Yup you’ll still need a fitting service to swap subsystems, the subsystem bay just gives you more space to carry them with you without using up your normal cargo bay.
Blueprints for the old subsystems will be converted into blueprints for the closest equivalent new subsystem on patch day, and will keep their other attributes such as number of runs remaining.
Has it been published what everything is changing to as a graphic or list?
True, but people with already existing preferences (consciously or not) probably won’t bring up points or options that would hurt them. Being neutral definitely can help in some cases.
Also, people on the other forum were constantly mentioning that the analyzers shouldn’t be tied to the cloak, because a decent (passive) tank sometimes more useful. Superior sleeper sites are a good example. Having the cloak defense in the new system could mean that one failed hack results in losing your ship. Or you can pick a better tank and fail every second hack because you lack the analyzer bonus.
@CCP_Fozzie By the way the current power core multiplier on the Proteus would be the perfect look for the new covert subsystem. It’s compact and has that radar thing on the side, perfect for exploration!
EDIT: also, could we get a visible drone bay on the drone subsystem please?
Why not just leave the option to swap visual between the sub system that is getting remove. Option set should be to have any of the old ones or none at all.
This will make everybody happy and CCP does not have to waist all the work you put into designing the subsystems that you are planning to remove.
Sadly the kinetic lock is still there on the Tengu…
Subsystem bay is a nice change along with the removable rigs.
It’s an extremely powerful change. I’m kind of surprised noone is complaining about it.
LOKI
new Adaptive Defense Mode -> old Power Core MP
full model swap – Projectile Scoping Array -> Support Processor
new Intercalated Nanofibers -> old Nanofibers model
PROTEUS
Nanobot Injector -> old Injector model
full model swap – Augmented Plating -> Cover Reconfiguration
TENGU
full model swap – Augmented Graviton Reactor -> Electronic Efficency Gate
new Aplification Node -> old Power Core MP model
new Chassis Optimization -> old Gravitational Capacitor model
These are the new/old subsystem models I’d personally like to see implemented. My opinion is just like anyone else’s, just an opinion and a wish to be seen.
I simply find these layouts most pleasing to the eye and I feel they are the best there is in mechanical design of sleek, advanced ships. No unnecessary holes or
extrusions. Silhouettes would remain intact and a bit sporty-like, very reflecting of their statue as “the next generation”-thing. They just look really good!
I hope you take my input into consideration, I would love to see these models ingame in the future. All the best to you and have a good one.
The visuals are more important than you may think.
People have the right to know what they may expect. Normally the name of the ship informs you about every possible ability that ship may have. But in case of the T3Cs the name “Tengu” for example covers 1024 sips currently, and after the update it still will be 81 ships. You actually need the visuals to identify what you’re dealing with.
No Lasers & Drones on an Amarr hull? Instead it’s missiles. I don’t get it.
I was planning on running half Incursion ( 6 beams ) half ratting ( drones plus beams ). All possible with the old set-up.
I’ll have to test it, but losing 350m isk as I bought the wrong ship is gonna suck…
it does seem odd that as there is no tracking bonus on the laser sub that it should have a set of small drones as proteus and loki both get tracking bonus and drones on there gun subs…
looking at the neut/nos sub on the legion wouldn’t it make more sense for it too provide an 8th highslot maybe in exchange for the midslot and for the laser sub too synergise more with that (nos more than neut) as it stands you would combine it with the missile sub as you have the 50mb drone damage
also not a fan that these still have really strong dps which can combine so readily with e-war and strong tank… very much the case of HAC’s still being obsolete here… i don’t think you’re taking the Overheat bonuses into account at all here with the dps/tank/e-war/reps…
Also why is the cloak sub still able too be used with 1k dps and decent active tank fit? … maybe consider the cloak as taking up a couple of hardpoints
not small skill injectors have enough.
also t3c have been always been this way, why the surprise. If it doesnt worth it then go fly a HAC.
re think that
As I feared this destroys my use case for the Proteus which is currently my favourite ship. Doing a quick search through the logs of the working group the Proteus is discussed far less than any of the other cruisers.
