Ships & Modules

As to comparison of the Legion vs the Absolution (a Command ship), by putting on a command module system, they lose 25% resists, 50% armor, OR, 50% armor repair effectiveness, and 1 low slot. I am not a high end math guru, and don't claim to be, but correct me if I am wrong... doesn't this put the Legion lower in performance and tank by a notable margin?

http://www.ellatha.com/eve/T3-Ships.asp?ship=Legion&def=13&off=3&elec=1&eng=2&prop=2&stat=View
lowest base resist (at 5) 35%, armor 3400, 6 Lows, 5 turret, 1 command (smaller sig though).

http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Absolution
Lowest base resist (at 5) 60%, armor 4805, 7 Lows, 6 turret, 1 command, AND a flight of light drones.



Now vs a Zealot, I agree, Legion is superior, but then it is almost identical TO the Zealot, except for having a ton more tank. I agree with most people's assessment that the Legion needs 1 more laser in this fitting.

The only Tech 3 I would say is somewhat in balance is the Legion since it can't really get pure damage and tank combination like the other choices. For some incredibly lucky (b/c i really doubt it was intentionally smart) reason, they decided that to get 6 turrets would cost you a low slot on that one ship. They also limited the neutralizer range and only buffed the amount, which helped tremendiously balance wise.

That said, compared to the Absolution/damnation, it's still millions of times better for a slightly higher investment cost. And compared to any tech 2 amarr cruiser except the Curse, it's vastly superior.


As for the other 3 races, the single largest problem comes from their innate ability to tank, move fast, and still project tons of damage. Gallente might struggle more than Minmatar and Caldari, but the problem still exist there.


I've said a lot lately that part of the major balancing issues come from weapon fittings. Class ships should get fitting reductions to weapons so that base powergrid/CPU can be lowered to avoid the overtanking/stupid oversized fitting tihngs that are causing a lot of the problems. The simple fact that I can oversize AB a Loki, get it to 3,300 m/s and implant to get the agility of most normal fit cruisers with a crazy tank is stupidly ********.

Tech 3's need a nerf badly, and Commands in particular need to be brought in line. I'd really like to see Commands get a better ability to tank by getting some sort of extended abilities related to tank, while keeping their range to a minimum as we currently see. If they were to implement gun fitting reductions, this might be the perfect option for fixing commands. In addition, every single command ship really deserves an extra tank slot in their primary tank, but most certainly the Nighthawk needs this the most.

In what world is 100%, "slightly"?



Now, this is an interesting comment, because you could have stopped here:



Nothing but the ability to avoid bloom while maintaining all other traits (through specialist support and modules) stand out.

The "problem" you allude to is not the speed or agility, nore is it conventional tank. It's the combination.

It's the problem driven to it's sharpest point: The one that relate all the way back to the nano-nerf and the very reason to why 100mn is considered the new nano. The oversized AB, and nano speed-tanks prior to that, appealed primarily to smaller entities as they segment execution to make it mroe complex and through that allow more routes to interaction. When you interact with a hostile AB speed-tank it require you to execute several steps to overcome it, not just one.

In the aftermath of the nano-change when a counter-balance to numbers was argued: this was the key matter. The change removed dynamics or layers from the rock-paper-scissors. You no longer have to effectively take risks to chase-down and control most mainline ships. It's a tired label, but i'll use it for recognition: you can just "F1 that" as the combination of several other tactical elements in unison (speed, sig, position etc.) do not stack up against a larger mass of a single element. The mass itself has no counter.

Consider the same scenario applied to something more easily digested. Let's say a Deimos resist-profile. Reaching 93% KN resist is a daunting number. If you fire a KN weapon at it you will consider that figure horribly "overpowered" against you. Most people would be daft firing into it (and even if you stack KN attacks en masse it's still an ineffective approach), where you realize the futility and adapt - they diversify on both ends (we fit for more complex omnitanks, and we premier flexible weapon systems). Even if it comes with a drawback, like losing your KN-bonus, you still adapt and pick a better suited ammunition - i think we can all agree that anything else would be stupid.

Your typical Drake doesn't need much in terms of adaption or support to just volley that "Vaga" anymore. Nano got balanced. They are perfectly capable of just creating an 80km sphere of death (or grid-control, over which they can push hostile targets) and still be quite effective. Apply any form of support ontop, something as simple as a single point-web call, and you are so likely to succeed that anything but success will be an anomaly.

