EVE Information Portal

I love the new Dueling system! We really needed that. One quick suggestion.

In a crowded system like Jita, it can be hard to figure out the ship that is challenging you. It would be nice if the challenge screen showed the pilot and his current ship. A button to target the ship would also be really helpful.

Why did you eviscerate the Battle Cruisers. I loved my myrm for PVE Now it is half the BC that is was before (hyperbole intended). Now what I am going to do with all of the BCs I have. Geez, this game keeps changing so much, It kind of makes you just want to save your isk, and not buy or build anything because in a few months it could be turned into junk by a game change. How can you plan anything when the sand in the sandbox keeps moving in ways you can't predict or understand.

I have been playing since last August, and the changes just keep shifting things around. I almost don't know what I want to do anymore.

What I'd like is a little more stability in the game foundation, and less changes so fast.

Some times it's the evil goons who kick your sand castle.

Some times it's the most evil CCP devs who kick your sand castle. And evilly cackle!

Ok, I've actually tested the changes to the gallente armor tanking before posting. i have a couple good points to go over first. i will not be touching the minmatar cruiser changes, because i think the nerfhammer came down way too hard. i will only be commenting on changes I have tested.


The good:

Armor Honeycombing: At level 3 I have a Hyperion booking at 909 M/s with dual 1600mm rolled tungsten and an experimental MWD. I like this. I like this a lot.

Battlecruiser damage buffs: brutix hits harder, and can now move faster. Myrmidon got a desperately needed buff to damage in the ability to field more sentries or heavies.

Reactive armor hardener: This module has a lot more use when you can put armor plates on your ship and not gimp your tank and when the hardener cycles are faster and cost less. Is it perfect? Absolutely not but it serves as a decent stopgap over using normal hardeners. I actually like this unit more than most do as far as the new modules go.


The Bad:

Heavy Missiles in general after much testing: The rumor we have been hearing is that the heavy missiles were nerfed because of the Tengu. On just about every other boat (especially the Drake) HMs provide decent damage projection but poor damage output, offset only by the ability to select damage type. The nerf has further made them into a joke that just isn't funny. I'm not a T2 missile user but when I'm struggling to achieve 300 DPS on a drake that isn't passive tanked old style I believe this creates a bit of a problem when you nerf it and suddenly the damage output is comparable to a frigate with T2 guns.

AAR: I have not tested this module, however, I have to comment on the still vastly lackluster performance of even tech 2 armor repair modules. Basically anyone who runs a PvE fit will replace their armor rep tank with one of these. The regular armor modules fail to pass muster for improvement of armor survivability even passingly. So far the rep side of the game is rather lackluster at best, with T2 logi being necessary for any armor fleet. My objection here is that it puts T2 armor repair into obsolescence without significantly having value in an armor fleet, where buffer is always better than on-ship repair.

Cap usage for armor tank: Armor vulnerability to neutralizers is still rather obnoxious in that in order to be sustainable you pretty much need a capbuddy. Shields still regenerate on their own and you can fit a ship for fast shield recovery on the fly. You cannot do this with armor, absolutely mandating a cap booster or capaciter transfer if you wish to be able to use your midslots and be able to maintain respectable damage. Even shield tanks have the option for an ASB. Armor tanks need some way to resist being completely wiped out of all offensive and defensive capacity at once by neuts. Especially since both armor races are capacitor hungry on the weapons they are bonused from.

Finally: The Gallente armor repair bonus is just about as worthless as it has always been. The aforementioned hyperion and a brutix were both tested with T2 armor tank setups as well as T2 reps. In both cases the amount of reps (which cannot be made cap stable at all without gimping the ability to nail a target or forgoing necessary tackle) is exceedingly laughable. basically for the gallente bonus to really matter, you have to have an AAR or you absolutely must dual-rep which chokes off your ship in major ways both in combat utility and fitting.

Now, my attempt at constructive suggestions:

Damage control modules: They're damage control systems, repair terams, etc: When activated give the DC units the capacity to passively regenerate hull, then armor, in that order. Doesn't even need to be a large amount to be useful, especially if the ability can be enhanced in other ways with existing skills. And if that happens, it doesn't gimp shield tankers as they benefit as well.

Gallente Armor repair bonus: Chuck it. Gallente ships are always described as that thing you must desperately keep away from your own vessels. if they get close, you die to blaster spam. Functionally it's still difficult to bridge that gap. Give the gallente the option to "DPS tank" instead of the Amarr resist copy/paste idea. removing the rep bonus and adding tracking or an optimal blaster boost, or even a reduction to cap usage of prop mods will make the ships dangerous in their own right. make it so Gallente boats actually making it to your fleet is an actual threat. Without some kind of bonus to their armor they'll be more dependent upon external reps in fleets, which is bluntly where they are now, as fleet doctrines are more efficient with external repair sources. The Gallente bonus is by and large the most unused bonus except on baitships, and the boost it gives to existing armor repair units is only useful really on pure resistance fits.

Micro Jump Drive: No one I know uses it. it has potential. make it a module that activates on lock-on. You lock a target, and do a micro-jump to 50 Km from the target. Reduced by 5 Km per point of the skill. The only other use I can think of for it is hopscotching arty/beams/rails out of range when enemies get too close.

Honest opinion? I have no idea if any of these ideas are viable, but... my two cents, as I believe every ship should be capable of performing admirably on it's own merits and enhance a fleet it joins, as opposed to requiring fleet support to be functional at all.

orca and rorqual. The industrial capital and industrial command ships are their own little special snowflakes that don't really fit except on their own.

I'd have to guess that it's t3s, as all the other things that need to fit special mods (like gang links and cov ops cloaks) seem to already be in their own group. T3s, however, need to be able to shed and gain groups almost on demand with this paradigm.

I suppose you might add a t3 to the "covert ops" and "command ship" groups when it fits the appropriate subsystems. That could cause problems though, especially if you can only be in one group at a time. You could add groups that are "command strategic cruiser" and "covert strategic cruiser" (and one that's both), but that might make for some clutter and weird-looking overview settings. The only other solution I can think of is to allow fitting (based on groups) of gank links, cov ops cloaks to any t3, but then disable the fitting on the ones that have the wrong subsystem.


On a completely unrelated note, with only 5 highs now, the part in the myrm's description about its "numerous high slots" is now kinda cheesy

Carrier/Super, Bomber/Covops, Fleet/Force Recon, Strategic Cruisers. Anywhere that part of a group can fit a special module, and part can't.

Solution? I suspect that the offending ships are occupying multiple groups. In the case of recons, for example: Both Fleet and Force Recon ships belong to the, "Recon," group, while Fleet Recon ships also belong to some sort of, "Coverts," group.

In the case that a given object can only have one group, then I'd expect some dirty-but-simple ship-by-ship hardcoding.

Null bears are currently getting dunked left and right by hordes of eager Blops pilots, don't know about you

My complaint is less about the AAR and more the utility of the remaining reppers seems...lackluster by comparison. CCP calls them sustained tanking modules in some posts, but you can't really sustain them for long. If you could I wouldn't give a rat's ass about the amount they repped.

Thank you CCP, you gave me the motivation I needed to go back to flying my cruiser.

I'm happy I now have a reason to no longer use BattleCruisers. I was getting board of them.