The slot load out for the average proteus drops from 6/3/7 to 6/5/5. We drop two highly important low slots for two mid slots. While those might be useful in PvP; for running missions or sites they are a complete waste. It is possible to get 6/4/6 by reducing the cap viability and switching to a buffer tank. The cap warfare resistance would be nice if the build had stayed at 3 mid slots, but with 5, we’re just going to fit batteries/cap recharge since there is nothing else worth while.
Armour tanked ships need low slots more than anything else because they are used for damage mods and tank modules.
Changing the Nanobot Injector to +1M, +3L would reduce the problem somewhat.
Using the Augmented Plating is pointless in PvE, buffer tanks are pure PvP builds. Augmented Plating could be changed to +2M, +2L if you want that variety since mids are way more useful in PvP.
That way at least we can achieve 7 low slots with a PvE build making difficult choices regarding other subsystems. The loss of the extra subsystem removes useful choices and just encourages people to follow cookie cutter fits rather than making something that works for them.
Original wormhole Proteus fit:
[Proteus, ❖HASS 3302 Glaucus]
Damage Control II
Centum A-Type Medium Armor Repairer
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Centum A-Type Energized Explosive Membrane
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner
Republic Fleet Large Cap Battery
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
250mm Railgun II
Auto Targeting System II
Small Tractor Beam II
Salvager II
Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II
Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II
Medium Nanobot Accelerator I
Proteus Electronics - Emergent Locus Analyzer
Proteus Defensive - Nanobot Injector
Proteus Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
Proteus Offensive - Drone Synthesis Projector
Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors
Warrior II x5
Gecko x3
Vespa EC-600 x5
Javelin M x1039
Nanite Repair Paste x97
Spike M x1216
Antipharmakon Thureo x2
Antipharmakon Kosybo x2
Way to go CCP. Wrecked the best ships in the game.
Why do you think the CSM knows better than the average player about what is good for the game.
These changes are beyond stupid.
The Amarr Laser Subsystem needs 25m3 drones/drone bay… it’s just unfair compared to every other offensive turret sub that also happens to have tracking bonuses. Please fix this.
Legion is already gimped enough as a laser platform as it stands now for solo activities, being forced to use missiles on a t3 to use it for solo activities is just bad.
Also, does anyone have the EFT Files for the new t3 changes? can’t find them anywhere D:
from what i ve seen and read on here loki is going to be most powerful t3 in game. ive trained my self into a tengu and well it gets better in some way but its a nerf so no very pleased. i fly it for pve so considering we dont get limitations to what ded sites can it run its ok. i love to have more capacitor but i hate to have less speed while running an AB (fuel catalyst sub give +2m so need to replace with the one that gives +1l +1m). resistences are lowered means less ehp. you can still make the tengu a nice shield tank with active shield booster but you will have to pay more. also i see a lot of whining from people that say t2 should be better than t3, are you guys out of your mind? t3 should be better than t2. do you know how much it takes to train into one t3? how much it costs to get one, specially now with the industry changes? i m not ganna talk about signatures and so on. (have no idea). also you lose one sub skill. the objective of t3 which i believe nobody has seen is to take different bonuses from the cruiser line t1-t2 and put them into subsystems. the goal was achieved the old subs were great but it seems the ship was too op and people like to fly op ships to they nerfed (rebalance) them so when you see them on gate and you are in a t2 cruiser “we can do it”. when somebody showed in a t3 ship either you brought up a t3 ship or a pirate ship that can match them. t3 should always better than t2 and people will say how is a t3 better than a specialized ship well because it gets the bonus from that specialized ship and another bonus from another specialized ship. resume new subs are chaos, some t3 a bit to nerfed and some a bit too buffed and graphics well… old was better.
Despite your other arguments, that is one of the stated design objectives of t3, or at least it once was.