It is a long long way from having to chase down and stack a multiplicity of effects, where each layer would have the same element of success or failure. 100mn gave part of that tactical complexity back, where you not only need numbers or a mass of similar effects - but actually have to diversify and correctly execute in several steps.

That's what the nano-nerf removed from the game and why numbers in simplicity have thrived since. It's also why the Darkside school of Drakes have thrived, since even if it's just a single Rapier to crown your creation with, like the most tasty cherry on the cake, it becomes so immensely powerful in it's element, with numerical superiority. A good Rapier pilot win the day, and everything else is subsidized to mass (you don't even need points, if the hostiles as much as attempt to engage and not run at first sight of superiority).

The difference of course is that the Darkside Drake concept with it's roots in small-gang "composition theory" originally relied around creating layers of support (Vagas were always awesome at killing frigates, but despite their speciality adding Links, Rapiers, Curses and Falcons ontop amplified the effect and allowed you to diversify tactics to deal with gangs of different size or concept). That's why you could interact with more diversity - you could peel any layer.

For a gang like that, killing a 100mn Tech III, even a gang of them, is child's play - you have the array of tools.

This also mean a smaller 100mn Tengu gang is more likely to escape 50 Drakes and a Rapier, than it is to escape a 10-man oldschool nano-gang that have all offensive elements at their disposal.

The nano gang of course would just be obliterated by the BC-blob, because even if they rely on a relatively complex defensive end (tech II resist profile to positioning, speed, sig, control, bonuses and support) they are not layered enough.

In the end, what the ("overpowered-") 100mn do is forcing the hostile offensive end to be more offensive, risky and well-executing. It needs a concerted and cooperative effort of giving chase.

Does any of this make sense? It's so complex that i felt i needed to shine alot of different spotlights on it.

Hmmm, I think what he was getting at is that the Legion is not slightly more expensive - it's twice as expensive. As for it being better: when configured as a fleet command, it's arbitrarily better. It has a better bonus, and due to not being able to shoot what you can't target it's got infinitely more tank than a Damnation.

I haven't compared the Legion directly to the Absolution, but I can say that I consider the Legion far more often than I consider the Abso despite having CS5. IIRC the trade off when going to a Legion over an Abso is very marginally lower DPS and drones for vastly superior mobility, vastly superior tank, dramatically lower, and an optimal bonus.

The mobility and optimal bonus are really what do it for me.

-Liang

Ed: I do remember EFTing up a L4 Legion that dropped almost 900 DPS a couple of days ago. I don't remember being able to get that from the Abso. What's max DPS from an Abso? [5% hardwirings, faction dmg mods, T2 dmg rig]

The absolution gets 900 dps with t2 conflag and 3 faction heat sink. It has enough lows for a 1600mm, 2 enams, and a damage control.

The legion only have room for 1600mm and 2 enams when fitting 3 heat sinks. The legion also has powergrid issues, even with max skills and power core multiplier. You cannot fit a 10mn mwd with putting on pg mods.

The absolution no only has more dps at this point, but it has more tank. Its tank is superior as well, the legion has a hitpoint tank, the absolution has a resist tank. Which makes it superior for RR gangs.

I am an avid fan of the absolution. People dismiss the abso believing it to be only slightly better than the harbinger, but it is much superior, you only need to EFT to see so. Flying is even better.

I'll check that out when I get home, but I will say at a glance that you seem to underestimate tanking benefit of a smaller sig radius.

-Liang

Ed: Can you post the fit for that 900 DPS Abso? Also, thanks. :)

If we're talking about engagements with T3s or Absos, it's pretty reasonable to assume that disruptor range is 35-45km.

-Liang

Who said anything about RF points? That's T2 warp disruptor range.

-Liang

I'd like to point out again as well, that this is also without using the command ships extra high slot for a command module. If you use it for that, bonuses get a bit higher, and the only way for the legion to get similar bonus is to swap modules which would kill its tank.

Currently you are comparing a Pulse dps legion configuration, to a Command ship, when it should be Command Legion configuration to Command ship. If you do this, it fairs even worse.

The pulse dps legion should be compared to the Zealot, as it is the closest in size, config, speed, sig, and class / role, should it not?

For the foreseeable future, T2 warp disruptor with links is ~38km. Yes they'd like to remove off grid boosting but AFAIK due to technical considerations it's not even slated for Winter release. If you're talking about fight with Legions and Absos on field, it's not at all unreasonable to assert that T2 warp disruptor range is with off grid links.

At least for now and for the foreseeable future.

-Liang