually said as much. Itâs confusing and frustrating because we really have no idea what their plans are, or why they came up with those plans to begin with.
1 Like
The Tengu is almost an Eagle now but the Legion still a double Zealot 
The changes are on a good way but it seems you nerfed the two popular a bit too much while you buffed the two less popular ships on a good level.
Do you plan a rebalance for HACs and T1 BS as well?
@CCP_Fozzie The most important question I havenât seen answered:
Which skill category are we getting unallocated skill points for? 
A massive and totally unnecessary buff to cloaky nullified T3.
Dear CCP, I would love to sub for a good patch, but this is just creating more problems, so I will stay alpha.
Why canât we have a good old Phoebe all over again and just nerf that substitute for skill to where it belongs?