EVE New Citizens Q&A

Amarr ships EAT Drakes :P

Nvm what I said previously, I just love missiles too much with long range, I'll be going Caldari with a precious Hookbill or Raven (sorry for being so complicated, don't want to regret anything in the long run). Is it wise to be cross-training from the start? I do want to keep my Amarrian portrait. x)

:(

Missiles got to me, Jim.

Been waiting for this ever since i first met a black, missile spewing khanid pilgrim in a mission in like 2004. Its been a long wait and it will continue.

+1 to the sacrilege being a great ship

With targeting rigs, it can have a scan res 1000+, and the mids can be fit MWD, Sensor Booster, Web, disruptor/scram. Its a very nasty ship to run into if you jump into a system and find you're in a bubble. Somewhat underused IMHO.

Actually Khanid ships wouldn't be violating the idea of "racial weapon preference" much. Yes, missiles are the Caldrari focus but Caldari ships also focus on shield defense and ECM. Amarr ships focus on armor defense and weapon disruption. So a Khanid ship would basically be missile offense with armor defense and weapon disruption. So it's not "just like flying Caldari" nor is it "just like flying Amarr." That's what makes it appealing.

How many Myrmidons fly with projectile cannons (not including my own)? Cross-over is already quite common from what I've seen. The catch is that cross-over always hits a brick wall when it comes to missiles because of the rules on "missile vs turret hardpoint." While ships may get a bonus to a certain type of turret, there are no actual rules against mixing & matching. For example, there is nothing preventing someone from sticking two blasters and an autocannon on Punisher if they really wanted to. But the second you bring missiles into the equation you come screeching to a halt, because missiles only go on missile hardpoints and no where else, period. That's always struck me as simply frustrating.

How I Would Do It: Replace the binary "Missile Y/N" function with something more flexible. For example, let's say a ship has 4 mounts, 2 turret and 2 missile. So long as guns when in turret and missile went in missile there would be no penalties. But I'd allow that missiles could go into turret hardpoints or turrets into missile hardpoints but with a penalty of some sort for doing so - a higher CPU requirement would be the most obvious, since it would involve making the electronics do something that they were not originally meant to do, so CPU would be wasted by patching new fire control routines into it. So you could still do it, but it would cost you, say, 50% more CPU to put the wrong kind of weapon in that hardpoint.

I feel that would be balanced. It's not telling the player that they can't do something but still giving them reasons why they shouldn't and letting them decided if it is really worth it.

Certainly an interesting way of implementing more unconventional fits, you could even have a hardpoint reconfiguration skill that
Reduced the penalty by 3% per lvl as even at 35% its still a big penalty.