Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

I dunno, I feel like the gila with 2 dda rather than 3 can still solo just about any sub-BS, many of them it would still be able to defeat afk. Buff the muninn *\o/*

sounds like they joined the wrong group and should join a group somewhere where they can handle the pve

or work together

T1 Frigate changes - All Good M8 - except the punisher*
Sacrilege Change - Great I've always loved it.
Gila/Worm Nerf - yeah they are stupid powerful
Navy Frig/Cruiser Changes - All Good M8

Ok So the Punisher:

+1 Turret - good

+1 Lowslot - good

+10 PWG - necessary for the above/turret changes

+13 CPU - necessary for the turret changes

Replace the 5% damage bonus with -10% laser cap use per level

This is unacceptable - you should just adjust lasers cap use so we don't need a passive gunnery bonus just to use the ship. Imagine if you will any gallente or caldari turret vessel that had a bonus like this effectively removing a gunnery bonus. This doesn't make it less susceptible to energy neuts. If it had a cap battery like bonus then ok that would be interesting but that cap use bonus to lasers deserves retirement like the KE lock.

The nosprey is **** atm m8.

good call...editing post

Give Sac cap back!

First, the sac change is the most awsome things I've heard this year when it comes to ship changes so thank you CCP.
The Sacrilege was a great ahac before with it's decent DPS, great tank and range not to mention utility but now it has even more staying power with a second set of drones. \o/
Second thing I care about in this change would be the Punisher.
I think the 4 unbonused gun is a great idea but the cap bonus is **** and will just lead to players changing the weapon type.
In my opinion, the best way to change that without removing the 4th turret would be to give him a 10% optimal range bonus and buffing the hull capacitor.
Baby aHac Punisher and Inquisitor fleet anyone ?

Also why not give the the "Sacrilege" treatement you gave the Damnation to the Vengeance ?
Put the cap bonus into the hull and give a 10% rocket velocity instead and maybe a 15/30 dronebay please.

I strongly dislike the suggested change to the punisher. My problem is that by eliminating an effective bonus to lasers such as damage or tracking, we are returning to the days of the AC punisher. Even a 10% bonus to cap doesn't compare to the zero cap and easier fitting of ACs. Why use the lasers at all? As for a path for newer players, so basically they should skip small energy turrets and go AC if they plan to fly a punisher. That seems counter to the purpose of the stated reason for change. If cap is the issue, why not increase the ships cap or recharge rate, keep it to 3 turrets and keep the laser damage bonus?

Sad about the Orthus nerf as I was rather hyped about finding a solid role for it in my PvE stable. The Blood Base Burner mission is a very annoying and underpaying mission (compared to other burners! before someone bites my head off) and the Orthrus is almost perfect to run it in a similar manner as other burners: fast and dangerous. The Orthrus and Barghest are not common PvE ships to begin with and the buff on the Barghest is not enough to make it PvE viable but that's another matter. Just very sad to have to remove the Orthus as a PvE ship now as well as it really is a very good looking ship.

Currently with bling it can match other bling fit ships but be a lot less frustrating while still exciting due to a tendency to explode if you don't pay attention. Interestingly enough along with this change the only other well performing (but more frustrating) alternative to running this mission, the Gila, is also getting a nerf. I don't know if this change will make the Gila even more frustrating to run this mission (or even unable to run at all) than it is now but these changes are a huge blow to me ever running this mission again.

I would have preferred a more PvP orientated nerf rather than a pure dps nerf. As is this change completely removes any hope of a partially T2 (using OH) fit Orthrus being viable for this mission and forces all bling combined with OH be required while still being unoptimal and frustrating.

Well that's my feedback from a PvE view point, something that the Orthus is not known to be used for. Always sad when the limited pool of optimal PvE ships shrinks by one.

You do know that all three of the Guristas ships have only two drones, right? And that all three have a 10% bonus to kinetic and thermal missile damage, right? There's nothing wrong with the damage the Gila does with missiles.

The problem with the Gila is twofold:

First, the 500% bonus is too damn high resulting in a massive amount of damage from Hammerheads (HAMs with Rage is 244 paper dps, the two Hammers are 380! before any damage mods). If it was a 300% bonus (228dps) that would be much much more sane for a cruiser as tanky as the Gila.

Second, the 500% bonus to drone HP combined with it's stupid huge drone bay means that killing off the drones is simply not feasible. It can field FIVE flights (flight = 2 drones for Guistas ships). There's no way any other non-T3 cruiser can compete with that. The Worm can hold 2.5 flights of super drones. The Rattle can hold 3.5 flights of super drones (but since it can use heavies, sentries, and Geckos I don't see an issue with this, especially since the Rattle isn't broken in relation to the other BS).

So why is the Gila a special snowflake? Like the Ishtar, it's CCP's baby and they'll never meaningfully nerf it.

So when I said that the only thing you have to do to fix the Gila is change the 500% bonus to 300%, I was wrong. It also needs its drone bay reduced to 50m3.